The City’s financial statements treat the Housing Authority of the City of Pittsburgh as a related organization whose purpose it to acquire and maintain low-income housing.  The Mayor of Pittsburgh appoints the seven board members, but the City does not subsidize its operations or guarantee its debt service.

So when the Authority was audited and findings regarding pay for contracted security guards by the Controller’s office and heard from a service union about the pay the Controller couldn’t penalize them for the pay and benefit levels.  Under the regulations for the prevailing wage law for the City, the Controller’s office takes complaints and then reviews and investigates the complaint.

The ordinance covers various types of projects, including residential buildings with at least 50 units and the City’s ordinance lists security officers as one type of building service employee and its defines City as the City itself and any related agency, department, or authority, so by that plain language it would seem that the requirements would have applied to the Authority, but it took an action of the board to make it so.

A 2010 piece examined the possible effects of the City’s prevailing wage law when it went into effect.  As we noted “…firms or agencies with City contracts will pass this cost onto the City in the form of higher prices in any future contracts and could ask for or sue for immediate additional funding assistance on the grounds the terms of their contract have been affected.”  That could be the result of the Housing Authority’s decision.