Councilwoman Krajewski and Councilman Mariano voting aye. Councilwoman Miller.
Aye. The ayes are 16, the nays are 0. A 05/29/03 - STATED - 2ND READING & FINAL PASSAGE majority of all Members of Council having voted in the affirmative, the Bill passes. The next to be called for consideration is Bill No. 030003. THE
This Bill having been read on two different days, the question now is shall the Bill pass finally? The Clerk will please call the roll. THE
Councilwoman Krajewski 05/29/03 - STATED - 2ND READING & FINAL PASSAGE and Councilman Mariano voting aye. Councilwoman Miller.
Aye. The ayes are 16, the nays are 0. A majority of all Members of Council having voted in the affirmative, the Bill passes.. Bill No. 030004. THE
An ordinance adopting 05/29/03 - STATED - 2ND READING & FINAL PASSAGE the Operating Budget for Fiscal Year 2004.
This Bill having been read on two different days, the question now is shall the Bill pass finally? The Clerk will please call the roll.
Yes, I do. I rise to speak and would rise, if necessary, to speak in opposition to the budget Bill for the operating period of next year. I'm deeply concerned about providing funds for the operation of a government where the Mayor fails to recognize the legitimate role of City Council and legislation; and further, either has lost control of his government or is consciously supporting the refusal of two of his appointees to recognize the authority of City Council. The two gentlemen I refer to are Carl Greene in the PHA and Thomas Knudsen of the Gas Works. Both of them have defied the City Council, don't recognize our authority, and I think City Council has to respond appropriately. I welcome the decision and thank the 05/29/03 - STATED - 2ND READING & FINAL PASSAGE Council President for her strong support in that lawsuit which resulted in a declaration by Judge Carrafiello of the Common Pleas Court that City Council is a legislative body and that the Mayor's action in not honoring the Bill which we passed unanimously to afford to condo owners and co-op participants the same ownership rights of having trash collected by the City as ordinary residents do. The Mayor's refusal to recognize that Council has any authority means -- and I would go further than the judge. The judge said that would reduce Council to an advisory role. It would do less than that. The Mayor who's a former President of City Council, therefore, I think what he's doing has to be viewed even more seriously, has engaged in a series of actions to thumb his nose openly, publicly at City Council. And that's the reason I said to Mr. Knudsen of PGW, "Go somewhere else for your support for y our capital budget. Don't come to City Council when you don't recognize City Council as a legislative body having the right to set the policy or senior citizens and that 20 percent discount rate. I don't think the Mayor can have it both 05/29/03 - STATED - 2ND READING & FINAL PASSAGE ways. And I don't see supporting the budget until the Mayor changes his position with respect to legitimacy of City Council.
The Chair recognizes Councilman Goode for a point of order.
I don't think that's a sound point of order. A point of order means the speaker is out of bounds, and that's not the way to raise that and I think I'm completely within bounds. So I would say I think there's no basis for that.
The budget is a weak budget. It does not deal with matters like lead paint poisoning. After some 30-odd years of discussion, the budget still leaves a backlog of lead paint poisoning. The budget leaves so many things empty because the Mayor believes that when we pass this budget we present him with 3 billions of dollars for him to spend in any way he wants. That's why Judge Carrafiello's report is so important. When this Council mandates expenditures 05/29/03 - STATED - 2ND READING & FINAL PASSAGE in certain directions, it could be that there could be a circumstance sometimes where the Mayor might have a case to ignore City Council or to appropriate funds in a different direction if there were a major crisis requiring that. But in the absence of that, it seems to me our legislative job is to legislate budget priorities. This Council has made clear it wants to resolve the budget process on lead paint poison, on a whole host of things, on homelessness. We don't know what the City is doing to provide additional funding for homelessness since the City reduced the number of beds available. We have all kinds of problems open to us in the budget which have not been resolved. The Mayor has known for two years that there is a gap in the insurance laws covering City Council.
Madam President, 05/29/03 - STATED - 2ND READING & FINAL PASSAGE again, I think it's not a proper point of order.
Councilman, we do have our Rules here, and apparently our attorneys agree that Councilman Goode does has that right. It's a motion which needs to be seconded and it would have to be voted upon. Call those in favor of -
I just ask a question. I'm not asking to debate the question.
