Sunday, March 6, 2011

Infindorsement: InsolvenCity Council District 9

InsolvenCity's 9th council district is a collection of desolate neighborhoods -- Lincoln-Lemington, Homewood, East Hills, Garfield -- that need and deserve better than the status quo.

Despite a background that would seem to predict strong advocacy of social justice, Rev. Ricky Burgess devoted his initial council term to citywide (and mayorally tinged) politics rather than to providing desperately required assistance to his district. Recently, Rev. Burgess has become a transparent, predictable and divisive lapdog for interests that are entirely unrelated to his district's needs.

On the other hand, every political force -- including the better elements of InsolvenCity's current council -- should have a foil, and Rev. Burgess has been a dependable (if merely reflexive) counterweight to the Peduto-Kraus-Dowd-Harris-Rudiak-Shields coalition.

Two challengers, hoping the mayor's money and influence might be overcome by indigenous effort within the 9th district, seek the Democratic endorsement today. Lucille Prater-Holliday (left) presents an impressive resume from the schools of hard knocks and community-mindedness. Phyllis Copeland-Mitchell appears to be a politically inexperienced but well-intentioned citizen candidate.

It is tempting to root for Rev. Burgess' tumble consequent to his cynical (and often bigoted) contributions to citywide politics, but that would ignore the most important issue for district 9 -- its local needs. The real reason to support Lucille Prater-Holliday (left) is found along Lincoln and Penn avenues rather than on Grant Street. Rev. Burgess could toss a few mayorally dispensed crumbs to his district, but East Hills and Lincoln-Larimer and Homewood would be better served by a council member focused on, and genuinely devoted to, street-level concerns.

This is a closer call than one might expect from Infinonymous' observations and reports of Rev. Burgess' performance as a member of council (and Rev. Burgess' bigotry). The Infindorsement belongs to Lucille Prater-Holliday.

Infindorsement: Lucille Prater-Holliday
Infinonytune: Living For The City, Stevie Wonder and Ray Charles

36 comments:

gradstudent1 said...

"Despite a background that would seem to predict strong advocacy of social justice, Rev. Ricky Burgess devoted his initial council term to citywide (and mayorally tinged) politics rather than to providing desperately required assistance to his district."

Infy can you talk more on the last part about not helping his district. My understanding is Councilman Burgess has produced notable legislation, specifically on Community Block Grant Reform, the Pittsburgh initiative to Reduce Crime, and the police accountability legislation in response to the Jordan Miles agenda.

I can't think of any council legislation that has benefited the district of its sponsor more than these three piece ( well, since PIRC has been delayed and the Jordan Miles stuff was passed recently, you could say potential benefit, but CDBG reform is pretty clear actual benefit). I'm just curious to hear your perspective on that, cuz I don't get it.

Infinonymous said...

Rev. Burgess' work on police reform has been good, although results are in short supply so far. It might have been a mistake to regard that as citywide rather than district-level work. (Police misconduct in InsolvenCity does not respect district lines.)

The city is pushing and heavily subsidizing development in many areas of the city. If Rev. Burgess' district is involved, the projects have been well concealed.

The crime reduction initiative appears to be drifting.

Rev. Burgess appears to have a solid moral and debating point concerning his district's "fair share" of targeted and general funds, but he seems unlikely to accomplish much in that regard (beyond whatever the mayor can steer unilaterally) because his council colleagues justifiably are disinclined to cooperate.

That last point might have tinted our overall perspective. Burgess seems poorly positioned to get much done for his district because he has lost the ability to persuade a council majority.

The 9th district's council member appears to occupy a unique position because that district is in a chronic state of emergency. It would be understandable were that council member to set broader issues aside in an effort to focus on helping an exceptionally needy district. Rev. Burgess does not appear to take that approach.

And, so far, it is difficult to find much tangible progress for the 9th district during Rev. Burgess' term as its member of council. He should get some points for trying, however.

Anonymous said...

Infy:

I think that it is patently unfair to blame the difficulty in securing resources for the 9th District at the feet of "disinclined" Council colleagues.

The truth is, and there is really no way of getting around it, for District 9 (or any disinvested district) to get its fair share of resources, 8 other members have to consciously decide to deprive their OWN constituents of those very same resources.

And since that is not the kind of thing you place on a political mailer, it is unlikely to happen unless it is done unilaterally (a la the Supreme Court ruling that segregation DOES deprive the minority group of its' birthright opportunities in this nation).

Convenient though it may be (for whatever reason) to opine that one of his challengers would have better success delivering goods and services to the District by having a more "inclined" Council, in the "real" Pittsburgh, we all know that simply isn't true.

Can either of the good Reverend's challengers win? It looks more likely at this exact moment. Will that equate to something more positive for his current constituents? Only if you're a paternalistic, elitist, pathological adherent in divisive politics.

What you ascribe to affirms the very real fears of the community in question: Gentrification, displacement and relocation -- to Rankin.

Setting broader issues aside in favor of focusing on that District? How exactly does one deliver a more fair share of resources to that District without dealing with the nature in which THOSE resources are currently dispersed? That's real easy to say for someone from Squirrel Hill or Shadyside, who pays half of their fair share in the cost of government while the very people you discuss pay almost double so that the former can receive the lions share of the bounty.

