Miss Brill, again, I say thank you for your endurance and commitment 234 4/16/99 LAW & GOV'T - Bill 990056, Res. 990066 to stay. I did, I guess, at least want to put on the record so that you don't feel that there is some massive conspiracy of secrecy here, the bill 6 and the resolution, as you probably know, were introduced in a Council session back on February 4, 1999. It was two months ago.
The Philadelphia Daily News, on its editorial on , on February 19th, wrote an editorial about this. The Philadelphia Inquirer, on its editorial page, A-10, wrote an editorial about this issue Monday, February 22nd.
Through my office at least, I sent out press releases about this particular hearing as soon as it was scheduled to the news media. Now, as powerful as anybody thinks we might be here in City Council, we still don't control what the media covers or what they try to --
And there was nothing, 235 4/16/99 LAW & GOV'T - Bill 990056, Res. 990066 there was nothing.
And so, I mean, we are often challenged by this dilemma of how we get out as much information as possible.
But I was surprised that the League of Women Voters knew absolutely nothing about it. And as I said, I called, and you know, if Mary Jane Hazel in northeast Philadelphia doesn't know anything about it, then, you know, something's really going wrong.
So there are a lot of people that should have been notified -- and not that they could all be here, not that they could all comment, but they're concerned about the process, and it is an important process, and we feel that, just as the Reverend said, it's -- people are having a hard time right now evaluating the mayoral candidates. It's such a hodgepodge, believe me. And to throw this into the hopper. We spent, when Mayor Rendell first came in and the Charter Commission went into effect, it took three or three years out of our lives working on that and fighting it and trying to, you know, 236 4/16/99 LAW & GOV'T - Bill 990056, Res. 990066 get that voted down. We don't need to spend six months. And I'm going to tell you, I will work to get this -- if this goes through, to fight it at the ballot box. But I just -- it's not going to solve anything.
Why? Just for all the reasons I said. For the issue that you can toss out the people at any time and that you're appointing a whole new board without any continuity. There are ways --
I think you were here for some of that discussion, that's not necessarily something that anybody wants to do.
Well, Miss Brill, I mean, something has to be in the bill. That's why we have public hearings. 237 4/16/99 LAW & GOV'T - Bill 990056, Res. 990066
But I'm saying that this a major discussion point. There are other alternatives, you know. What we could do -- and this is one of the alternatives that could be discussed -- is, instead of having people appointed every two years, you could have them appointed every year. You could have people serve three-year terms so that there would still be continuity, but a mayor would maybe get control a little sooner instead of having to wait two years. There's many ways of doing things without changing the impetus of having staggered terms and of having people feel free to give their opinions on a board without retribution, 'cause people don't get paid for this job, and --
I don't know how many people apply. John White said that, apparently, they're not getting enough people. I don't know. I know someone who applied and didn't get selected. So there must have -- you know, there 238 4/16/99 LAW & GOV'T - Bill 990056, Res. 990066 must have been candidates applying somewhere along the line.
Sure. Let me ask you this question: Who do you think should ultimately be responsible for the functioning of the public education system?
Well, it is the School Board but definitely the mayor and City Council. And I don't think you need to change it. If you read the Charter, there's a lot in there that can be done if you want to work the system in conjunction with the School Board.
As Mayor Rendell said, he is constantly on the phone with the School Board people. He is getting everything he wants, and he's gotten, you know, some of the things. And there's a public hearing process through the School Board, and you can pick up the phone and you appointed people or, you know, and you say, Look, this is my opinion, I would appreciate it if you would do this, if someone has a major complaint. I've gone to many School Board meetings 239 4/16/99 LAW & GOV'T - Bill 990056, Res. 990066 where people have come and, you know, presented their positions. In some cases, they're listened to; in some cases, they're not. But at least you have that.
And with the cluster system, which is working beautifully, at least in the Northeast schools; I can't say that for the rest of the City.
But there is a legal way for parents to get involved. The principal's supposed to involve them in the budgeting process at each school and so on. If it's not happening, it's because the Home & School people don't know the power that they have.
