A debate over take-home cars turned into a scramble for the steering wheel of Pittsburgh government yesterday, with Mayor Luke Ravenstahl's administration warning City Council not to micromanage and some legislators saying their right to make law was being challenged.

An increasingly assertive council gave initial approval to a proposed cut in take-home cars from 59 to 29. Members did release development funding bills that had been held up and heard calls for increased civility later in the four-hour meeting. Still, tensions lingered.

"This is a new council that is exercising, perhaps, historical influence," Councilman Ricky Burgess said after the meeting. "We're creating something new. That's what you're seeing in terms of the tensions."

"I think it's strictly because you have individuals [on council] who want to be the mayor," said Councilwoman Tonya Payne. "They want to have contentious issues all the time."

Mr. Burgess' legislation would direct the administration to reduce the number of employees who drive city vehicles home from 59 to 29. It lets the mayor decide who gets cars.

The vote was 4-2, with Mr. Burgess, Patrick Dowd, Bruce Kraus and William Peduto in favor, and Jim Motznik and Darlene Harris opposed. Council President Doug Shields also favors reductions, and could supply the crucial fifth vote for final passage Tuesday. Mr. Shields, Ms. Payne and Councilman Dan Deasy were not present for the vote.

The legislation would then go to the mayor, who can veto or sign it, or let it become law without his signature.

The proposal was amended to mirror a plank in the city's Act 47 recovery plan, passed in 2004, that has never been fully implemented. Attorney James Roberts, co-leader of the state-picked Act 47 recovery team, has written that the legislation matches the plan, which is already a city ordinance.

City Solicitor George Specter said that even though the legislation parrots the plan, it is illegal "micromanagement of the day-to-day operations of the city."

That stance prompted Mr. Dowd to ask if the same bill would be legal if it were proposed by the administration.

"I think it would be legal," Mr. Specter said.

"It's illegal if it comes from the legislative branch," an exasperated Mr. Dowd said. "All we can do is wait for the executive branch to bring things forward to us? ... That's amazing."

"Let's just go home," said Mr. Burgess, sarcastically. "Why are we here? Why should we introduce bills?"

He said some of his colleagues were "threatened" in relation to the bill, but would not provide details. Mr. Specter denied making any threats.

Mr. Motznik called it "a bill that's going to be illegal, that the administration is not going to follow."

Council also removed a $150-a-month cap on mileage reimbursement for business use of personal vehicles, including the members' own cars.

The temperature spiked again later in the meeting when Urban Redevelopment Authority Executive Director Pat Ford came to the table. Mr. Dowd on Tuesday called the agency's failure to pass an annual budget until mid-March "unethical."

"Reasonable people can disagree," Mr. Ford said. "But how can I be productive in working with you, councilman ... when, councilman, you use words like reckless, irresponsible, inflammatory, unethical, immoral and illegal?"

Mr. Dowd said he had been "stonewalled" in his effort to look at the URA's spending. Later, council members and Mr. Ford agreed to meet and discuss how the agency can provide information on scores of project budgets that account for most of its spending, and have not been made available to Mr. Dowd. Council then approved four URA funding bills that had been postponed.

Mr. Ford also fumed about council legislation to place a moratorium on electronic billboards that, he said, has prompted 90 applications for sign permits. Firms may be hoping to start the approval process before any new rules take effect. Late yesterday, other city officials wrote to council saying the legislation would inadvertently bar event banners, historical markers and business signs, and asking for amendments.

"I'm hopeful that from this session on, we can regain a sense of civility about this process," Mr. Burgess said at meeting's end.

Ms. Payne was less sure. "I don't know if there's a way out, because really, you look to [council] leadership, but if the leadership is a part of the problem, what do you do?"