How does one divert resources to Larimer or Homewood when they're going to pay for pensions, cops, firefighters and debt, unless you deal with and participate in the decisions that determine how much of those resources go into dealing with pensions, cops firefighters and debt?

You insult the intelligence of a great many District 9 residents, which is probably easy for you since that's been going on for 100 years or so.

It is quite another when you live in Homewood. This District has had two decades of representation solely focused on nothing but the District, and the reason that doesn't move the mountain in precisely because all of the resources are in YOUR community.

There are likely more objective reasons to advocate the defeat of the Reverend, but what you've espoused comes hardly close to one.

Infinonymous said...

Downtown gets a disproportionate share of city government (and council) attention, as has the South Side. It apparently can be done. (And we're idealistic enough to believe that altruism, as well as patronage and corruption, could motivate decision-makers in the proper circumstances.)

You nonetheless raise some issues that deserve attention (and some that are difficult to understand, although that could be attributed to either side of the connection).

The reference to "divisive" politics, in particular, is tough to decipher. Who has been more divisive among the current council lineup than Rev. Burgess?

Do you believe it is good, consequent to gentrification concerns, that the URA (which Rev. Burgess, among council members, has the most direct line to) funnels six-figure chunks for East End restaurants while largely ignoring the 9th district? If the URA can't help district 9, we ought to dismantle it immed -- hey, wait a minute . . .

At the serious level, if Rev. Burgess' approach can't lead to at least an attempt by the URA to help the 9th district, it seems a stretch to endorse Rev. Burgess' approach. Gentrification concerns are valid, but some improved business districts and seed money for small business seems at least as important for district 9 as it is for any other spot in the city.

Do you have a preference between the two challengers, or any insight concerning their candidacies?

Anonymous said...

"At the serious level, if Rev. Burgess' approach can't lead to at least an attempt by the URA to help the 9th district, it seems a stretch to endorse Rev. Burgess' approach. Gentrification concerns are valid, but some improved business districts and seed money for small business seems at least as important for district 9 as it is for any other spot in the city."

Given the URA's terrible "urban" history (read Toker's Pittsburgh: An Urban Portrait), it is more likely that Burgess has stood at the gates and said "wait a goddamned minute, fellas!"

Most likely because much of what happens in government is not well-known, it is more likely that to get the URA to be a good partner, he has had to fight like hell to stop them from simply leveling the 9th District in favor of its' new (and developer and 14th/7th Ward-favored) matrix so that us poor folks in Homewood have a chance to participate in the future.

The folks in the poor communities know (in part because he has told them) that the land their homes, etc., sit on is more valuable than what sits on it.

The developers in this town are salivating at the mouth to get their hands on it because it's flat (except for Garfield), cheap and to quote you, "desolate."

Like him or not, he represents his District's (and more importantly -- his constituent's) last best hope for rebirth in a way that protects their status as residents.

And that's no easy burden.

Unfortunately, the Homewood Children's Village was denied (while having the unifed support of every governmental body in PA, the civic, philanthropic and religious communities) the HUD money to replicate the Harlem Children's Zone. That grant alone (worth some $60 million) would have advanced the ball for Homewood far further far faster than anything Council or any number of its' members could have done. Should the Reverend have derailed that project in favor of his own plans?

No, obviously not. He was on the train. However, they were denied and with it came the HUD set-asides for two other District 9 neighborhoods that are contiguous. Now everybody who gives a shit about District 9 has to regroup and move on.

Business Districts, you say? The URA assisted in the construction of two now completely empty brand-new buildings on Frankstown Avenue smack in the middle of Homewood, and one not very old on Homewood Avenue.

The lessees either backed out or ran out because of public safety issues (I can't blame the pharmacy for cutting-and-running when the store manager takes a bullet to the head taking the deposits to the PNC bank a block down the street)

If YOU were a corporate type would YOU locate there? So it's cute and convenient to talk about these District-level concerns as if the good Reverend were merely wanton. In reality, to quote Toker, these issues took time to occur and will take time to defeat.

As for the Reverend's opponents, they suffer the EXACT same challenge, inertia, classism and outright racism.

If one of them can figure out a way to get 8 other Council members to screw their own constituents in order to fix it, then God bless them.

Infinonymous said...

What would work in Homewood (other than, or in addition to, castrating the drug warriors)?

If the answer is "nothing" (or "nothing within reach"), we withdraw the objection to Rev. Burgess based on district-level issues and propose that he be deposed solely because of his transparent and unprincipled toadiness for the List-Makers.

Anonymous said...

Blogger Infinonymous said...

...If the answer is "nothing" (or "nothing within reach"), we withdraw the objection to Rev. Burgess based on district-level issues and propose that he be deposed solely because of his transparent and unprincipled toadiness for the List-Makers.


Exactly. To the anonymous Burgess-defenders: the structural racism part of your argument makes sense, and you seem to understand the limits of resources available to city council to dole out. I just don't see a coherent link between your critique of economic development and your defense of Rev. Burgess. Has he stood up to developers in some way that we've all missed?