Well, let me ask you this last question. In terms of the current governance structure -- so, I mean, your testimony is that everything is fine and everything's working well? Is that your testimony?
No, no, everything is not fine, but we need to work hard. And whether getting more money is going do solve the problems, 240 4/16/99 LAW & GOV'T - Bill 990056, Res. 990066 I don't know. Whether things can be done more efficiently, I don't know. I know the controller's office has a post-audit function; they would like a pre-audit function. The School Board could approve that. They don't need any legislative action for it; that's something they could vote and have happen. And, you know, this goes way back to when we first had the school supplement and we worked to establish the Citizens Committee on Public Education. At that time, I think it was Charles Bowser and Debra Wiener and so on. We met with the school auditors and we went over the budgets with a fine-toothed comb, and they continued to do that, you know. But we've had many years of growing pains through the Dilworth years and through all the other years, but it's an evolution. And things are getting better, but we have changes. We have cultural problems, we have social problems, we have problems that the schools are stuck with that they didn't anticipate having. And so, you know, we need to cooperate with -- City agencies have to cooperate with the 241 4/16/99 LAW & GOV'T - Bill 990056, Res. 990066 schools. I know the Health Department does. And certainly, you know, all that sort of thing can be done. But it can all be done under the existing Charter. There's a section on cooperative agreements, there's all kind of sections that can be done. Read it carefully. I asked the staff to distribute copies of the supplement, you know.
No, we have it. Okay. So would you propose any changes?
Well, that's why I asked you the question earlier. You believe that everything is working fine and we should just keep it the way it is, right?
Well, I guess I'm not qualified to answer that. In other words, I just know --
I'm just asking you for your opinion. I mean, you have a all of long history in this, and you say that everything -- 242 4/16/99 LAW & GOV'T - Bill 990056, Res. 990066 anything that needs to be done can be done through the current structure and system, and no changes need be made.
You have to work the system. We happen to have no people on the School Board, as I'm sure many of you do.
If there's a problem, we can call them. We've had principal problems over the years where we had to, you know, appeal to the School Board for different things and so on. But I've seen major changes where people come in and testify, and there's a whole -- you know, they are responded, you know, to in things like that.
I don't know if that's going to solve any major, major problems. But all I'm saying is that this particular bill isn't going to help. If anything, it's going to make it worse. But if, after the elections, there should be -- you know, we should have an open process just like it was mentioned here today. Everybody should be talking, and it's a good thing 243 4/16/99 LAW & GOV'T - Bill 990056, Res. 990066 to have that.
As strange as it may seem, we had a recent discussion in City Council. A member of City Council got up and said, We can't talk about this 'cause it's the school budget and we don't any power in the Home Rule Supplement to do that. I said I believe that's dead wrong. I believe we not only have the right to discuss but we have the responsibility to discuss, to make recommendations, to call in the school people and question them.
It's unfortunate that it had to wait till the budget. I mean, if this problem had come to people's attentions -- and it should have sooner -- we shouldn't have had to wait for the budget process. That's what I'm saying.
Well, I think the hearing today was very good. I think it's really 244 4/16/99 LAW & GOV'T - Bill 990056, Res. 990066 concentrated a lot of people's attention on this. The game may be taken away from us. There may be proposals by the State or actions by the State that may make us have to come to grips with things very quickly, whether or not we act on these bills. So I don't think that this is an issue that's going away. And I'd urge you, Mrs. Brill, to do what you can to notify the people in the communities that you're associated with. I'm going to try to do the same, and I think maybe every Councilmember might be well advised to do it with whatever contacts they have. I think this is going to be on the screen from now on. I think we have an intolerable situation in which we in the City feel that the State doesn't do its share, and the State feels that we don't do our share. And I like what President Verna said about having these discussions continue 'cause I think it's urgent that we come together. And it may be that action like the bill and the resolution here may be indicated at some time. My feeling is, it's too early to reach that 245 4/16/99 LAW & GOV'T - Bill 990056, Res. 990066 decision. And in informal discussions, I've had with each of the members of the committee here, except for the sponsor of the bill, 'cause I knew how he felt; I just wanted to know how everybody else felt. But they all indicated that they don't feel that there's any immediate urgency to take action on the bill today. But the issues are going to be on the -- you know, they're on the screen now, and I think everybody's got to be alerted particularly to the possibility of unfriendly action coming out of the State legislature.