No discussion. All I'm saying is, does this have the effect of just shutting debate on issue that we ever have?
It would seem to me to totally conclude the discussion on the budget so that I think the effect of Councilman Goode's motion, if successful, means there will be no debate on the budget at all. 05/29/03 - STATED - 2ND READING & FINAL PASSAGE
I think we have to move on. I think Councilman Goode made a motion. I've had Mr. Shapiro, Councilman Cohen, check our Rules. His motion has been seconded, so at this point in time, I would ask for a vote.
Very well. The vote will be on Councilman Goode's motion. He made a motion. It was seconded.
I know that everybody is getting weary, but the vote is on the motion. The Clerk will please call.
I called for the question. It's been called for. It does not require a vote.
I would like to read our rule on that, please. "The previous 05/29/03 - STATED - 2ND READING & FINAL PASSAGE question shall not be moved by less than five members and shall require the vote of a majority of all the Members of the Council to sustain it. If you call for the previous question be sustained, the question shall be upon pending amendments and the main question in their order." And they are decided without debate. So again -
There must be nine votes at least to carry this motion because a majority of all the Members of City Council means 9 out of 17 no matter what the number is who are present or who constitute the body.
There are a number of Councilpeople that want to be recognized. I would like to let everyone know we need a majority of the votes on the motion. We need nine votes to pass the budget Bill. Councilwoman Blackwell.
Madam President, point of clarification. Councilman Goode talked about -- if I'm not mistaken, we had previous question, he called the previous question. Previous 05/29/03 - STATED - 2ND READING & FINAL PASSAGE question can be called with not less than five members.
Okay, we called for the question. Councilman Goode, let me ask for clarification. I know Councilwoman Blondell Reynolds second it. Therefore, my understanding is that we should be calling -- he called for a vote, that we should be voting on Bill No. 030004. That is my understanding as to where we should be. I will ask the Chair to rule. I'll ask the President to rule on that. I don't believe we're voting on his motion. I believe we're voting on the Bill. Am I correct?
According to our Rules we should be voting on Bill No. -
I called for the 05/29/03 - STATED - 2ND READING & FINAL PASSAGE question. I did not make a motion.
I called for the question which is a call for the vote on the Bill.
And that is what the ruling that I just read refers to.
No, the ruling that you read refers to a call for a previous question.
There are several lights on. I don't know whether Councilmembers want to be recognized at this time. Councilman Nutter.
Madam President, it was strictly for seeking either a ruling or an interpretation either from the Chair or Councilman Goode as to whatever the next vote is going to be, is it a vote on this calling of the question which is primarily for the purpose of ending the debate which members would then vote as to whether or not they want to end the debate? Or is it a expedited 05/29/03 - STATED - 2ND READING & FINAL PASSAGE procedure to immediately take us back to where we were, which is the Clerk read the title of Bill, it's been read on two different days, et cetera, et cetera, and that we're actually voting now on whatever the underlying Bill is, whatever its number may be. I think it's 04 or 05. My question is, what is the next vote on? Is it on in essence a motion to end debate which members will then have an opportunity to decide whether they want to end debate? Or is it an expedited procedure to get you back to the Bill that was in question? I just want to know what we're actually voting on.
It does not have to voted on. A call for the question takes you straight to a vote on the Bill.
You made a 05/29/03 - STATED - 2ND READING & FINAL PASSAGE motion.
Madam President, the motion made by Councilman Goode acquires the approval of five members to present the motion. And if there are five, then a vote will take place and that vote requires nine votes to win because the Rules talk in the language of the Home Rule Charter. Whenever it says a majority of all the members of City Council, the interpretation is a majority of the 17 membership established by the Home Rule Charter. For example, when we seek to override a veto, we always need 12 votes no matter what the membership at City Council may be. If City Council gets down below 12, it means City Council's lost its ability to ever consider a veto because if everybody voted unanimously, 11 members would not be enough. So you have to two thresholds here for the vote to terminate the discussion and vote on the Bill: Five members to request it, and nine members to support it.
Councilman Ortiz, your light is on. You want to be recognized?