Also, Infy is right about who's divisive on Council. You haven't been watching if you think Rev. Burgess is a consensus-builder.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous:

"Divisive" is a relative term, when the Party itself is divided between the Machine and the Progressives.

Infinonymous said...

One can disagree without being divisive.

(Or, as in the case of Peduto and Dowd, people can be divisive despite agreement.)

In Burgess' case, claiming racism (while advancing bigoted positions) and accusing progressives of disregarding the disadvantaged (in the context of a proposed nine-figure giveaway to cream-skimmers) seems divisive.

Anonymous said...

Infy:

Council complained that it was a ten-figure giveaway!

Please clarify.......

It is obvious that the divisions predated the "Great InsolvenCity Parking Fiasco."

So you'll have to do better than that example.

Infinonymous said...

At the rate the List-Makers planned to siphon cash from the public, it is difficult to distinguish high nine figures from low ten figures.

Rev. Burgess' rants about parking garage privateering toward yearend stand as examples of divisiveness.

If you'd prefer another, however, try the pathetically mischaracterized effort to require a council member to resign before seeking another office. That example became surreal when it was recognized that the ostensible reasoning -- a desire to avoid dilution of a council member's attention -- betrayed a comical lack of self-awareness.

James said...

Adding my 2 cents here...
I had a class taught by Mr. Burgess at CCAC. I found him to be intelligent and a good teacher. His class was regarded as the tougher of the public speaking classes, but he was fair and even handed. I genuinely liked him.

The thought occurs to me, however: as a professor and as a minister, he's used to being in charge. I don't say this to make him sound petty, rather that successfully running a classroom or a church requires you to develop skills as an autocrat, not a consensus builder.

District 9 said...

Burgess is an asshat

Anonymous said...

Why no discussion of Phyllis Copeland-Mitchell? She got the ACDC endorsement

Anonymous said...

"My understanding is Councilman Burgess has produced notable legislation, specifically on Community Block Grant Reform"

This never happened, and won't happen - but you will probably see some shitty pieces of legislation trotted out 3 weeks before Election Day, not to actually "reform" anything, but simply to be used as a vehicle to berate the rest of City Council as a bunch of jerks. Almost all of the Reverend's proposed legislation on any topic, upon close inspection, does absolutely nothing, except stir up trouble and land with a thud. And most of his legislation, never passes council, not because council are a bunch of doofs who don't want to give up their money and toys, but because he can't play well with others and his bills are so shitty and nonsensical and without merit. It's so sad that so many people in the city need the change that the Rev promises to deliver, that they are so willing to believe anything that is even so much *presented* as credible.

And the police accountability agenda stuff is a joke. The "Jordan Mile" bills that were proposed last year in a haze of media blitz and pandering, were hollowed out before they were passed - and they do absolutely nothing to change the way the bureau currently operates.

Smokes and mirrors, my friend. The devil is in the details.

Anonymous said...

Why do you call the Endorsed Democrat for City Council 9 inexperienced? Have you actually read about her? She seems to be the only candidate who actually has a track-record with results. Copeland Mitchell seems to be the only candidate that is not only well-intentioned as you say, she seems honest and experienced in leadershp and social services. She helped launch the Welfare-to-Work Program model. All the newspaper articles on www.Mitchell4CityCoucil.org include testimonies and proves that she actually gets RESULTS. The only track record I get on Prater-Holliday is her arrest record for fraud and disorderly conduct, discrepant addresses, landlord tenant problems, past and current lawsuits and many job firings, the last being the HACP in 2010 for sending Xrated emails. She was also kicked off the Wilkinsburg. I started my research on the candidates with the Tribune Review article: http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/pittsburgh/s_723852.html

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/05077/473418-94.stm

AR-05-005831 Commonwealth Financial Systems vs Prater-Holliday 08/26/2005 @1308639 Prater-Holliday Lucille -- -- Defendant
LT-05-000135 Curges etal vs Prater-Holliday 04/22/2005 @1308639 Prater-Holliday Lucille -- -- Defendant
AR-08-001848 Prater-Holliday vs Como 02/07/2008 @1544443 Prater-Holliday Lucille -- -- Plaintiff

Infinonymous said...

The description was "politically inexperienced but well-intentioned." It still seems to fit but might not have done justice to Ms. Copeland-Mitchell.

None of the District 9 candidates inspires great enthusiasm. Rev. Burgess is a sanctimonious lapdog for a substandard mayor. Ms. Prater-Holliday's record seems blemished. Ms. Copeland-Miller appears to be the Fielder dynasty's representative.

The most important issue in this race seems to be the revolting political hatchetry involving Ms. Copeland-Miller's employment.

Anonymous said...

I keep hearing that the City Councilman, Peduto is heavily involved in district 9's City Council race. Is this true? I hear the residents of district 9 are furious about his involvement in their affairs.

Anonymous said...

In response to the following comment by Jacque Fielder "The only track record I get on Prater-Holliday is her arrest record for fraud and disorderly conduct, discrepant addresses, landlord tenant problems, past and current lawsuits and many job firings, the last being the HACP in 2010 for sending Xrated emails. She was also kicked off the Wilkinsburg. I started my research on the candidates with the Tribune",

Ms. Prater-Holliday has always been a model citizen and has fought her entire life to empower others, and she has the people to prove it.

