The second portion of the District 10 agenda meeting was mostly the city councilmembers talking, specifically Councilman Brian O'Neill, it's his district after all. The other two councilmen, Councilman Jack Kelly and Councilman Bill Green are both currently At-Large officials, but Kelly is from the NE and once was a district councilman as well. They were more than happy to let the home team have their say and added their points accordingly. The initial discussion focused on Planning & Zoning. Forum attendee and NE resident Alan wanted wanted a real citywide plan with significant localized input. He asked how much juice should individual neighborhoods have?
Councilman O'Neill (pictured above) frankly stated that after 7 years of the Street administration, he gave up. He thinks that Mayor Nutter "gets it" in regards to planning and hopes that change will come. He said that there would be an overriding plan, but there would and must be local input. How much, he didn't specify. He added that Philadelphia is the largest city without a city wide street cleaning; it was canned during the Rizzo administration 35 years ago. O'Neill noted that even without street cleaning, the streets were relatively clean considering, but that we do need it. Over on the Inky's Trash Me blog is this post questioning why this city doesn't have street cleaning, "this dysfunctional status quo" Rauch-Mannino wrote. Touching on an earlier comment on a 311 system, O'Neill said that Mayor Daley in Chicago was doing the best job kicking butt. He said that the iron fist with which Daley rules is the driving force.
Councilman Kelly agreed that there wasn't a good planning plan in place for the last 8 years or more and that Councilman O'Neill may be more of an expert on the matter than those on the mayorally (is that even a word?) appointed planning commission. Councilman Green said that the current councilmanic privilege process didn't exist in the 1960s and that district council members shouldn't act as planners. Green said that district council should bring their issues to the commission and not hold up projects themselves unless absolutely necessary. He also said that the way the commission is appointed should be changed: the members should serve staggered terms and nominees should be approved by City Council.
Councilman Green opened the discussion on a 311 system for the city by pointing to a policy paper on the topic on his website: The Green Plan for Service Reform [.pdf]. It outlines a plan for a predominantly paperless city government which he estimates will save $200M - $300M per year and would enable more accountability by having processes outlined and electronic checklists which can be analyzed for efficiency. He pointed to CIOs of multi-national corporations who increase efficiency in their companies between 2% - 4% each year saving money and speeding things up. Satullo asked about initial costs of implementation and training; Green stated it would cost between $5M - $10M to start up, but the money would quickly be made up.
Alan brought up what he called the "big elephant in the room" - real estate reassessment and the Board of Revision of Taxes. Councilman Jack Kelly (pictured above) stepped up first. He emphatically said that council must do all it can to protect the elderly and others on fixed incomes. He suggested a cap on the amount taxed. Currently, homes are not taxed at the full value of their house. You may have heard of State Senator Vince Fumo's house and how it's on the selling block for $6M, but is only taxed at $250k, 1/24th or 4% the value. According to Councilman O'Neill, the average across the city for valuation is about 30% of the full value of one's home meaning that if you own a $200k home, you're most likely only paying taxes as if you had a $60k home. The goal is to get to 70%, but how to get there and over how long a period of time? And what about those who cannot afford a 200% increase? O'Neill added that without action from the state legislature, the city would never get to a full 100% evaluation of real estate and the state legislature won't be proactive about it. He accused them of wanting to wait until the last minute of a budget crisis so they could come in and look like heroes.
Councilman Green swung the conversation to Brett Mandel's mission and pending lawsuit. Green thinks that Mandel will win his lawsuit as the city is legally bound to a full valuation of homes. The time period for council to act on the issue and protect those vulnerable will expire before the lawsuit is won. You can read up on Mandel's take on citywide reassessment. Councilman O'Neill disagreed that the lawsuit was a slam dunk. Previously, as candidate Nutter, now Mayor Nutter said that the current real estate structure was antiquated. His plan was for City Council to figure out how much money they needed from real estate taxes for the budget and then tax to meet that rate that year, that way a full 100% evaluation isn't necessarily needed.
Councilman O'Neill suggested getting everyone at a 50% evaluation threshold. The jump from 30% to 50% isn't too bad and people understand the notion of "a half" very easily. Then, depending on what the actual valuation of one's home is needed, double the number for 100% or halve it for another round number. But no matter what council comes up with, he said that their hands are tied as it's the state legislature which has the final say and the BRT surely won't be proactive either.
Warren (center in blue), said he had no faith in any change as long as the BRT stays as it is. He wants an independent reassessment for the entire city. One of the councilmembers noted that the city has no idea as to the bigger picture number of the value of all the real estate in the city. With an independent reassessment, a baseline number could be established and the BRT would be forced to act one way or another. Councilman O'Neill agreed and said that reassessments in each council district should be performed and published for all to see. Satullo asked if that wasn't precisely the job of the City Controller? The council members lamented that nobody listens to what the Controller says or does.
Councilman O'Neill had last licks as the home team and closed by noting how and why counties were initially created [NYC and Philadelphia are among the largest city-county entities]. They were to provide state services on a local level more effectively, not to simply act as funnels for tax monies to be sent back to the state. He noted the unequal relationship Philadelphia has with the state as so much tax money goes back to the state, an unbalanced number compared to other counties with lighter burdens. He said that the state must recognize the unique impact counties like Philadelphia and Allegheny have and how they are different from suburban and rural counties and to let those unique counties act more freely with their constituency. Allowing a city-county like Philadelphia to keep more of its tax money could allow more effective control of programs which are currently dependent on state funding. Allowing a city-county like Philadelphia have stricter laws than what comes out of Harrisburg would allow Philadelphia County to meet the unique needs of it's urban environment. I think this cry for individual attention rang loudly in the independent NE. But on the other hand, I did hear many people ask for the NE to be more of a part of the rest of the city. How that can be done is a mystery to me.
Aside from the pure geographical difference from the rest of the city, there are other huge concerns I have. The issue of mass transit is high up there. There is no easy way to get to and from the NE from Center City. I had to take a PhillyCarShare car for my half hour drive to the NE. People from the NE may not feel as comfortable in the pedestrian-centric Center City area and pedestrians are left with no easy way to get to the NE. And then there's the issue of race. The 100% white makeup of the Tuesday night group was a stark example of the difference to the vast majority of the rest of the city which is predominantly brown. But as the once staid NE is disturbed by more and more development, the problems become more similar. Can the divide be closed? I don't think it can without an improvement in mass transit options without a multitude of transfers. But even then, can it be done? I have hope that it can, but both sides are going to have to work hard at it. The willingness of this thoughtful and knowledgeable group to come together and discuss this citywide agenda is a step in the right direction.
Please check out the Great Expectations blog and their events page to see where you can learn about this ongoing civic engagement project. I'll be reporting from two more of these councilmanic district events.
Post new comment