Yes, Madam Chair. If 05/29/03 - STATED - 2ND READING & FINAL PASSAGE we go with the interpretation that Councilman Goode says, it would end debate on the budget. This Session is not just to rubber stamp the budget, but at least for those of us who have questions that have still not been answered as to the budget to be answered and the budget to be debated. This is a budget that is not transparent. This budget has many unanswered questions to it. It is not a budget because we still have and are awaiting for questions to be answered from the Administration. The Administration has said that this is not the budget and these are not the priorities that we're setting. The cuts, and there are going to be cuts, are to be determined in a later period. What we want to know before we decide on a budget is, what is it that approving and what cuts are going to be made. And what if none of that aid from the State is forthcoming? Those answers were supposed to have been provided to us before this date. I know we have a Charter obligation. But those are questions that are still up in the air. This is not a budget that has been cleared through the budget process, that has answered the questions that this Council 05/29/03 - STATED - 2ND READING & FINAL PASSAGE has put forward to it. This is a budget that is with many, many questions to it as to where the cuts are going to come from, because there are cuts, and where money is going to be allocated. And we have not gotten those answers from the Administration. I thought at least that some of these things could be debated. Obviously, we want to shut debate on the budget and just vote on it.
Thank you, Madam President. I believe there was a call for the question. And in spite of all of this, that is the issue of the hour. There's a call for the question and we have to deal with that. We may have all kinds of opinions, but Councilman Goode made a motion. That is where we are. There's a call for the question on the table. That is what we deal with. Legally, that is our responsibility. We can agree or disagree, but we still have to go by the Rules.
In consultation with the attorneys on staff, the Councilman made a motion. I think everybody's been heard anyway. I 05/29/03 - STATED - 2ND READING & FINAL PASSAGE don't know that there's going to be anymore debate. We will now vote on Councilman Goode's motion, and I believe that was -- Councilman Goode.
Well, Councilman, you're either making a motion or you're not making a motion.
I called for the question, and I call for the question.
Again, I am told that you would have to make that in the form of a motion. Is there anyone who wants to speak on the Bill?
The debate will continue unless someone makes a motion to stop the debate. 05/29/03 - STATED - 2ND READING & FINAL PASSAGE Please continue, Councilman Cohen.
Madam President, these are the areas I'm very much concerned about in the budget not been dealt with fully. The Philadelphia Citizens for Children Youth say they need $300,000 more to continue their program. Actually, they want $5 million totally for the future, but there's been no consideration at all given to that. The Administration said they would think about it, but they've taken no action so we don't know what they're going to do. Dignity Housing, a fine program that supports residential housing has made a request for at least $50,000. The Administration said they would look into it. No answer from the Administration one way or the other. Lead paint remediation, I've already discussed. All the City says as to this stage is that they will not permit the backlog to increase. There is two years backlog. After some 35 years of backlog, it's time to eliminate that. But we have no answer finally from the City. The Faculty Federation of the Community College of Philadelphia has requested $800,000 this 05/29/03 - STATED - 2ND READING & FINAL PASSAGE year to bring parity to the unfair situation that exists in which the interim professors, the adjunct professors who teach part-time don't get the same salary level as the full time professors, yet in many ways they carry even greater responsibilities, including the responsibility of being available for conferences with students. No answer from the Administration. We have methods that can secure that money only for that given purpose, but the Administration still has it under study. The SEPTA tokens for school children, that's been around. Councilman Goode has participated with me on that. In fact, I think he's the leader of that. But no action by us on SEPTA. Fairmount Park has asked -- the activists have asked for 340,000 more for the park. It's a very minimal figure.
We've got the story only that the City is considering it. We have no answer. We have legislation for a number of years providing more money for allies, driveways, 05/29/03 - STATED - 2ND READING & FINAL PASSAGE and retaining walls, but the Mayor takes the position -
Madam President, we have here Mason's rules. We have list the list of motions. My colleague called for the question. In the rules we have it here in writing, under Item 10, Request for a motion to withdraw a motion or question which is under consideration. My colleague called for the question. So legally, according to the Mason Rules -- I'm happy to have all my colleagues on the technical staff review them. We have them in writing. He called for the question. We have to vote on the Bill.
Mr. Shapiro, are you in a position to respond to this right now? Councilwoman Miller, I would like recognize you at that point while we're waiting.
