The Big Story

A note to G-20 readers

2009-09-30T15:39:00Z

From Timothy McNulty

For occasional G-20 updates please check in with the P-G's Early Returns government and politics blog.

Thank You.

Nordenberg finally reacts to protests

2009-09-29T20:44:00Z

From Timothy McNulty

Pitt Chancellor Mark Nordenberg released a long statement today on the G-20 events in Oakland last week entitled "The G-20 and Other News: The Good, The Bad and the Ugly."

Regarding the 100+ arrests on Friday night, he largely follows the reaction from the Ravenstahl administratio n, saying arrests were made after people failed to disperse, that the city has promised an internal review of police actions, and that people were free to make complaints to the Pittsburgh Citizen Police Review Board.

He promises the university will be looking "judiciously" at student misconduct, but does not directly address allegations about police entering student dorms and libraries, and targeting young female arrestee s, or what, if anything, the university will do in response. The closest he gets is this: "To acknowledge the truly serious challenges that existed, of course, does not mean that every effort to meet those challenges was conducted in the most appropriate way."

The DA's office announced today that it has dropped charges against four of the 51 Pitt students arrested Friday, and is reviewing other student cases.

From the Nordenberg statement:

As the events of the evening progressed, police directed the large crowd that had assembled at Schenley Plaza to disperse. That group, by all accounts, included a combination of curious onlookers and peaceful protesters, as well as demonstrators bent on destruction. Distinguishing between those subgroups was difficult. In fact, at one point during that evening, black-clad anarchists retreated to an area near the Cathedral to change into collegiate attire so that they would blend in with our students. When repeated orders to disperse were ignored, the police utilized smoke canisters and other crowd-dispersal techniques and began making arrests.

A similar pattern of activity occurred on Friday night at what had been profanely promoted-by non-students, we believe-as an anti-police rally in Schenley Plaza. Prior to that demonstration and after discussions with student leaders, a "secure zone," located in the residence hall quadrangle off Fifth Avenue and controlled by University police, was created. That zone was designed to give students seeking to disperse in response to police orders a safe destination, which we believed had been a problem for some students on the prior night.

On Friday evening, the University's emergency notification system also was employed on two separate occasions. At about 7:30 p.m., all subscribers to that system received the message, "G-20 Disturbances May Continue Tonight. Be Careful. Exercise Good Judgment. Safety Tips at My.Pitt.Edu." Shortly after 10 p.m., when it became clear that a problematic situation was developing, a second message was sent. It stated: "Conditions May Be Deteriorating In Oakland. Students Are Advised To Remain Near Their Residences." On Friday night, property damage was greatly reduced, if not eliminated entirely. However, an even larger number of people were arrested, principally for failure to disperse or disorderly conduct. On Saturday evening, a much smaller, but similarly promoted, anti-police protest ended peacefully, with no property damage and with no arrests. The emergency notification system also was used on that evening.

To acknowledge the truly serious challenges that existed, of course, does not mean that every effort to meet those challenges was conducted in the most appropriate way. The City, which had authority over the security force (subject, almost certainly, to national direction and advice with respect to the safety of Summit delegates), has said that it will assess the policing practices employed in Oakland as a part of its overall review of the Summit. Those wishing to file complaints have been invited to do so with the Citizen's Police Review Board.

Representatives of the City have expressed a further desire to work with Pitt to ensure that our students, particularly those caught up in crowds and unable to disperse as ordered, are treated fairly in the legal process. That is a joint undertaking that we welcome. Similarly, it is the University's intention to employ its own judicial processes judiciously, given the unique set of circumstances facing students last week, circumstances that almost certainly never will recur.

"I want an apology"

2009-09-28T19:25:00Z

A Pitt grad student asks for an apology from police for Friday's actions:

It should be noted, however, that Friday's activities should in no way be considered a reaction to the G-20.

It was, instead, a reaction to the excessive preemptive build up of heavily armed and armored officers in the Oakland area. You are to blame for provoking this.

You are also to blame for using volatile and harmful substances near entire buildings of completely innocent college students - non-lethal does in no way mean harmless.

You are to blame for massive overreaction where students are concerned. In the age of instant media, in an age of curiosity, in an age of any large mass of people simply being interesting, you are entirely to blame for not being able or willing to separate the idea of bystanders from those inciting groups of people.You are likely to blame for overreacting to what those groups of people were doing - causing further problems.