Okay, well, I'm concerned though -- I mean, and that's something we can deal with at the State legislature too.
Well, I think we're seeking to enlist your support now.
Right. And it would depend on what the particular bills are in the State legislature. We'd have to say how it would be. But in regard to my comments, you know, 246 4/16/99 LAW & GOV'T - Bill 990056, Res. 990066 that it would be good if this could be postponed until after the election in terms of -- I mean, discussions can be ongoing, but any, you know, real major changes or considerations for any change to a charter should wait till after the November election and we have a new City Council, which will be many of you, but it will be, you know, a complete Council. And also, it won't become a political football in the mayoral campaign. I know everybody's saying something different, and every meeting they go to, we're hearing other things. And it's very confusing for those of us in the electorate who are trying to make a decision.
Well, we can't promise you or anybody that we're not going to act in such a way that this may be on the ballot in November. What we're going to do today is to recess and see what follows from the developments of this hearing. We're going to take no action today, but we are mindful of the deadlines and the dates that are required to be met, you know, to comply with the possibility of this being on the 247 4/16/99 LAW & GOV'T - Bill 990056, Res. 990066 ballot possibly in time for the November ballot, possibility not till afterwards. But we think there will be time for full discussion and debate, and we'll all be in a better position in a month or to two to make that decision.
And I hope there will be wider notification. I think every group is on the mailing list.
Well, I think you ought to be begin alerting everybody.
I would just like to get a statement on the record, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you. Mr. Chairman, you've been most patient and generous with the hearing today, and I deeply appreciate the level of interest expressed by the many members of City Council. With regard to the testimony by the 248 4/16/99 LAW & GOV'T - Bill 990056, Res. 990066 previous witness, whether action is taken today, whether action is taken next month, whether there is a ballot question in November or not, I do think that most of us were here -- and she may have been here at the time -- when it was indicated to us that the State legislature, both the House and the Senate, are contemplating making many changes to the School Code of 1949. I think it is very clear to most of us who pay attention to what goes on in Harrisburg. Their process is one very different than ours. It takes place in Harrisburg, not in Philadelphia. Those dictates are sent down here. You will not have the opportunity to vote on them, you will not have the opportunity to have very much input. And we have seen on numerous occasions, whether it was the action that was taken against Councilman Ortiz's much fought for legislation for the assault weapons ban, which we passed here in the City Council, which was overturned by the State legislature, with no ability by Philadelphians to do or say anything about it. Or when it came to the issue of stadiums, or, for that matter, riverboat gambling, 249 4/16/99 LAW & GOV'T - Bill 990056, Res. 990066 which did fail. But again, none of those initiatives came out of Philadelphia; they were being sent down here. And so whether or not action is taken on this bill and resolution may in fact end up being a moot issue, as the two representatives indicated, that the State is anticipating taking the same kind of action and more than we are talking about in the next 30 to 60 days. I don't necessarily no that their timetable is tied to the mayor's race or not. But inaction on our part may result in serious action on the State's part, for which we will have no recourse whatsoever. So, you know, I am a very open-minded person, I'm a very flexible person. I do believe, though, that the to the extent that the City of Philadelphia can take action that it has an interest in and allow its voters to demonstrate what their will is, up or down, is always better than just leaving things to another legislative body that functions in a totally different place, in a different environment, over which we have virtually no control and no input. I believe that we should always take 250 4/16/99 LAW & GOV'T - Bill 990056, Res. 990066 action, whatever it may be, that we can take, rather that allow someone else to take action which may be to our detriment. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you. Let me just state for the record that the only disagreement I have with the Chairman is that I would change the word "action" to "action or inaction" because, as in the assault weapon case, the State legislature assumes the power to override us in Philadelphia, whether we act or don't act. And while I think they've been wrong, the courts don't always agree on the supremacy of the Home Rule Charter. I had occasion Thursday to announce a victory under the Home Rule Charter in a zoning matter. In the assault weapons case, the Supreme Court did not so act; they felt the State did have the power. But whether we act or don't act, I think the hearing today, the bills introduced by Councilman Nutter, the bill and the resolution, have served an extremely important purpose. They're alerting us to the fact something's going 251 4/16/99 LAW & GOV'T - Bill 990056, Res. 990066 to be happening, and it's our job to try to find that to be a positive thing rather than a negative thing that we're so often confronted with. Thank you, Councilman Nutter. Thank you to the members. Yes, Councilman Ortiz?
