COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA STATED MEETING Room 696, City Hall Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Thursday, December 4, 2003 10:42 a.m. PRESENT: COUNCIL PRESIDENT ANNA C. VERNA COUNCILWOMAN JANNIE BLACKWELL COUNCILMAN DARRELL L. CLARKE COUNCILMAN DAVID COHEN COUNCILMAN FRANK J. DICICCO COUNCILMAN W. WILSON GOODE, JR. COUNCILMAN JAMES F. KENNEY COUNCILWOMAN JOAN L. KRAJEWSKI COUNCILMAN RICHARD T. MARIANO COUNCILMAN MICHAEL A. NUTTER COUNCILMAN BRIAN J. O'NEILL COUNCILMAN RICHARD T. MARIANO COUNCILWOMAN DONNA REED MILLER COUNCILWOMAN BLONDELL REYNOLDS BROWN COUNCILWOMAN MARIAN B. TASCO PATRICIA RAFFERTY, CHIEF CLERK V A R A L L O Incorporated Litigation Support Services Eleven Penn Center 1835 Market Street, Suite 600 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103 215.561.2220 215.567.2670
I note that the hour has come and that a quorum of this Council is present. The Council will come to order. Members will please take their seats. To give our invocation this morning, the Chair welcomes Rabbi Aaron Bisno, Rabbi of the Congregation Rodeph Shalom. He is here today as the guest of Councilman Cohen. All guests and members will please rise.
Permit me to begin my teaching. According to Jewish tradition, the Torah which is to say the first five books of the Bible are read all the way through over the course of a year. Week by week, day in and day out we return to the stories that are the record of our people's lives. This, I suppose, the liturgical process, is not so very different from the legislative process. For here, too, in this Chamber day in and day out stories that are a record of our lives and those of our neighbors are recalled and where the best intentions and the most honest efforts of those who labor in this Chamber, here is where this City Council and all who make its work possible engage in a sacred task. And so as we gather this week to share and work together again, let us pause in prayerful reflection of that which is our sacred charge. Source of our inspiration, in going about our sacred work, we pray that we may grow in an awareness of ennoble powers with which everyone of us is endowed: The creative powers of observation, reflection and reason; the redemptive powers of empathy, optimism and purpose; and the divine gifts of universal equality for all of creation's children and the equal justice us under the laws for all who reside and work in, all who travel through and all who depend on this City in so many ways. Source of our purpose, as we go about our sacred work, teach us to make wise use of the gifts with which we have been blessed and so to use these gifts in the power within each one of us and within this Council to sustain and secure, to inspire and lift up, and to make a Philadelphia's citizens stories of tomorrow an even better day than we know them to be today. Amen.
The Chair thanks Rabbi Bisno for his very inspiring invocation. Council will be at ease. (Council at ease.)
The next order of business is the approval of the Journal of the meeting of Thursday, November 20, 2003. And the Chair recognizes Councilwoman Blackwell.
Thank you, Madam President. I move that the Journal of the meeting of Thursday, November 20, 2003, stand approved. (Duly seconded.)
It has been moved and properly seconded that the Journal of the meeting of Thursday, November 20, 2003, stand approved. All in favor will please indicate by saying aye. (Aye.)
The ayes have it. The motion carries. And the Journal of the meeting of Thursday, November 20, 2003, is approved. The next order of business is requests for leaves of absence. And again, the Chair recognizes Councilwoman Blackwell.
Thank you, Madam President. On behalf of the Majority, a leave of absence is requested for Councilman Ortiz.
Madam President, on behalf of the Republicans, leave of absence is requested for Councilman Frank Rizzo.