Ms. Fielder failed to mention that Ms. Prater-Holliday courageously defended herself in court against false allegations of access device fraud and disorderly conduct, after being told by a P.D. to take a guilty plea, which is how so many African-Americans end up with criminal records and/or in jail, AND SHE WON!

(con't)

Anonymous said...

Ms. Fielder also fails to mention that Ms. Prater-Holliday was suddenly widowed at the age of 34 and had 2 sons to raise, both of whom she sent to college, and while they were attending, found herself in a situation where she was faced with a difficult dilemma. She sacrificed herself to ensure that her sons received an education so that they would have opportunities few African-American males are afforded.

Ms. Prater-Holliday understands the importance of education, which Ms. Fielder would know nothing about because the last time she saw an institution of higher learning she was driving past it on her way to court to file charges against one of HER OWN COMMITTEE PEOPLE! Unfortunately, she doesn't have a father who can GIVE HER A HOUSE, like Ms. Fielder does.

Ms. Fielder is so dumb that she cited a case (AR-08-001848 Prater-Holliday vs Como 02/07/2008 @1544443 Prater-Holliday Lucille -- -- Plaintiff) as an eviction when actually, Ms. Prater-Holliday SUED HER LANDLORD for unsafe living conditions! I guess "Plaintiff" is too big of a word for Fielder to comprehend! Maybe she should "research" the meaning!

But Fielder obviously thinks it's alright for landlords to neglect their property, because she's backing a candidate who owes the City of Pgh. $10,000 of OUR TAX DOLLARS WE PAID a contractor for demolishing her condemned building on Hamilton Ave. in Homewood just last year that sat in disrepair for years in OUR community (Allegheny County Real Estate Website -City of Pgh. v Rockie Mitchell, yes, I do my research too!). Oh yeah Fielder, the City is the "Plaintiff" in that case.
(con't)

Anonymous said...

You would think that a so-called "Leader" in the community would see Ms. Prater-Holliday as a role model and commend her for taking such a bold stance, and encourage residents living in squalor in the 12th Ward to do the same, and you would think that Fielder would "research" her candidate before throwing her support behind a slum landlord, so many of which exist in the 9th Council District, but Fielder has her head so far up her own fat behind she can't tell shit from shineola.

This makes one question the strength of Fielder's candidate, when Fielder spends so much time attempting to discredit another candidate. But Fielder thought that her candidate was going to waltz into City Council on the coattails of disgruntled voters, and up pops Ms. Prater-Holliday, a qualified candidate that has lived a life very similar to that of most residents of Council district 9!

Fielder also fails to mentionthat Ms. Prater-Holliday attended EVERY 12th Ward meeting, including the HOLA )Holding Our Leaders Accountable) meetings, and was often invited to speak. Fielder's candidate hasn't attended any of her Fielder's meetings, that's why no one knows her. Speaking of Holding Our Leaders Accountable, it's high time that Fielder be held accountable, as well.

Fielder knows her candidate can't stand on her own merit, that is why she spends so much time speaking for her (Tribune Review article), and trying to discredit the only other African-American female candidate, instead of going after the real culprit, the incumbent!

(con't)

Anonymous said...

Ms. Fielder also neglected to mention that Ms. Prater-Holliday, like so many other low-income individuals, fell victim to a predatory lender and incurred an exhorbitant balance on an account, not because of the money she borrowed, but because the lender tacked on enormous fees and other charges that increased the actual balance. As President of ACORN Pgh. and ACORN PA, Ms. Prater-Holliday and other members of the organization stood up to predatory lenders and successfully had legislation passed that prevents these lenders from preying upon poor people. What has Copeland-Mitchell done?

In regards to Ms. Prater-Holliday being fired from HACP, Ms. Fielder again fails to mention that Ms. Prater-Holliday was awarded ALL of her UC benefits after a hearing found no evidence to support her temination, unlike Ms. Fielder's candidate, who had a job she REFUSED to return to, because she CHOSE to campaign full-time, which also means that Copeland-Mitchell is NOT ELIGIBLE FOR UC BENEFITS because what? Oh, that's right, SHE WAS NOT ABLE AND AVAILABLE FOR WORK AND SHE TURNED DOWN WORK THAT WAS AVAILABLE TO HER. I still don't understand why she DIDN'T RETURN TO WORK. The incumbent has 3 FULL TIME JOBS and, although he doesn't spend a lot of time focusing on District 9 issues, he still manages to do some semblence of campaigning. Ms. Fielder could have campaigned for her candidate while she was at work, but oh, I almost forgot,Fielder is supposed to be conveniently "disabled", (or is she?)

Fielder's candidate CHOSE NOT TO RETURN TO HER JOB! With the unemployment rate as high as it is, you would think she would be grateful to have a job, but, with the blind and stupid leading the blind and stupid,alas, Fielder's candidate has no J-O-B, thanks to Fielder. and I heard her C-A-R broke down too. Awww. Maybe Fielder can help her out with the money she gets from the 12th Ward committee! It's totally unaccounted for, because Fielder guards the Treasurer's report like gold!

