City of Pittsburgh officials and managers showed up at City Council Chamber today to defend their take-home cars, and Mayor Luke Ravenstahl's administration argued that the city's nine legislators have no right to enact policy limiting the assignment of such vehicles.

That special meeting on Councilman Ricky Burgess's legislation to restrict the number of take-home cars sparked another in a series of debates between some council members and the administration.

"It is our very strong opinion that this bill violates the separation of powers doctrine between council and the mayor," said city Solicitor George Specter. He called it "an unlawful imposition on the mayor's executive powers."

Council President Doug Shields and others responded that the legislation largely mirrors the city's Act 47 recovery plan, passed into law in 2004.

"This administration is trying to pick and choose what parts of the law to comply with," he said. "The mayor is going beyond the powers vested in him."

At one point Mr. Burgess asked Mr. Specter to define "serial noncompliance," suggesting the city may be repeatedly ignoring city code.

His original legislation would reduce the number of city cars that go home with their assigned drivers from 59 to as few as eight, and then permit more such cars for people who are called out after-hours an average of four times a month. Mr. Burgess has said he now intends to exempt police, fire and emergency medical services brass, thereby allowing around 35 such vehicles.

That shifts the focus to some two dozen take-home cars assigned to employees in the Department of Public Works, Parks Department, Bureau of Building Inspection and administration.

City Finance Director Scott Kunka said he recently gave up his take-home car, at Mr. Ravenstahl's request. But he said a deep cut in take-home cars would worsen response times on after-hours emergencies.

Mr. Kunka said the city currently has no system of logging the use of the vehicles to ensure against personal trips. Mr. Burgess said that the lack of monitoring of personal use is a problem, because if those cars are involved in accidents, the city is liable, even if the employee is on a personal errand. He wants tracking devices in all city vehicles except those driven by top officials.

Much of the two-and-a-half-hour meeting focused on whether council has the right to legislate city operational policies.

The 209-page Act 47 plan called for an eventual reduction from 83 take-home cars in 2003 to 29 -- a level that has not been reached. Mr. Kunka called the plan "a global, sort-of, road map." Councilman Bruce Kraus called the plan a law.

Mr. Specter said council's right to legislate policy doesn't mean it can manage departments. "It's kind of like obscenity -- where you call it like you see it -- when you cross the line into micromanagement of operations," he said.

Mr. Burgess said he will submit revised legislation Wednesday, when it could come up for a preliminary vote.

A council majority and the administration are also grappling over a permit for an electronic billboard Downtown. Yesterday Mr. Shields, Mr. Kraus, Mr. Burgess and Councilman William Peduto signed on to Councilman Patrick Dowd's zoning appeal against the permit, which would allow a 1,200-square-foot sign on the Grant Street Transportation Center.

More details in tomorrow's Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.