Thank you leave will be granted. The Chair will dispense with the regular order of business to recognize the guests and visitors joining us in Chambers this morning. On behalf of all Members of City Council, I welcome you to our Council Session. We certainly appreciate your taking the time to join us as we attend to the legislative affairs of our City. We certainly invite you to come again. The next order of business is communications. The Chair requests that the Sergeant-at-Arms deliver the messages from the Mayor to the Chief Clerk. The Chief Clerk will please read the messages from the Mayor. THE
To the President and Members of the Council of the City of Philadelphia, I am pleased to advise you that 3rd, I signed following bill that was passed by Council Session on November 13th: Bill No. 030644. And I am pleased to advise you that I signed all of the bills that were passed at its Council Session on November 20, 2003. And I am herewith returning to you as disapproved Bill No. 030657, which would amend the Passyunk Avenue Special District Control section of the Zoning Code. And I am transmitting for the introduction and consideration of your honorable body a proposed ordinance. The ordinance is entitled, an ordinance authorizing the City of Philadelphia in corporation with the Philadelphia Authority for Industrial Development to undertake the project to promote the health, safety and welfare of the residents of the City of Philadelphia supplementing the ordinance, Bill 980789 which established the alternate funding mechanism. And an ordinance amending Title 22 of the Philadelphia Code entitled "Public Code," by amending Section 22-305 relating to maximum benefit limitations imposed by the Internal Revenue Code. And an ordinance authorizing the Commissioner of Public Property on behalf of the City of Philadelphia to enter into a sublease to the Philadelphia Authority for a Pennsylvania non-profit corporation certain land located 901-47 North Marshall Street. And an ordinance authorizing the Commissioner of Public Property on behalf of the City of Philadelphia to acquire from the Redevelopment Authority for nominal consideration properties located at 901-47 North Marshall Street. And an ordinance authorizing the Philadelphia Authority for Industrial Development to file an application with the Office of the Budget of Commonwealth of Pennsylvania in an aggregate amount not to exceed $15,350,000 to assist in the development of the Franklin Institute, Holy Family University, the Irish Memorial, and the Kimmel Center and WHYY.
Thank you. The Chief Clerk will please read any other communications in her possession. THE
Thank you. The next order of business is the introduction of bills and resolutions. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Blackwell for a motion.
Thank you, Madam President. I move that the Rules of Council be suspended so as to permit the immediate consideration of resolutions at their time of introduction. (Duly seconded.)
It has been moved and properly seconded that the Rules of Council be suspended so as to permit immediate consideration at the time of introduction of all resolutions. All in favor will indicate by saying aye. (Aye.)
The ayes have it, and the most carries. The Chair recognizes Councilman Kenney.
Thank you, Madam President. I offer one resolution on my behalf and one resolution my own behalf, Councilman O'Neill and Councilman Nutter.
Thank you. The Clerk will please read the title of the first resolution. THE
A resolution urging the Pennsylvania General Assembly to provide fair and full funding of the Health Choices Program.
I move the adoption of the resolution. (Duly seconded.)
It has been moved and seconded that the resolution be adopted. All in favor will say aye. (Aye.)
The ayes have it, and the resolution has been adopted. The Clerk will please read the title of the second resolution. THE
A resolution congratulating the varsity football team of St. Joseph's Preparatory School for winning the 2003 Philadelphia Catholic League Red Division Championship.
For the third year in a row. I move the adoption of the resolution. (Duly seconded.)
It has been moved and properly seconded that the resolution be adopted. All in favor will signify by saying aye. (Aye.)
The ayes have it, and the resolution has been adopted. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Blackwell.
Thank you, Madam President. Today, I introduce two resolutions and two bills.
The Clerk will please read the title of the first bill. THE
An ordinance authorizing the Philadelphia Authority for Industrial Development to file an application with the Office of the Budget, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, under the Redevelopment Assistance Capital Program in an aggregate amount not exceed $15,350,000.
The bill will be referred to the appropriate committee. THE
And an ordinance authorizing the City of Philadelphia in cooperation with the Philadelphia Authority for Industrial Development to undertake a project to promote the health, safety and welfare of the residents of the City of Philadelphia, supplementing the ordinance, Bill No. 980789 which established the alternative funding mechanism.