Anonymous said...

As far as discrepent addresses are concerned, Ms. Prater-Holliday is a resident of Homewood. She graduated from Westinghouse High School and is well known in the community, unlike Fielder's candidate. Every time her name is mentioned it is followed by, "Who is she?" Ms. Fielder had the opportunity to file a challenge to Ms. Prater-Holliday's residency prior to names being placed on the ballot. If Ms. Fielder was so convinced there was a discrepency, why didn't she exercise her rights? I'm sure that Mr. McCullough, who himself is facing criminal charges, would have been glad to oblige her with representation, as he is representing Fielder's candidate with her suit against the "Program".

Lastly, in regards to Ms. Fielder's allegations of Ms. Prater-Holliday being "kicked off the Wilkinsburg" (she's so erratic she didn't even finish her sentence, so I'll finish it for her)Civil Service Commission, again, Ms. Fielder is as uninformed as her candidate. She fails to mention that Ms. Prater-Holliday was the FIRST African-American female to serve as Chair of the Wilkinsburg Civil Service Commission, and that Ms. Prater-Holliday provided exemplary VOLUNTEER service for 9 years, 8 of which she served as Chair and produced a 98% success rate of case decisions being upheld by Allegheny County Common Pleas Court. Again, what has Fielder's candidate done?

Accolades would be too much for Fielder to handle. She goes for the juggler everytime!

Furthermore, since Ms. Fielder likes to do so much research, she needs to do some research on her Campaign Committee. Why would a Ward Chair associate herself with a woman who chases formerly incarcerated men and their NEW GIRLFRIEND all over the neighborhood AFTER SHE GOT DUMPED and she's MAD BECAUSE ALL OF HIS MILLIONS OF DOLLARS SETTLEMENT WENT TO THE NEW GIRLFRIEND WHO JUST HAPPENED TO SEAL THE DEAL BY GETTING PREGNANT BY HIM? (Thomas Doswell, Adrienne Young (yes, more research)?

Anonymous said...

Fielder, her "candidate", and Young are all in the business of ruining lives, not saving them!

Fielder raised hell when the Lemington School was sold, supposedly without her knowledge, to a Minister that wants to operate programs for youth. If she had spent her time doing some "useful research", she would have known the building was going to be sold, and to whom. And why wouldn't she want these programs in her community? Because she has to control EVERYTHING AND EVERYONE!

Young destroyed musical contracts that Doswell had with B.B. King, and made him lose a college scholarship to Pitt.

And to Fielder's candidate, where are all of these "young mothers" you supposedly helped? They should be singing your praise, especially now when you could REALLY benefit from it.

Oh, yeah Ms. Fielder, have you written any bad checks lately?

Please! Fielder's candidate is so out of touch with District 9 that she recently stated in a newpaper article that there are ...."no dry cleaners or mini-marts" in the District. There is a cleaners that has been in Homewood for over FIFTY YEARS, and there are THREE MINI-MARTS within THREE BLOCKS OF EACH OTHER! Fielder's candidate's claim to fame is that she worked with the Young Mothers Program at the Hill House. That was almost 20 years ago! The newspaper article is so old Fielder had to tape it together!

Fielder also stated that her candidate was an exemplary employee for over 15 years. If she was so great, why did she get fired?

Then, Fielder, not her candidate (who obviously can't speak for herself) goes to City Council and pleads with them to support her candidate in getting her job back! How dumb can you be to think City Council is going to support someone who willfully neglects her superiors? If she did it to her employers, what will she do on City Council?

PA law states that an employer can fire anyone with or without cause. I guess Fielder didn't "research" that!

To add insult to injury, Fielder went so far as to publicize and hold a demonstration outside of one of the only secure and secretive places where women can seek refuge, the "Program", putting the entire organization, and numerous women, who may be hiding from an enraged boyfriend or former drug dealer, on front street! That place is so secretive they don't even have a website! Now everyone knows where these women might be hiding, thanks to the ingenious efforts of 12th Ward Chair Jacque Fielder!

Yeah, Fielder, her candidate, and Young really care about the welfare of women! They attempt to discredit them, they "out" them, and they chase them down in the streets! Shameful, especially when the majority of households in the 9th Council District are headed by single females.

Everything Fielder's candidate has ever done has been attached to a paycheck, just like Ms. Fielder (by the way, where does Fielder work? Oh, that's right, she's "disabled" until time for an election!)who takes money from candidates every time there is an election and NEVER PRODUCES RESULTS, but probably uses the money to back HER OWN CANDIDATE, without the sanction of the 12th Ward committee, which she bullies into submission (Pgh. Post-Gazette, "Sacrificial Rites of Democrats" read Jacque Fielder's email to committeepeople)!

Ms. Prater-Holliday has always served the community and strived to make life better for others, WITHOUT A PAYCHECK ATTACHED AND WITHOUT ANY ATTACHMENT TO ANY POLITICAL FACTION! That is the ultimate sacrifice, of which these fake, insecure, women will never know.

Anonymous said...