I think what Councilman Nutter said is very clear. We cannot just remain passive and allow the Charter change to come from Harrisburg, if there is a Charter change that is going to come about. Whether we vote it out today or next week or next month, we have to be cognizant of what the legislators here said from Harrisburg. And I would like to be an active participant, and I would like the citizens of Philadelphia to be active participants in any of the changes that happen rather than have those changes imposed on us down the road. So I understand that I think we need greater input into the process, but I would like 252 4/16/99 LAW & GOV'T - Bill 990056, Res. 990066 to see the process take place and accelerated. And before we leave here in June, that we have some action on the issue -- either pro and to move it along, or to just let it be.
President Verna, I wonder if I could suggest to you and see what members of the committee feel about it. I think there ought to be a follow-up to the offer made by the Majority Leader and Representative Evans suggesting preferably a meeting here, maybe in the Council caucus room or in your offices, with those members of Council who wish to be involved in this meeting together with the State people. I think the point's made about what may come from the legislature. However, whatever comes, it will be better if we're a part of it than if we're not a part of it. Could we impose that on --
I certainly would be more than happy to do that. I think that's --
'Cause you suggested that during the hearing, and I think it's a great idea. 253 4/16/99 LAW & GOV'T - Bill 990056, Res. 990066
In fact, I recall that I made that suggestion way back when President Coleman was here. I think that it's very important that we all know -- I'm sure in Harrisburg they do not know what we're doing, and we certainly don't know what they're doing relative to the schools. And I think -- I thought it was extremely healthy this morning to hear the dialogue. I will certainly be more than happy to follow through on that.
Okay, that's fine. What Councilman Nutter said to Mrs. Brill directly is very important. The way Harrisburg works, they don't even have to have hearings; they can work behind closed doors so that nobody knows, and then they just present the bill to two bodies, without any public hearings. So we're pleased by what President Verna just said. We're going to follow up, and this is a live matter. And we hope everybody in Philadelphia understands that.
Passivity is not an option in this is. I think that's the message I 254 4/16/99 LAW & GOV'T - Bill 990056, Res. 990066 got this morning.
Mr. Chairman, I think my only request will be that the committee take some action prior to our legislative recess, which, I think, begins on June 24th, that we have some opportunity for a follow-up hearing and that the full Council have the opportunity with some bill -- amended, unamended -- we can have that debate. But I would like to have some bill out of this committee so that the members of this Council can take some action prior to our legislative recess.
I'm sure the President will agree to give us a committee date at whatever time it's requested, and I will be very happy to arrange that. So I just think it's important that everybody understand that this is up for action -- not only this amendment but the whole ball of wax in Harrisburg.
Exactly. Thank you. 255 4/16/99 LAW & GOV'T - Bill 990056, Res. 990066
Thank you very much. The hearing will stand in recess till the call of the Chair. (Adjourned at 2:35 p.m.) - - - 256 C E R T I F I C A T E I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing proceedings of the Council of the City of Philadelphia of Friday, April 16, 1999, were reported fully and accurately by me, and that this is a correct transcript of same. RE: COUNCIL COMMITTEE ON LAW AND GOVERNMENT BILL NO. 990066, RESOLUTION NO. 990056 __________________________________, JOSEPHINE CARDILLO, Registered Professional Reporter