This bill will be referred to the appropriate committee. THE
Thank you, Madam President. I move for the adoption. (Duly seconded.)
It has been moved and properly seconded that the resolution be adopted. All in favor will say aye. (Aye.)
The ayes have it, and the resolution has been adopted. Department debt. The Clerk will please read the second resolution. THE
A resolution designating December 22nd as Homeless Persons Memorial Day.
Thank you, Madam President. I move for the adoption. (Duly seconded.)
It has been moved and properly seconded that the resolution be adopted. All in favor will say aye. (Aye.)
The ayes have it, and the resolution has been adopted. I Chair recognizes Councilwoman Krajewski.
The Chair thanks the Councilwoman. The Chair recognizes Councilman Mariano.
Madam President, I have no bills or resolutions today.
Madam President, I have no bills or resolutions today.
The Chair thanks the Councilwoman. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Miller.
The Clerk will please read the title of the resolution. THE
A resolution approving the redevelopment contract and disposition supplement of the Redevelopment Authority of the City of Philadelphia for the redevelopment and urban renewal of a portion of Tioga Urban Renewal Area.
I move for the adoption of the resolution. (Duly seconded.)
It has been moved and properly seconded that the resolution be adopted. All in favor will say aye. (Aye.)
The ayes have it, and the resolution has been adopted. The Chair recognizes Councilman Nutter.
The Clerk will please read the title of the resolution. THE
A resolution congratulating Louis Marie Well Schmidt on her retirement from the City of Philadelphia.
Thank you, Madam President. I move the adoption of the resolution. (Duly seconded.)
It has been moved and properly seconded that the resolution be adopted. All in favor will signify by saying aye. (Aye.)
The ayes have it, and the resolution has been adopted. The Chair recognizes Councilman Cohen.
Thank you, Madam President. I have no bills or resolutions today.
The Chair thanks the gentleman. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Brown.
Thank you, Madam President. I offer no bills or resolutions this morning.
Thank you. The Clerk will please read the title of the resolution. THE
A resolution declaring December 4, 2003 as Alpha Fi Alpha Day in the City of Philadelphia.
It has been moved and properly seconded that the resolution be adopted. All in favor will say aye. (Aye.)
The ayes have it, and the resolution is adopted. The Chair recognizes Councilman DiCicco.
Thank you, Madam President. I offer six bills on one resolution on your behalf.
Thank you. The Clerk will please read the title of the bills. THE
An ordinance granting permission to Robert Bitros , owner of the property 933-933 North Second Street to operate and maintain an open air sidewalk cafe.
The bill will be referred to the appropriate committee. THE
And an ordinance granting permission to Nehal Desai and Raju Desai owners of the newsstand at 13th and Market Streets to construction, own, and maintain electric conduit with the electrical service line.
This bill will be referred to the appropriate committee. THE
And an ordinance amending Section 1(a) and (c) of an ordinance, Bill No. 030344, approved July 31, 2003, entitled an ordinance granting permission to Ride the Ducks International to remove an existing wood and metal newsstand.
The bill will be referred to the appropriate committee. THE
And an ordinance granting permission to 900 South Front Street, owner of the property 900 South Front Street to operate and maintain an open air sidewalk cafe on the southwest corner of Front and Christian Streets.
This bill will be referred to the appropriate committee. THE
And an ordinance authorizing the Commissioner Public Property on behalf of the City of Philadelphia to acquire from the Redevelopment Authority for nominal consideration properties located 901-47 North Marshall Street.
The bill will be referred to the appropriate committee. THE
And an ordinance authorizing the Commissioner of Public Property on behalf of the City of Philadelphia to enter into a lease agreement to lease to Philadelphia Authority Industrial Development for further sublease to Leadership Learning Partners Charter School.
The bill will be referred to the appropriate committee. THE
And a resolution commending Stella Maris Roman Catholic Church on its 50th anniversary.
Thank you, Madam President. I move for the adoption of the resolution. (Duly seconded.)
