Legislation quietly introduced Tuesday in Pittsburgh City Council gives the city's nine lawmakers veto power over almost all new construction by big tax-exempt institutions -- effective immediately.

Five bland-looking zoning bills were introduced and fast-tracked to the City Planning Commission with little discussion, but could have broad importance at a time when the city is wrestling with universities over money. They change the process by which construction of everything from dormitories and assembly halls to parking and restaurants would be approved, taking them from the administrative realm into the political world.

Instead of getting approvals from bureaucrats or boards, such matters would be subject to public hearings and votes of both the City Planning Commission and City Council. The latter body is right now mulling both a tuition tax and negotiated payments by schools to the city.

"If approved, council will look at [construction plans] on a case-by-case basis," said Councilman Ricky Burgess, author of the measures. "I view this as restoring the proper role of council."

He downplayed any link between the measures and the city's wrestling match with the schools -- just hours after he said in a council meeting that tax-exempt institutions "are unwilling to negotiate," and that "going into war is something you do as a last resort."

The schools appeared to be caught by surprise. A Pittsburgh Council on Higher Education spokesman said they're not prepared to talk about the zoning measures, and "would have to take a long, hard look at it."

At issue are five pieces of legislation that, together, vastly increase council's power.

Three of them demand council and planning commission hearings and votes before anyone can proceed to place a host of new uses on land zoned general industrial, urban industrial or educational-medical -- the last one being the zone in which almost all university and hospital property sits. It would not affect existing uses of buildings on those properties.

Because proposed zoning rules go into effect on a temporary basis as soon as they are introduced, it kicked in Tuesday, though a council vote can't come until next month.

Mr. Burgess said the need for such legislation became clear to him after the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center put a crisis center at the corner of Braddock Avenue and Meade Street, in his district, over community objections. "Council, I think, gets to be the final arbiter of these activities," he said, giving "the public the chance to be heard."

In 2005, council loosened rules for educational and medical expansions. At the time, the city was in the process of accepting an arrangement with tax-exempt organizations that resulted in $14 million in voluntary payments for 2005 through 2007. Council has not accepted a subsequent offer of $5.5 million for 2008 through 2010.

A fourth bill would rezone much of Chatham University from multi-unit residential to educational-medical, bringing it under the proposed rules.

A Chatham spokesman said the university had no immediate comment.

A fifth bill shifts the power to set zoning fees from the City Planning Department to council.

Council is wrestling with a budget gap, said Mr. Burgess. "We should decide what those fees are."

The city faces a $16.2 million budget hole because the state-picked Intergovernmental Cooperation Authority on Tuesday rejected Mayor Luke Ravenstahl's $453.8 million budget. ICA members thought revenue from a 1 percent tuition tax was too speculative.

Mr. Ravenstahl is expected to talk about the budget gap at a news conference this morning.

Yesterday, council voted for Mr. Burgess' proposals to evaluate the value of tax-exempt property, estimate the cost of providing city services to students and then enter into negotiations with educational institutions and others not subject to most city levies. Mr. Burgess noted that Boston gets $8.4 million this year from 13 schools, plus $4.9 million from nine medical institutions.

Council discussed, but did not vote on, the tuition tax. Members quizzed Philadelphia attorney Joseph C. Bright, former chief counsel to the state Department of Revenue and author of books on the state's tax law, who has been hired by the city to help defend the tax.

Mr. Bright said the city is "going to win" a likely court fight over the tax, since state law gives municipalities broad power to tax "privileges," and nowhere excludes higher education.

The discussion revealed that yoga, martial arts, cooking and dance schools may fall under the tuition tax, unless council excludes them. So would lawyers' continuing education.

City Finance Director Scott Kunka said such schools would account for "a very small proportion" of revenue from the levy "and a very small amount of money" from, say, a yoga student's pocket. "That $100 class would cost $1" in taxes, he said.

Council members also quizzed administration representatives regarding Mr. Bright's $650-an-hour fee. Council hasn't approved any contract with him, and Mr. Kunka said it might not be asked to do so, since the Law Department has the power to contract with outside counsel.

Council members pointed out that last year four of them tried to get the city to pay bills from attorney Hugh McGough for his work on a challenge to a Lamar Advertising electronic billboard. A deal was struck then under which the city paid bills incurred defending council from a Lamar lawsuit against them, but not bills related solely to the billboard challenge.

Councilman William Peduto yesterday called for a vote on whether the city should pay the $5,892 balance of Mr. McGough's bill, and council approved.

Looking for more from the Post-Gazette? Join PG+, our members-only web site. You'll get exclusive sports content, opinion, financial information, discounts from retailers and restaurants, and more. Our introduction to PG+ gives you all the details.