You are, in many ways most of all, to blame for invading Pitt's property trying to break up groups of innocent students who are curious about what is happening on their campus, and trying to go home. There was no reason to put armed officials or non-lethal crowd dispersal through the Quad/Towers area. That is our campus, and I hold you accountable for making it unlivable completely unnecessarily. There is no reason your actions in those areas could not have been replaced by better methods - getting the university to return to its policy of only allowing students with valid Pitt IDs to be signed in, for instance, would have left any out of town inciters in the open. You should have left that area open so that students would feel safe rather than hunted.

Both sides acted poorly, but you [should] know better. You have training, you have people to think about responses, and you are not an uncentralized mob.

I want an apology.

Police: students were fleeing arrest

2009-09-28T19:02:00Z

From Rich Lord

"As a group, the police responded admirably," said Pittsburgh Mayor Luke Ravenstahl, pledging an internal evaluation of what went right and wrong on the streets during and shortly after the summit. "We kept our city safe," he said while sending "a message to the out-of-town anarchists that this is our town."

Pittsburgh Police Deputy Chief Paul Donaldson said he made the much-discussed decisions on how to handle large Oakland gatherings.
On Thursday night, he said, the order to disperse was given when police became "concerned with the crowd size" not far from the Phipps Conservatory, where world leaders were gathered.

On Friday at 10:42 p.m., he said, police who were monitoring a Schenley Plaza gathering determined that "conditions had deteriorated," and gave the order to disperse to prevent the kind of fires and glass breakage they had seen the night before.

"When we moved them from the park, they then re-formed at Forbes Avenue," he said. "We didn't see any movement by the protesters to disperse until we started to effect arrests." At that point, students were not dispersing, but were instead fleeing arrest.

Officials said just six of the 190 people arrested for summit-related activities are still in custody. Claims by some arrestees that they were just caught up in the flow of the crowd will be evaluated, and in some cases charges may be dropped. Those whose lost property can claim it at the police headquarters property room.

Public Safety Director Michael Huss said that the city's Office of Municipal Investigations has gotten five complaints about the police, including one from a business that was affected by tear gas.

Local leaders praise G-20 outcomes

2009-09-28T18:49:00Z

From Rich Lord:

Local leaders today called the G-20 Summit a rousing success, providing initial estimates of $35 million in direct economic impact, $100 million worth of media exposure, and just $50,000 in damage.

"We've already documented dozens and dozens of stories all across the world on newspapers and on TV," said Dennis Yablonsky, CEO of the Allegheny Conference on Community Development. His staff said it would cost at least $100 million to buy equivalent ads worldwide.

Those stories have already resulted in one call from an international company interested in doing business in Pittsburgh, he said.
VisitPittsburgh President Joe McGrath reiterated his estimate that the money spent by visiting advance teams and delegations, plus David L. Lawrence Convention Center set-up, totaled $35 million. He said two groups have told his organization that G-20 publicity has prompted them to tentatively pick Pittsburgh to host upcoming meetings, and negotiations are occurring.

The public-private Pittsburgh G-20 Partnership put together to host the summit will remain in place, said Mayor Luke Ravenstahl, to "make sure that the G-20 isn't just a 48-hour flash in the pan."

The estimated $50,000 in property damage from protesters won't be covered by the insurance policies taken out by the city, officials said. Those policies will cover the city in the event anyone sues the city for damages or injuries driven by last week's summit. Police officials said they did not believe there were any major injuries.

Independent mayoral challenger Kevin Acklin today questioned the "decision to shut down the Downtown business district" for the summit, saying that "the economic damage done to our local business community was both unfair and unnecessary."

Mr. Ravenstahl said he did everything he could to encourage Downtown businesses to stay open. Mr. McGrath estimated that around 1 in 5 people who normally work Downtown came there Thursday and Friday, and said much of the business they do may have been pushed into outlying areas.

Peer review needs peer pressure

2009-09-28T17:54:00Z

Marketwatch has G-20 reaction from the president of the World Bank, who says the Pittsburgh declaration was a nice start, but it has a long way to go:

WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) -- The Group of 20 nations' proposal to tackle global imbalances through a peer-review process will require a sea change in international relations to succeed, said Robert Zoellick, the president of the World Bank, on Monday.