It has been moved and properly seconded that the resolution be adopted. All in favor will indicate by saying aye. (Aye.)
The ayes have it, and the resolution is adopted. The Chair recognizes Councilman O'Neill.
Madam President I, offer one privileged resolution for which I ask immediate consideration.
The Clerk will please read the title of the resolution. THE
It has been moved and seconded that the resolution be adopted. All in favor will say aye. (Aye.)
The ayes have it, and the resolution is adopted. The Chair recognizes Councilman Clarke.
Thank you, Madam President. Madam President, I have one resolution and one bill.
Thank you. The Clerk will please read the title of the bill. THE
An ordinance amending public Title 22 of the Philadelphia Code, entitled "Public Employees Retirement Code," by amending Section 22-305 relating to maximum benefit limitations imposed by the Internal Revenue Code.
The bill will be referred to the appropriate committee. THE
And a resolution authorizing the Commissioner of Public Property to execute and deliver to the Redevelopment Authority of the City deeds located in the 18th and 32nd Wards of the City of Philadelphia.
Move for the adoption of the resolution. (Duly seconded.)
It has been moved and properly seconded that the in favor will signify by saying aye. (Aye.)
The ayes have it, and the resolution has been adopted. The next order of business is reports from Committee. And the Chair recognizes Councilman Kenney for a report from the Committee on Rules.
Thank you, Madam President. The Committee on Rules reports out five bills with favorable recommendations.
Thank you. The Clerk will please read the report. THE
To the President and Members of the Council of the City of Philadelphia, the Committee on Rules to which was referred Bill No. 030670, entitled an Philadelphia Zoning Maps by changing the zoning designations of certain areas of land located within an area bounded by Second Street, Turner Street Hancock Street and Oxford Street; And Bill No. 030709 entitled an ordinance approving the Fourth Amendment of the redevelopment proposal for the Point Breeze Urban Renewal Area being the area generally bounded by the southerly side of Washington Avenue on the north and westerly side of Broad Street on the east; And Bill No. 030721, an ordinance approving the Second Amendment of the Redevelopment Proposal for the Jefferson Square Urban Renewal Area; And Bill No. 030730 entitled an ordinance amending Title 14 of the Philadelphia Code, entitled "Zoning and Planning," by adding a new Section 14-1628, entitled "District Special Controls," prohibiting certain uses in relation to the sale of malt and brewed beverages, under certain terms and conditions; 030740, entitled an ordinance to amend the Philadelphia Zoning Maps by changing the zoning designations of certain areas of land located within an area bounded by Allegheny Avenue, Collins Street, Westmoreland Street, and Tulip Street; Respectfully reports it has considered the same and returns the attached bills to Council with a favorable recommendation.
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman Kenney.
Madam President, I move the Rules of Council be suspended so as to permit first reading this day of Bills No. 030670, 030709, 030721, 030730, and 030740.
It has been moved and properly seconded that the Rules of Council be suspended so as to permit first reading this day of the bills just read All in favor will say aye. (Aye.)
Yes. I wish to speak in opposition to the motion to suspend the Rules with respect to the Wal-Mart bill. I think this bill is being improperly rushed, and I think it needs a lot of consideration. I think we ought move very slowly when we move in opposition to the strongly expressed views of the community. I, therefore, oppose the Rules suspension with respect to the bill involving the Wal-Mart project on Allegheny Avenue. I don't know the number of that bill. (Applause.)
Madam President, when it comes to permitting a predatory employer to come in and try to break up the union rules and the rights that unions have fought for years to win, I think we ought to move slow. There's no rush to break down to be a rush in the opposite direction. (Applause.)
So I would like to move to separate -- my motion is to separate the Wal-Mart issue from the others. I have no objection to the Rules suspension with respect to the other bills mentioned. So I move to sever the Wal-Mart motion and treat it separately.