That is why Ms. Prater-Holliday has received NUMEROUS ENDORSEMENTS for her campaign for City Council, which include the Allegheny County Labor Council, SEIU, Gertrude Stein Club, Steel City Stonewall Democrats, Young Democrats of Allegheny County, Ironworkers Local #3, Sierra Club, United Steelworkers District #10, Utility Workers Local 433, IAM District 98, and others too numerous to mention, compared to Fielder's candidate's THREE measly ENDORSEMENTS. And THAT IS WHY MS. PRATER-HOLLIDAY IS THE BEST CANDIDATE FOR CITY COUNCIL!

How about Fielder, her candidate and Young put in some real work, like Ms. Prater-Holliday, and stop hoping to have an unqualified candidate glide into City Council on the coattails of disgruntled voters! Ward Chairs are supposed to be concensus builders, so why would Ms. Fielder, the 12th Ward Chair, take ONE OF HER OWN COMMITTEEPEOPLE TO COURT AND WASTE OUR TAX DOLLARS on charges Ms. Fielder trumped up, again in an effort to discredit someone?

If Fielder cares so much about the 12th Ward, why isn't there so much as a candy store located there so the children don't have to buy things from a mobile store?

Ms. Prater-Holliday has always been, and will always be, a DEDICATED COMMUNITY SERVANT!

Here's an idea: How about Fielder and all of the other "Desperate Housewifes" she associates herself with, DO SOMETHING TO IMPROVE THE LIVES OF THE RESIDENTS IN THE 12TH WARD, or better yet, DO SOMETHING TO IMPROVE YOUR OWN LIVES!

Ms. Fielder also fails to mention that Ms. Prater-Holliday was suddenly widowed at the age of 34 and had 2 sons to raise, both of whom she sent to college, and while they were attending, found herself in a situation where she was faced with a difficult dilemma. She sacrificed herself to ensure that her sons received an education so that they would have opportunities few African-American males are afforded.

Ms. Prater-Holliday understands the importance of education, which Ms. Fielder would know nothing about because the last time she saw an institution of higher learning she was driving past it on her way to court to file charges against one of HER OWN COMMITTEE PEOPLE! Unfortunately, she doesn't have a father who can GIVE HER A HOUSE, like Ms. Fielder does.

Ms. Fielder is so dumb that she cited a case (AR-08-001848 Prater-Holliday vs Como 02/07/2008 @1544443 Prater-Holliday Lucille -- -- Plaintiff) as an eviction when actually, Ms. Prater-Holliday SUED HER LANDLORD for unsafe living conditions! I guess "Plaintiff" is too big of a word for Fielder to comprehend! Maybe she should "research" the meaning!


(con't)

Anonymous said...

But Fielder obviously thinks it's alright for landlords to neglect their property, because she's backing a candidate who owes the City of Pgh. $10,000 of OUR TAX DOLLARS WE PAID a contractor for demolishing her condemned building on Hamilton Ave. in Homewood just last year that sat in disrepair for years in OUR community (Allegheny County Real Estate Website -City of Pgh. v Rockie Mitchell, yes, I do my research too!). Oh yeah Fielder, the City is the "Plaintiff" in that case.

You would think that a so-called "Leader" in the community would see Ms. Prater-Holliday as a role model and commend her for taking such a bold stance, and encourage residents living in squalor in the 12th Ward to do the same, and you would think that Fielder would "research" her candidate before throwing her support behind a slum landlord, so many of which exist in the 9th Council District, but Fielder has her head so far up her own fat behind she can't tell shit from shineola.

This makes one question the strength of Fielder's candidate, when Fielder spends so much time attempting to discredit another candidate. But Fielder thought that her candidate was going to waltz into City Council on the coattails of disgruntled voters, and up pops Ms. Prater-Holliday, a qualified candidate that has lived a life very similar to that of most residents of Council district 9!

Anonymous said...

Ms. Fielder also neglected to mention that Ms. Prater-Holliday, like so many other low-income individuals, fell victim to a predatory lender and incurred an exhorbitant balance on an account, not because of the money she borrowed, but because the lender tacked on enormous fees and other charges that increased the actual balance. As President of ACORN Pgh. and ACORN PA, Ms. Prater-Holliday and other members of the organization stood up to predatory lenders and successfully had legislation passed that prevents these lenders from preying upon poor people. What has Copeland-Mitchell done?
In regards to Ms. Prater-Holliday being fired from HACP, Ms. Fielder again fails to mention that Ms. Prater-Holliday was awarded ALL of her UC benefits after a hearing found no evidence to support her temination, unlike Ms. Fielder's candidate, who had a job she REFUSED to return to, because she CHOSE to campaign full-time, which also means that Copeland-Mitchell is NOT ELIGIBLE FOR UC BENEFITS because what? Oh, that's right, SHE WAS NOT ABLE AND AVAILABLE FOR WORK AND SHE TURNED DOWN WORK THAT WAS AVAILABLE TO HER. I still don't understand why she DIDN'T RETURN TO WORK. The incumbent has 3 FULL TIME JOBS and, although he doesn't spend a lot of time focusing on District 9 issues, he still manages to do some semblence of campaigning. Ms. Fielder could have campaigned for her candidate while she was at work, but oh, I almost forgot,Fielder is supposed to be conveniently "disabled", (or is she?)

