Robin Rombach, Post-Gazette The Rev. James Simms "... not something we initiated or condoned." Click photo for larger image.

Last month, dozens of public housing residents from the Hill District joined a daytime pep rally, ostensibly in support of a plan to build a casino and new arena in their neighborhood.

It was an impressive show of community enthusiasm, but it wasn't an entirely sincere one -- many of them took part because they got paid.

Pittsburgh First, a local group created by the Isle of Capri and Pittsburgh Penguins to support their proposal to redevelop the Lower Hill, organized a bus trip that day to take residents to the rally. They left from the group's Chatham Center headquarters and stopped along the way at the Bedford Dwellings public housing complex.

The 80 or so Bedford Dwellings residents were among hundreds of people, including Downtown workers and Pens fans, who jammed into Mellon Square on April 18 as Pittsburgh's three competing casino proposals were being vetted by the Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board.

State Rep. Jake Wheatley Jr., D-Hill District, says the Bedford Dwellings residents were promised $15 if they got on the bus to join the rally. Mr. Wheatley has recently criticized Isle of Capri and Pittsburgh First for not soliciting enough community input while formulating their plans to remake The Hill.

Neighbors in the community confirmed the payments.

"Some got paid $15, some got paid less," said Howard Parker, who lives in The Hill and who talked to several neighbors who attended the rally.

A handful of people among the three bus loads driven Downtown actually supported the development plan, and not everyone boarded the bus just to get paid, but "that's the reason why most of them did," Mr. Parker said.

The Rev. James Simms, head of Pittsburgh First, denied involvement.

"I heard similar comments from some people, however, this was not something that we initiated or condoned," he said. "It may have been a tactic used by the coordinators in the field; it was not a tactic that we authorized nor would we have supported."

The Rev. Simms said "transportation coordinators" were given stipends, but that the stipends were not intended to encourage participation in the rally.

But several people involved in the rally told the Post-Gazette that Rev. Simms authorized the payments. They said he gave $400 to one his coordinators for distribution to Bedford Dwelling residents as they left Mellon Square that day.

"They're trying to keep it real quiet," said one pep rally participant who didn't want his name used in the paper.

"[The Rev. Simms] greeted everybody coming off of the bus," he said.

Alissa Hughes, who lives in Bedford Dwellings and who attended the rally that day, confirmed this version of events. She said Rev. Simms paid a man named Tony Eaves to offer people $15 to go to the rally.

"I was right there," she said.

But the $400 he provided turned out not to be enough, she said. Eighty people, at $15 a head, comes to $1,200.

When the $400 wouldn't cover the tab, some Bedford Dwellings residents complained to Mr. Eaves, and he paid some of them with his own money, according to Ms. Hughes and others who attended the rally.

Mr. Eaves, driven by Ms. Hughes, went to Chatham Center the next day to confront Rev. Simms and recoup his expenses. Eventually, he received an additional $240, according to Ms. Hughes. That money was used to provide $10 apiece to pep rally visitors who didn't get paid on the day of the rally.

The delay in payment caused a stir in the complex.

"The community was really upset," she said. "But because we all live in this community, we have to get along." She also added that her distaste for how the pep rally payoff was handled didn't diminish her support for a Lower Hill casino or a new arena for the Penguins.

When contacted by the Post-Gazette, Mr. Eaves refused public comment. He's a former city employee and remains active in local politics.

But one of the people who received money from Mr. Eaves also pinned blame on Rev. Simms. "He didn't even pay everybody," said Tyrone Gray, who lives in Bedford Dwellings. "He used those people terribly."

When told that a number of Hill residents had said that he and Pittsburgh First were directly involved in paying people to attend the rally, the Rev. Simms said: "It did not come from us. I stipended the field coordinators, and if they made arrangements, they made them on their own."

Les McMackin, the senior vice president of communications for Isle of Capri, said his company wasn't involved. "We have no knowledge of anything like this happening," he said, "and I don't believe that it did happen."

He said community support for the casino and arena development in the Lower Hill is around 80 percent. "There wouldn't be a need to incentivize folks to come out and support it," he said.

David Morehouse, Penguins spokesman, also said he doubted the tenants' stories.

"I don't believe people were paid, and I think this is more of a dirty trick effort," concocted by opponents of the Isle of Capri plan, he said.

The payments came to light two weeks ago when Mr. Wheatley and members of his staff were taking a bus trip of their own. They were traveling to Beaver County with some constituents to support state Rep. Mike Veon in the Democratic primary election, and someone mentioned the incident, an aide said.

Offering payment for public support isn't necessarily wrong, but "you should be open and up front with people" and make it clear who's being paid and who isn't, Mr. Wheatley said.

Cleveland's Forest City Enterprises, which wants to build a casino in Station Square and is competing with Isle of Capri for the lone Pittsburgh casino license, weighed in on the idea of paying public housing tenants to support one plan over another:

"It's not a tactic that we would use ourselves," said Abe Naparstek, company spokesman.

The third competitor for the casino license is Detroit businessman Don Barden, who wants to build a casino on the North Shore near the West End Bridge.

The gaming board hopes to award a Pittsburgh license by the end of December. Public support is just one of many factors the board will consider in deciding between the three proposals.