In his remarks, Zoellick called the peer-review framework a "good start."

"But the peer review will require a new level of international cooperation and coordination, including a new willingness to take the findings of global monitoring seriously," Zoellick said in remarks to Johns Hopkins University's graduate school for international studies.

The new peer-review process is aimed at trends that have turned the global economy upside down in some respects.

The primary global imbalance is that countries such as China, Japan and Germany have geared their economies to send exports to the United States.

However, after years of overspending on imported goods, the U.S. savings rate fell to record low levels.

Economists say the challenge for policy makers is to move the U.S. savings rate higher though fiscal measures while the exporting countries develop a domestic market for their goods.

In Pittsburgh, President Barack Obama proposed the new peer-review framework that the other 19 countries adopted. See related story.

Under the peer-review plan, the G20 countries will have to put forward policies to reduce global imbalances. They will gather under the IMF umbrella to discuss progress, with the IMF serving as referee.

Zoellick said that this review process will have to have teeth.

"Peer review will need to be peer pressure," Zoellick said.

More local takes

2009-09-28T17:25:00Z

Here are some local takes on G-20 goings-on:

Infionymous writes about the library incident we noted earlier:

Before Chief Tim Delaney and Chief Nate Harper get too attached to their lies stories about how the 'innocents' had been permitted to and had dispersed, and that all of the Pitt students rounded up by police had been 'there for a [culpable] reason,' they should consider this:

Reliable reports -- which, I am told, university employees can corroborate -- are emerging that a number of students studying in a library were aggressively rousted by police, forced outside (where they were promptly gassed), and physically assaulted with nightsticks and shields.

Oh, and one such student's parent is a trial lawyer.

And he's p***ed.

Any chance that guy's name might be on a pink message slip on Nordenberg's desk first thing Monday morning?

It will be interesting to compare Pitt's treatment of students involved in Friday's festivities with Pitt's traditional treatment of varsity athletes who kick the hell out of other students, 12-year-old paperboys, or police officers. So far, it doesn't look good.

That's Church says the whole thing went rather well for Ravenstahl and Onorato (Warning: bad language at link):

Now that the G-20 is wrapped up with a pretty bow and shipped away, and now that the garbage cans have returned to the city sidewalks, which of course Lukey was going to protect his garbage cans, he paid a QUARTER OF A MILLION DOLLARS for those puppies, just a few final thoughts:

1. A bartender at a local eatery told my husband that a group of anarchists were in there having a meal, bragging about the "destruction" they rained down on Pittsburgh, etc. and after their meal was over the little whippersnappers paid with a bank card. No Banks! No Borders!

2. Nicky Sarkozy never called me for a drink. (I've been informed via twitter that both sadcakes and sad panda are outdated and I'm lame if I continue to use them, so for now I'll say ... poopers!) Poopers.

3. In hindsight, on the whole, I thought the G-20 was handled exceptionally well and I thought Pittsburgh, the city not the people because we the people were in hiding, looked beautiful for the event. I'm thrilled that no businesses went down in flames, that no police were injured (that I know of), and that police/civilian relations were for the most part uneventful. I imagine this successful G-20 will reflect well on Lukey and Danny Boy come election time.

Matt Hogue rounds up a bunch of videos at Pittsburgh Hoagie.

Criticism from the right

2009-09-28T16:52:00Z

From Timothy McNulty

Not all the criticism of the Pittsburgh Police is coming from the left -- here's a post yesterday by Glenn Reynolds of Instapundit:

POLICE VIOLENCE AT THE G20: A law school classmate of mine, Curt Vaszquez, emails:

I just wanted to say that my daughter Martha, a 19 year old sophomore at the University of Pittsburgh, on Thursday night was rousted by police from the school library where she was studying, ordered to leave her belongings behind and herded into the street where she was tear-gassed, sound cannoned and hit by a plexiglass shield for exercising her right to be a young person outdoors on her campus on a pleasant fall night. I suppose I should be grateful because other kids were roughed up much worse by the police that night. This is just one aspect of the G20 that will never receive the attention it deserves. You have no idea how bad it was here.