The motion is to sever the Wal-Mart bill from the other bills with respect to the Rules suspension, and first to have the motion on the other bills -I would ask the Chairman if he would agree to that motion so that there's no need for a vote.
Thank you, Madam President. As the sponsor of the bill, I would ask that the Rules of Council be suspended for this bill. And I do respect my colleague Councilman Cohen in his concern for predatory businesses that want to operate in the City of Philadelphia. I support unions, and I've received the support of many unions over the years. This is beyond a union issue, in my opinion. This bill speaks to an issue that has been on the table for about 13 or 14 months, as to what to do with a seven-acre vacant warehouse sitting in part of the City known as Port Richmond, removing that blight and that potential for catastrophe. The only persons who have come forward is the developer who has an intention of building a Wal-Mart. There have been no other interested parties, including the hospital. There have been no other interested parties, including the hospital, that have brought any ideas, suggestions, recommendations to my attention during those 13 months. And for those who were at the hearing the other day, you would have known if you were here the other day, it was on the record when I was interviewing the CEO, Mr. Skip Marshall, that up until November the 26th of this year did I ever know that there was any intention of hospital to buy this site. And even Mr. Marshall suggested if the hospital -- and those are his words, if the hospital were to purchase the former Goldman Printing Company, that the best that they would do with this is create a parking lot and maybe, maybe sometime down the road in the future they might consider developing an annex to the hospital. So this has been debated. I've been to numerous meetings. There are a number of people who support it and there are a number of people who are opposed to it. It is one of those situations we always find ourselves in as elected officials. We can't have it both ways. it over with, let's get this blight removed from the community, create jobs in Port Richmond. (Applause.)
Councilman Cohen, there's a point of order on the floor. Councilman Kenney is recognized for a point of order.
Madam President, I wasn't finished. I was drowned out by applause. Thank you. I was about to say that not only will it create jobs for the construction industry and the building trades, it will create about 300 jobs or so for residents of the Port Richmond area. Thank you. (Audience reacts.)
I am sorry. We're not going to tolerate outbursts. We are trying to conduct a hearing. I am asking that you respect us as we respect you, please. Thank you. Councilman DiCicco are you finished?
Only to say, President, that the number of meetings that I have attended in Port Richmond for a whole host of issues, about five of those meetings took place in a community room that belongs to Northeast Hospital directly across the street from the site we're speaking about today. And not once, never once during those five or six meetings that I attended directly across the street from this site in a room owned by Northeast Hospital did the subject come up or any opposition to this proposed site that everyone has known about for more than 13 months. Thank you. (Audience reacts.)
If there any outbursts, I am going to ask people to leave. Now, I don't want to get to that point. So I'm asking please, please that there are not outbursts from anyone. Thank you.
Councilman Kenney, I believe you had a point of order before Councilman Nutter.
Thank you, Madam President. This is just a procedural question. As it currently stands, there was a motion on the floor which was seconded to suspend the Rules to allow for first reading of the entire Committee report. I just need some type of ruling on whether or not Councilman Cohen's motion is in fact in order as it relates to a motion being on the floor and seconded. We can work it out if it comes to the point where we need to separate the motions, but at this point I don't know if the procedure is correct.
The Chair recognizes Councilman Nutter for a point of order.
Thank you, Madam President. Madam President, we might be able to get the individual members, Councilman DiCicco, where they need to be. There's no reason we cannot separate these bills in terms of Committee reports to vote on them separately. If it's a three-bill package -
The non-Wal-Mart bills can be separated from the rest of that package and have a separate Committee report just on that particular bill. We can go and vote on the rest of the bills. What we need to have happen is -- Councilman Kenney is correct. Councilman Cohen I would suggest needs to withdraw his motion for the moment. Councilman Kenney needs to withdraw the Committee report for the moment. Put the four bills in a package as a Committee report and have a separate Committee report on the bill that is the topic of conversation, and then the two Councilmembers can have their conversation strictly about that Committee report solely on that particular bill.