Anonymous said...

Fielder's candidate CHOSE NOT TO RETURN TO HER JOB! With the unemployment rate as high as it is, you would think she would be grateful to have a job, but, with the blind and stupid leading the blind and stupid,alas, Fielder's candidate has no J-O-B, thanks to Fielder. and I heard her C-A-R broke down too. Awww. Maybe Fielder can help her out with the money she gets from the 12th Ward committee! It's totally unaccounted for, because Fielder guards the Treasurer's report like gold!

As far as discrepent addresses are concerned, Ms. Prater-Holliday is a resident of Homewood. She graduated from Westinghouse High School and is well known in the community, unlike Fielder's candidate. Every time her name is mentioned it is followed by, "Who is she?" Ms. Fielder had the opportunity to file a challenge to Ms. Prater-Holliday's residency prior to names being placed on the ballot. If Ms. Fielder was so convinced there was a discrepency, why didn't she exercise her rights? I'm sure that Mr. McCullough, who himself is facing criminal charges, would have been glad to oblige her with representation, as he is representing Fielder's candidate with her suit against the "Program".

Lastly, in regards to Ms. Fielder's allegations of Ms. Prater-Holliday being "kicked off the Wilkinsburg" (she's so erratic she didn't even finish her sentence, so I'll finish it for her)Civil Service Commission, again, Ms. Fielder is as uninformed as her candidate. She fails to mention that Ms. Prater-Holliday was the FIRST African-American female to serve as Chair of the Wilkinsburg Civil Service Commission, and that Ms. Prater-Holliday provided exemplary VOLUNTEER service for 9 years, 8 of which she served as Chair and produced a 98% success rate of case decisions being upheld by Allegheny County Common Pleas Court. Again, what has Fielder's candidate done? NOTHING!

Anonymous said...

Accolades would be too much for Fielder to handle. She goes striaght for the juggler everytime!
Furthermore, since Ms. Fielder likes to do so much research, she needs to do some research on her Campaign Committee. Why would a Ward Chair associate herself with a woman who chases formerly incarcerated men and their NEW GIRLFRIEND all over the neighborhood AFTER SHE GOT DUMPED and she's MAD BECAUSE ALL OF HIS MILLIONS OF DOLLARS SETTLEMENT WENT TO THE NEW GIRLFRIEND WHO JUST HAPPENED TO SEAL THE DEAL BY GETTING PREGNANT BY HIM? (Thomas Doswell, Adrienne Young (yes, more research)?
Fielder, her "candidate", and Young are all in the business of ruining lives, not saving them!
Fielder raised hell when the Lemington School was sold, supposedly without her knowledge, to a Minister that wants to operate programs for youth. If she had spent her time doing some "useful research", she would have known the building was going to be sold, and to whom. And why wouldn't she want these programs in her community? Because she has to control EVERYTHING AND EVERYONE!

Young destroyed musical contracts that Doswell had with B.B. King, and made him lose a college scholarship to Pitt.

And to Fielder's candidate, where are all of these "young mothers" you supposedly helped? They should be singing your praise, especially now when you could REALLY benefit from it.

Oh, yeah Ms. Fielder, have you written any bad checks lately?

Anonymous said...

Please! Fielder's candidate is so out of touch with District 9 that she recently stated in a newpaper article that there are ...."no dry cleaners or mini-marts" in the District. There is a cleaners that has been in Homewood for over FIFTY YEARS, and there are THREE MINI-MARTS within THREE BLOCKS OF EACH OTHER! Fielder's candidate's claim to fame is that she worked with the Young Mothers Program at the Hill House. That was almost 20 years ago! The newspaper article is so old Fielder had to tape it together!

Fielder also stated that her candidate was an exemplary employee for over 15 years. If she was so great, why did she get fired?

Then, Fielder, not her candidate (who obviously can't speak for herself) goes to City Council and pleads with them to support her candidate in getting her job back! How dumb can you be to think City Council is going to support someone who willfully neglects her superiors? If she did it to her employers, what will she do on City Council?

PA law states that an employer can fire anyone with or without cause. I guess Fielder didn't "research" that!

To add insult to injury, Fielder went so far as to publicize and hold a demonstration outside of one of the only secure and secretive places where women can seek refuge, the "Program", putting the entire organization, and numerous women, who may be hiding from an enraged boyfriend or former drug dealer, on front street! That place is so secretive they don't even have a website! Now everyone knows where these women might be hiding, thanks to the ingenious efforts of 12th Ward Chair Jacque Fielder!

Anonymous said...

Yeah, Fielder, her candidate, and Young really care about the welfare of women! They attempt to discredit them, they "out" them, and they chase them down in the streets! Shameful, especially when the majority of households in the 9th Council District are headed by single females.

Everything Fielder's candidate has ever done has been attached to a paycheck, just like Ms. Fielder (by the way, where does Fielder work? Oh, that's right, she's "disabled" until time for an election!)who takes money from candidates every time there is an election and NEVER PRODUCES RESULTS, but probably uses the money to back HER OWN CANDIDATE, without the sanction of the 12th Ward committee, which she bullies into submission (Pgh. Post-Gazette, "Sacrificial Rites of Democrats" read Jacque Fielder's email to committeepeople)!