Also, you might be interested in the linked article in which Pitt's police chief pats himselfs on the back for his handling of the situation and cynically refers to the victims as "innocents" who chose to put themselves in harm's way. Note the Chief's presumption that the police have the right to break up any assembly. Very disturbing.

I regard the G20 protests as idiotic, but that doesn't excuse police overreaction. Violent protesters deserve to be arrested, but the reaction here does seem to have been excessive.

Reynolds also links to this post at Below the Beltway.

Merton Center blasts police, mayor

2009-09-28T16:46:00Z

From Jerome L. Sherman

Activists with the Thomas Merton Center and other groups today blasted the police response to a Friday night protest in Oakland following the G-20 summit, calling it a "military-style occupation" that resulted in the gassing and arrest of dozens of bystanders, including students and journalists.

During a press conference at the center's Garfield headquarters, some activists threatened lawsuits against the city and placed responsibility for the confrontation with Mayor Luke Ravenstahl and top public safety officials.

"I'll say it very bluntly: The mayor should be fired. The city council should hold his feet to the fire," said David Meieran, an organizer with Three Rivers Climate Convergence.

He and others called for authorities to release anyone who remains in custody because of G-20 arrests and to drop any charges against those arrested. He also said police should return all property, including cameras and video footage, confiscated Friday night.

"The police were beating people and gassing people who were wandering out of restaurants ... wandering out of their dorms," said Nigel Parry, a journalist with Twin Cities Indymedia who came to Pittsburgh from Minnesota for the summit.

Melissa Hall, also a journalist with Twin Cities, was one of more than 100 people arrested Friday near the Cathedral of Learning, and she said today that police damaged her camera and erased her video footage.

Nathan Lanzendorfer, 23, said police shot him four times with beanbag rounds at close range as he was trying to leave the area. He showed reporters large, purple blotches on the backs of both legs and an arm.

"This was unjust," he said. "I was peaceful. I had done nothing wrong."

Police officials have said they gave several loud dispersal orders using a Long-Range Acoustic Device, instructing everyone gathered to leave, no matter their purpose.

Elizabeth Pittinger, executive director of the Citizen Police Review Board, said she was "very disturbed" that police had arrested journalists - including Pittsburgh Post-Gazette reporter Sadie Gurman -- who were there to observe the protest.

She said the board so far has received 50 complaints related to police activity during the summit, mostly from the Oakland events.

She said the board would be undertaking a comprehensive investigation of how police handled the summit.

"The huge police presence - it was overwhelming," she said.

The empty waffle

2009-09-28T14:59:00Z

From Timothy McNulty

Back to the G-20 communique, which is the main reason for holding the summit after all. It may have worsened the country's financial crisis, argues this essay in the New Republic (via NPR):

It is easy to dismiss the G20 communique and all the associated spin as empty waffle. Ask people in a month what was accomplished in Pittsburgh and you'll get the same blank stare that follows when you now ask: What was achieved at the G8 summit in Italy this year?

Perhaps just having emerging markets at the table will bring the world closer to stability and more inclined towards inclusive growth, but that seems unlikely. Should we just move on - back to our respective domestic policy struggles?

That's tempting, but consider for a moment the key way in which the G20 summit has worsened our predicament.

There is broad agreement that capital requirements need to be increased and a growing consensus that very large banks in particular should be required to hold bigger equity cushions. This is a pressing national priority - if our financial system is to become safer - and reasonable people are starting to put numbers on the table, ever so quietly: Joe Nocera is hearing 8%, but Lehman had 11.6% tier one capital on the day before it failed and the U.S. banking system used to carry much more capital - back in the days when it really was bailout free (think 20-30% in modern equivalent terms (see slide 40 here).

Obviously, raising capital standards in the U.S. is going to be a long and drawn out fight. The G20 could help, if it set high international expectations, but the opposite is more likely. As Nocera suggests this [Friday] morning, the inclination of the Europeans - largely because of their funky "hybrid" capital, but also because they have some very weak banks - will be to drag their feet.

Why should we care? This administration seems to think that we need to bring others with us, if we are to strengthen capital requirements. Our progress will be slowed by this thinking, the glacial nature of international economic diplomacy, and the self-interest of the Europeans.

Instead, the U.S. should use its power as the leading potential place for productive investments to make this point: If you want to play in the U.S. market, you need a lot of capital. If you would rather move your reckless high risk activities overseas, that is fine.