In the interest of moving this along, I would withdraw my original motion to approve the entire report and make a motion to -
If it's appropriate, I would like to make a motion to have the Rules of Council suspended so as to permit first reading of this day of Bills No. 030670, 030709, 030721, 030730. And then I want to make a separate motion that Bill No. 030740 and its Rules suspension be considered separately, all to be read today if all these bills are approved and the Rules of Council are suspended to allow that to happen. (Duly seconded.)
It has been moved and seconded that the Rules of Council be suspended so as to permit first reading this day of Bill Nos. 030670, 030709, 030721, and 030730. All in favor will indicate by -
I want to know whether those bills include the Wal-Mart bill or not?
The ayes have and the bills just read will be placed on today's First Reading Calendar.
Madam President, I make a motion that the Rules of Council be suspended so as to permit first reading this day of Bill No. 030740.
It has been moved and properly seconded that the Rules of Council -
I understand from Councilman DiCicco that it's his opinion that the Goldman building is now polluted. If so, I say let's not increase the pollution by adding Wal-Mart to the polluters. (Applause.)
Let's work with getting rid of the current pollution and not taking away the rights of labor. If we were able to get the exact people here in this room, I think you would find overwhelmingly that the people from Port Richmond are opposed. (Applause.)
I don't want to embarrass those that are allegedly here to support the union, but I'll bet that almost none of them are from Port Richmond. (Applause.)
And it's a terrible thing to be pitting labor against community interests. Both are very important interests. And we ought to do everything we possibly can to avoid pitting one against the other. And to bring in Wal-Mart, the worst employer, polluter in the country today, is no solution to the Goldman problem of pollution; it worsens it. And Wal-Mart has to learn, if they don't already know, that they're not welcome to Philadelphia. They're not going to be welcome until they begin acting like an honest employer who knows that a job means you family, provide health benefits. Wal-Mart has a well-known history. If it's possible at all, they fight against providing any health insurance for anybody. And then and only then at the last stages do they offer a health plan, and then they limit it to the worker, separating the worker from the rest of his family. If it's a he or a she, doesn't make any difference, but they'll only recognize the worker's rights to health benefits if they have to recognize anybody else. It puts a terrible strain on the family. It means the worker is saying, "I'm selfish, I'm going to protect myself but I'm in no position to protect my family." It's a terrible thing to do. The minimum wages paid by Wal-Mart don't deserve the support of Philadelphia. And I'm shocked that my colleague Councilman DiCicco after the demonstration by the constituents in his district is still presenting the job issue. These are fake jobs; these are not real jobs. (Applause.)
The union that's here talking about jobs is not the union that represents the people that are going to be working at Wal-Mart; it's the people that will be building it. And then after they build it, they leave and they go on and work somewhere else. And I want to see that they can work too, but not at the cost of destroying a whole community. Port Richmond is probably one of the oldest and most basic communities in Philadelphia. It deserves to be fought for, not opposed. (Applause.)
This Council and this Administration need to be in the business of strengthening communities, not destroying them. And, therefore, I ask Councilman DiCicco again not to present his motion because I'll tell you, there will never be a day of peace in this Council if this motion is approved. There won't be a day of peace, and I will oppose everything that is aimed at by Councilman DiCicco since he will have proved himself interested in destroying an ancient and historic community, a community that deserves the support of everybody in Philadelphia and deserves the full support of labor. Therefore, I ask Councilman DiCicco again not to present his bill. (Applause.)
The Chair recognizes -- Councilman Cohen, are you quite finished?
Do you want me to recognize Councilman DiCicco at this time?
Thank you, Madam President. This is not the first time that Councilman Cohen has threatened me that any peace in this Council. But for a long time, this has been peace between the Councilman and I. And unfortunately, we are ending this Session and this year on different terms on different sides of the aisle. I'm going to respectfully request again that the Rules of Council be suspended. To suggest that I am trying to destroy a neighborhood, I do find that somewhat insulting. There will be differences of opinion. There are people on both sides of the aisle in here, excluding -- Councilman, I listened to you; I would ask for the same courtesy. Excluding the folks who are here from the buildings trades, and there are many; there's no question about it. We have over 1500, almost close to 2,000 signatures in support of the Wal-Mart.