Ms. Prater-Holliday has always served the community and strived to make life better for others, WITHOUT A PAYCHECK ATTACHED AND WITHOUT ANY ATTACHMENT TO ANY POLITICAL FACTION! That is the ultimate sacrifice, of which these fake, insecure women will never know.

That is why Ms. Prater-Holliday has received NUMEROUS ENDORSEMENTS for her campaign for City Council, which include the Allegheny County Labor Council, SEIU, Gertrude Stein Club, Steel City Stonewall Democrats, Young Democrats of Allegheny County, Ironworkers Local #3, Sierra Club, United Steelworkers District #10, Utility Workers Local 433, IAM District 98, and others too numerous to mention, compared to Fielder's candidate's THREE measly ENDORSEMENTS. And THAT IS WHY MS. PRATER-HOLLIDAY IS THE BEST CANDIDATE FOR CITY COUNCIL!

(con't)

Anonymous said...

How about Fielder, her candidate and Young put in some real work, like Ms. Prater-Holliday, and stop hoping to have an unqualified candidate glide into City Council on the coattails of disgruntled voters! Ward Chairs are supposed to be concensus builders, so why would Ms. Fielder, the 12th Ward Chair, take ONE OF HER OWN COMMITTEEPEOPLE TO COURT AND WASTE OUR TAX DOLLARS on charges Ms. Fielder trumped up, again in an effort to discredit someone?

If Fielder cares so much about the 12th Ward, why isn't there so much as a candy store located there so the children don't have to buy things from a mobile store?

Ms. Prater-Holliday has always been, and will always be, a DEDICATED COMMUNITY SERVANT!

Here's an idea: How about Fielder and all of the other "Desperate Housewifes" she associates herself with, DO SOMETHING TO IMPROVE THE LIVES OF THE RESIDENTS IN THE 12TH WARD, or better yet, DO SOMETHING TO IMPROVE YOUR OWN LIVES!

###

Bram Reichbaum said...

WHO IS CHASE PATTERSON ENDORSING, IS WHAT I WANT TO KNOW!!!

Anonymous said...

Thanks for clearing up most of Ms. Prater Hollidays unfortuate circumstances. You seem to have very personal information. I am just curious if you wouldn't mind answering all the complaints listed against Prater Holliday
1. Ms. Prater Holliday was fired from the Housing Authority City of Pittsburgh last year for sending inappropriate emails while in management. 2. Does she have a lawsuit pending against the City?
3. What address did she use while employed by the Housing Authority if she did indeed get fired for misconduct?
4. Please give the tracking information for Phyllis Copeland Mitchell supposedly owing $10,000 to the City. If that is true, it is strange that the City hasn't published that information because she would have had to reveal that on her ethics report. We should know as much information as possible on both women before voting.
5. The information revealed about Prater Holliday was written by Bill Vadonic of the Tribune Review, the Post Gazette and the Wilkinsburg Police Dept. who said they investigated Prater Holliday for address fraud.
If all these things are documented about Prater Holliday, Why do you blame Fielder? Was she the one who brought these matters to light? Fielder is not the candidate!
6. I am not voting for Burgess!!

Anonymous said...

Since Fielder wants to talk about other people being arrested, how about her being arrested for Simple Assault and Possess of a Weapon On School Property -http://ujsportal.pacourts.us/docketsheets/cp.aspx - (CP-02-CR-0008120-1994) and for writing Bad Checks (CP-02-CR-0002654-1989). What a Great Role Model for our community!

Jacque Fielder's “endorsed democratic” candidate got trounced! She received a whopping 18% of the vote! That’s more than she deserved with her incoherent, uninformed, disengaged self. If she hadn’t wasted so much time running around talking about Prater-Holliday and clinging to those raggedy notes Fielder wrote for her as if they were gold, she may have received 18.5%! That says a lot about Fielder's power and influence in the 12th Ward. She and Copeland-Mitchell are a disgrace to the community and the Democratic Party!

Fielder was so desperate in the end, she took money from unendorsed democratic candidate Mark Patrick Flaherty to pay people to wrok at the polls, and didn’t even pass out his literature! It is time for Fielder to go! She’s embarrassing!

I could be wrong, but didn't I read somewhere that Copeland-Mitchell was fired from her job because she wouldn't go back to work?

By the way, when are Phyllis and her husband going to pay the $10,000 they owe for the city tearing down their house? Check out the info here: https://dcr.alleghenycounty.us/CaseDetails.asp? CaseID=GD-10-022825GD-10-022825

Anonymous said...

The 2011 District 9 election results prove that JACQUE FIELDER IS A NOBODY! Prater-Holliday owes her no explaination about anything, especially in regards to any personal issues. Fielder's candidate was pitiful and the voters told her so! When will Fielder shut her mouth and admit that Prater-Holliday was the better candidate? The voters proved it! The 12th Ward Committee should DEMAND that Fielder STEP DOWN as Ward Chair and allow someone competent to take over!