Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Planning Commission Nomination topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents and housing advocates oppose planning commission nominee over social-media conduct and doxxing allegations
Summary
Multiple public commenters told Pittsburgh City Council they oppose Mayor O'Conor's nomination of David Vatz (ProHousing Pittsburgh) to the planning commission, alleging he has publicly disparaged community members, sought to limit community input and that members of his group posted critics' personal information online; speakers said they would return for the formal vote.
Several residents and housing-sector professionals used the Feb. 17 public-comment period at City Council to urge council members to oppose the nomination of David Vatz to the city planning commission.
Tanisha Long, a Crafton Heights resident, said she objects to the nominee because "David Vatz has a strong anti-community stance and has posted several times that he does not agree with community input and decision-making processes," and she alleged members of ProHousing Pittsburgh "blatantly doxed members of our community," citing an instance where a critic's home address was posted on social media.
Daniel Schaefer, a consultant who works with small affordable-housing developers, expanded on those concerns, saying he began following ProHousing Pittsburgh and found social-media posts that discredited community advocates and housing practitioners including people instrumental in drafting inclusionary zoning recommendations. Schaefer said that after a lengthy planning commission meeting, a ProHousing Pittsburgh member published personal information for a longtime community advocate and another member posted salary information for community advocates.
Both speakers urged council to take those allegations into account before confirming a nominee to a body that reviews development proposals and hears public comment. "I strongly oppose Mr. Vatz being on the planning commission as he's repeatedly displayed a lack of respect for the community," Schaefer said.
Council did not take a vote on the nomination during the Feb. 17 meeting. Several speakers said they would return for the committee or nomination vote to press their objections.
Why it matters: The planning commission reviews development proposals and hears community input; council members appoint or confirm planning commissioners. Speakers framed their opposition as a matter of public trust and the capacity of the commission to receive community testimony without intimidation.
What's next: The mayor's nomination remains pending; council scheduled interviews and confirmations for various boards and commissions at subsequent meetings. Public commenters said they will return for the hearing or vote to press their objections.