Councilman, I've listened to you, and I'm asking you to same courtesy. We can go through this day in and day out. You've been around long enough. We get petitions all the time. Sometimes petitions are good; sometimes they're not so good. It is almost an impossible task to decipher between who is actually a resident and who is signed on behalf of someone else. I can tell you the one thing that I know. There is a building that is sitting there and has been sitting there for about three years, a building I desperately tried to save the printing company, working with the Commerce Department and PIDC. Every kind of tax incentive imaginable was offered to that company to keep them in Port Richmond. At the end of the day, none of the things we had on the table worked. The company went belly-up. We have a seven-acre building sitting there vacant. It is a site of prostitution and drugs. Some small fires to date. God forbid, we all know about when these vacant buildings, these warehouses are set on fire by arsonists throughout this City. Is Wal-Mart the best thing? I will say, no, it is probably not; but it's the only thing. It is the only developer that has come forth today. The hospital walked away from this deal three years. And now at the 11th hour they are saying that -
-- "if we buy the property, we would turn it into a parking lot." They have a parking lot behind its facility. They have a parking lot on the south side of Allegheny Avenue. And they have no plans for any development at this time nor do they suggest they have plans in the future.
They've had over three years. They have never presented a plan to me to develop that site. And it was on the record at the hearing - (Audience reacts.)
Excuse me, Councilman. I'm sorry. We are going to have order in here or I will clear out the entire room so that we can proceed with our hearing. Again, I will ask all of our spectators to please be respectful. Thank you.
Councilman Cohen, I think Councilman DiCicco is speaking, and there is a point of order. And the Chair recognizes Councilman Kenney.
Thank you, Madam President. I recall vividly that I Chaired a hearing of the Rules Committee that went on for quite sometime. There was a lot of testimony for and against. The Committee made a decision. And to re-debate this again our Session, I think, is not going to solve anything. There's been -Councilman Cohen certainly has a right to express his opinion, as does Councilman DiCicco, but at some point in time I think the votes are there to move this. And I would like to move forward if possible. (Applause.)
Thank you. It has been moved and seconded that the rules of Council be suspended so as to permit first reading this day of Bill No. 030740. All of those in favor will indicate by saying aye. (Aye.)
The record will indicate that all Members voted in favor. There was one descending vote passed by Councilman Cohen. (Applause.)
Madam Chairman, the Committee on Appropriations reports out two bills and one resolution with a favorable recommendation.
I'm sorry. Councilman, I don't believe your microphone is on and the stenographer cannot hear a word you're saying. I cannot hear you. So please put your microphone on, please.
The microphone is on and I'm yelling at the top of my voice "point of order" -
You have a point of order and the Chair is now recognizing you.
Let today, December the 4th be recognized as the day in which the City Council of Philadelphia turned its back on the communities of Philadelphia. (Applause.)
Let it be recognized that the day on which the most predatory employer comes to Philadelphia and is welcomed against the wishes of the overwhelming feeling of the community of Port Richmond. Let those who are leaving, by their leaving they're showing they're not part of Port Richmond because they're not concerned about it.
I want to congratulate the people of Port Richmond for coming out today and for waging the beginning fight. We're going to win. Wal-Mart will not be coming to this site on Allegheny Avenue. (Audience reacts.)
To the citizens of Port Richmond, keep up your fight. You're going to win. You're going to win against the likes of DiCicco and Kenney and anybody else who says, "Let's destroy our communities at the behest of predatory employers." We're not going to do that in Philadelphia because Philadelphia's going to remain a solid labor city. This is only Step 1 in the fight. Before it's over, Port Richmond will prevail.