Thank you, Madam President. I'd like to leave my vote of aye on all Bills because I need to leave the chambers. 05/29/03 - STATED - 2ND READING & FINAL PASSAGE
Madam President, we need to be clear in terms of where we are. If we call for the question, we need to make sure that we're legally clear and so we are trying deal with that issue.
Am I correct in our assumption that our Rules take precedent over Mason's Rules.
Speak into the microphone so everybody can hear you.
Mason's Rules apply only if they are not inconsistent with the Rules of Council. And the Rules of Council make clear that a motion for previous question in order to stop debate is a motion which is subject to a vote and is 05/29/03 - STATED - 2ND READING & FINAL PASSAGE approved only if a majority of all the members, which is nine members, vote aye on said motion. So anything that's in Mason's that's contrary to that does not apply to the procedures of the Council.
And I'm sure if we keep debating this issue, by the time it comes up for a vote, we're not going to have nine Councilmembers here. Councilman Goode.
Thank you, Madam President. The Rules of Council do not conflict Mason's under this situation. I did not call for the previous; I called for the question. When it's not addressed within the Rules of Council, the Mason's takes over in terms of precedent and in terms of rules.
I'm not aware of any substantive difference between a call for the previous question and a call for the question, but I'll be happy to look at Mason's to see if it addresses that in a different manner. But I am not currently aware of any difference, but I'll be happy to look at Mason's.
Madam President, I 05/29/03 - STATED - 2ND READING & FINAL PASSAGE don't know why we're in such a hurry to deal with the Mayor's request for the budget. The Mayor is the one responsible for meeting the deadline under the Home Rule Charter. (Pause.)
Can I have everyone's attention, please? We're still in Session. The Chair is going to rule that Councilman Goode's point of order is denied unless he makes a motion in the form of a motion for the previous question. Otherwise, at this time I would hope that Councilman Cohen is about finished with his remarks so that we could move on with the vote. I believe that there are people coming in for Public Property public hearings. I think, Councilman Cohen, you expressed your feelings about the budget issue.
Not entirely, Madam President. I haven't been permitted to.
If you would continue, and I would request that you please make your remarks very brief so that we could proceed with the Calendar.
Well, I would like to be cooperative, Madam President. But I think this 05/29/03 - STATED - 2ND READING & FINAL PASSAGE budget is the most important issue that comes before Council. Under the Home Rule Charter, it is the budget that City Council works with. It's our main function, and I think it would be wrong to shortcut it. We probably have been done with this well over maybe even an hour ago, but I respect Councilman Goode and respect his thoughts, and I think he acts appropriately when he raises these questions. But at the same time, I think I also have the right to raise questions about why we should act in response to a Mayor who ignores us, who seems to express only contempt for this body, who thinks that we're something below an advisory group. And therefore, I don't know why we have to pay attention to this budget or to help him meet his deadline. He doesn't care about us in any fashion at all. How can he leave all these issues undecided? For example, in South Philadelphia and Southwest Philadelphia, people there have been suffering from something called the plume for years now, billowing smoke making it impossible for the citizens of portions of South Philadelphia and Southwest Philadelphia to breathe any kind of air. Even dirty air they can't breath because there's no 05/29/03 - STATED - 2ND READING & FINAL PASSAGE room for dirty air. There's just this terrible plume. Yet the answer from the Mayor is, "We'll study the situation." Nothing happens. The Mayor tries to compel veteran legislators and veteran employees to retire under the threat of depriving their families of health insurance if they happen to die while on duty. Whereas if they retired, he points out, and the law in Philadelphia permits it, the families would be protected. The Mayor has known of this crazy situation that exists in the City's health plan for more than two years. What's his response? He ignores it. There's no money in the budget for dealing with that. He says he keeps studying it. I don't see how we can move a budget ahead on that.
I regret the delay that involves everybody, but Council budget dealings 05/29/03 - STATED - 2ND READING & FINAL PASSAGE is its single most important function.
