The American Civil Liberties Union voiced concerns today about a proposed ordinance that Pittsburgh Mayor Luke Ravenstahl unveiled yesterday to address disruptive properties.

The proposed ordinance would have the city use 911 calls to trigger a process that can lead to the invoicing of property owners for public safety services, and the filing of second- degree misdemeanor charges. It includes provisions apparently meant to encourage the eviction of problem tenants.

"What if someone doesn't like you and starts calling 911 and saying you're too noisy?" asked Witold "Vic" Walczak, legal director for the American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania in an interview. "You're talking about kicking people out of their homes or taking away their rental income, both of which are constitutionally protected."

If the ordinance is approved and implemented, the city would put in place software to alert the Public Safety Department any time a property was the subject of three 911 calls in a month. Building code violations also would be counted.

The three strikes could be anything from excessive noise to gunplay, pet violations to prostitution, drug dealing to letting the grass grow long. At that point, the public safety director would have the power to declare it a disruptive property.

Mr. Walczak said that gave the director too much discretion.

"When you give standardless discretion that way, you set the stage for arbitrary and discriminatory enforcement," he said.

If the disruptive tenant was being evicted, their acts would not be counted against the landlord.

After the declaration of a disruptive property, any other police, fire or building inspection calls to that address over the next six months would be followed by an invoice for the cost to the public treasury, enforceable through the civil courts. Owners who feel unfairly targeted could take their case to a new Disruptive Property Appeals Board, appointed by the mayor and council.

Mr. Walczak said that board did not appear to provide a "meaningful opportunity" to challenge the 911 calls that triggered the process.

Mr. Walczak said the ACLU will likely oppose the ordinance if it comes to a public hearing, and could sue to stop its enforcement if it becomes part of the city code.

City Council is scheduled to debate and vote tentatively tomorrow but could postpone that vote for a public hearing or further discussion.