On the question of pensions, every City employee is threatened with a drastic change in the pension system. The Mayor has proposed in the Public Housing Administration that pensions be frozen at the level a worker would get a pension if he worked for the City in year 2003. That means that if you worked for 10 or 20 years after that, you get no pension increase. We tried to find out from the Mayor, is the proposal at Public Housing merely a test to see whether that should substitute for the plan we have in Philadelphia? It's very uncomfortable for every City employee to be confronted with the fact that his pension may be based on a salary that he got 20 years ago. No answers from the Mayor on that. Does the Mayor answer when the committees of City Council asks an administrator of an agency to testify before City Council? The Mayor is either supporting two people in his Administration, two people that he's appointed. The Mayor either has no control over them or else he is 05/29/03 - STATED - 2ND READING & FINAL PASSAGE supporting a state that I compare with the state of anarchy. Two administrators are saying to City Council, "We do not recognize your authority." How can we operate as a government? Why should we honor the Mayor's request that we act if he doesn't honor anything we do.
Again, I ask the Councilman is that in the form of the motion?
It's not on the table because it has not been made in the form of a motion. The Chair recognizes Councilman. Again, I ask, Councilman, to try to be as brief as possible.
Very good, Madam President. 05/29/03 - STATED - 2ND READING & FINAL PASSAGE Healthcare for senior citizens. It's a growing problem and a terrible problem. There are many senior citizens in the City who are subject to all kinds of different schemes that deprive them of the ability to support themselves. They have nowhere to go. We ask for an item in the budget on that matter. No reply. The Administration still is discussing it. No answer at all on that. On City health centers, the attention given, we're the only major City in the country that has no city hospital. That was eliminated many years ago when Philadelphia General Hospital was eliminated. And in return we were given a series of health centers in the districts. They are inadequately funded. We raise that question with the Mayor in this budget. There's no answer whatever. Councilman Ortiz has held hearings on prison healthcare. As far as the budget concerned, no increase in any prison budget for health purposes for the inmates. The only issue that has been partly dealt with was the issue of the Philadelphia Cultural Fund. We had a minimum budget pass, 05/29/03 - STATED - 2ND READING & FINAL PASSAGE despite the opposition of the leader in Council, I guess a self-proclaimed leader of the Arts and Cultural Fund. We got at least 325,000 additional to what was originally recommended. It's inadequate, but that's the one area where there's been some action. These are main questions. I could raise a number of other matters. Then we have the other actions by the Mayor. The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania ruled that certain billboards were illegally there. The Mayor has authorized the City to thumb its nose at the Pennsylvania Supreme Court. He refuses to take any action to eliminate that billboard. If you're a press these days, you're reading about the growing scandal in New Jersey where it was revealed that two Governor McGreevey's -- and he's a Democrat. Two of his main advisors were involved in very questionable dealings with the billboard operators. Anybody who knows them would understand why questions have developed. These are the kinds of questions that lead me to feel that I have to vote against the budget. How can I support a budget when City 05/29/03 - STATED - 2ND READING & FINAL PASSAGE Council which has the responsibility for passing a budget is treated so contemptuously by the Mayor? We have to be able -
Thank you, Madam President. I call for the question. 05/29/03 - STATED - 2ND READING & FINAL PASSAGE
Again, I would ask if this were in the form of the motion?
Are there four Members of Council that support the motion with Councilman Goode?
Those who are in favor of the motion, please raise your hand. (Raise of hands by Councilwoman Blackwell, Councilwoman Krajewski, Councilman Mariano, Councilwoman Brown.)
It is now in front of the Body, and it will require nine votes. At this point I would ask the Chief Clerk to please call the roll on whether or not the previous question is called.
Is this motion in order to terminate debate on the budget? 05/29/03 - STATED - 2ND READING & FINAL PASSAGE
Madam Chair, further point of order. I do note that we have had this discussion that we're terminating the debate for the last hour or so. I think we've had some debate on the issue. And I think everybody wants to vote on all of these Bills today. I just for point of clarification thought I should note that we have had some debate on this issue for the last hour.
I believe that's what the vote is for, whether or not the members feel that we have had enough debate.
I noted for a point of clarification in response to the comments made by my colleague Councilman Ortiz. Furthermore, I vote aye. THE
I know I'm supposed to say this during the course of the vote, but I just wanted a clarification. Voting on terminating 05/29/03 - STATED - 2ND READING & FINAL PASSAGE the debate on this particular Bill? Because there are a number of budget Bills.