When this Council the citizens of Philadelphia, there's no time to finish. We've got to keep working until we restore Philadelphia to its good standing as a city. And new generation is going to be fighting as hard as the old generation for Port Richmond.
At this time, again, the Chair recognizes Councilwoman Krajewski for a report from the Committee on Appropriations.
Thank you, Madam President. I move that the Rules of Council be suspended as to permit first reading this day of Bills No. 030656 and 030771. Thank you.
Thank you. The Chief Clerk will please read the report. THE
To the President and Members of the Council of the City of Philadelphia, the Committee on Appropriations to which was referred Bill No. 030656 entitled an ordinance authorizing transfers in appropriations for Fiscal Year 2004 within the of administering funds to distressed businesses affected by the Market Street Elevated Reconstruction Project; And Bill No. 030771, entitled an ordinance authorizing transfers in appropriations for Fiscal Year 2003 within the General Fund from certain or all City offices to certain or all City offices, departments, boards and commissions; And Resolution No. 030575 entitled a resolution authorizing the Committee on Appropriations to hold hearings to determine whether an additional appropriation is necessary to fund the expansion of the Police Department's Neighborhood Services Unit; Respectfully reports it has considered the same and returns the attached bills and resolution to Council with a favorable recommendation.
Thank you. The Chair again recognizes Councilwoman Krajewski.
Thank you, Madam President. I move that the Rules of so as to permit first reading of Bills No. 030656 and 030771. (Duly seconded.)
It has been moved and properly seconded that the Rules of Council be suspended so as to permit first reading this day of the two bills just read. All in favor will indicate by saying aye. (Aye.)
The ayes have it, and the bills will be placed on today's First Reading Calendar. Resolution No. 030575 will also be placed at the end of today's Calendar. Council will now proceed under a special order of business to the reconsideration of Bill No. 030657. This bill was passed by the Council at its November 13, 2003 Session and was returned disapproved by today's Session of Council. At this time, the Chair recognizes Councilman DiCicco.
Thank you, Madam President. I move that the Council reconsider Bill No. 030657, which was approved by City Council on November 13, 2003, and I wish to be heard for a very brief remark. (Duly seconded.)
It has been moved seconded. All in favor will say aye. (Aye.)
The ayes have it. Councilman DiCicco. I'm sorry, I think at this time I think what we should do is have the Clerk read the letter. THE
To the President and Members of the Council of the City of Philadelphia, I am herewith returning to you as disapproved Bill No. 030657, which would amend the Passyunk Avenue Special District Control section of the Zoning Code. Notably, the legislation prohibits a number of new uses in commercially zoned properties fronting Passyunk Avenue between Washington Avenue and 25th Street, including the operation of any establishment with a license from the Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board for the after hour sale of alcoholic beverages.
I believe you have to read the title of the ordinance, please. THE
Bill No. 030657, an ordinance amending Title 14 of the Philadelphia Code entitled "Zoning and Planning," by amending Section 14-1621 entitled "Passyunk Avenue Special District Controls," by revising the prohibited uses and regulations regarding signs within the district.
Thank you. This bill having been read on two different days, was duly approved by City Council on November 13, 2003, and was returned to Council by the Mayor as disapproved at today's session. The question is, shall Bill No. 030657 pass, notwithstanding the Mayor's disapproval. Please note that a vote of aye is to override the Mayor's veto, and a vote of no is a vote to sustain the Mayor's veto. Councilman DiCicco, I think you wanted to be recognized?
Yes. Thank you, Madam President. I'll be brief. This bill was a direct result of a request from the property owners in the newly formed Passyunk Avenue Special Services District. It is not unlike some of the prohibited uses in the South Street Special Services District and I also believe in the Manayunk Special Services District. I'm not absolutely certain of that, but I believe they have similar prohibited uses. And if we fail to override this veto, my other concern is that a bill that just came out of the Rules days ago that was introduced by Councilwoman Blackwell that would put certain restrictions on the stop-and-goes throughout the City that a number of district Council individuals had placed in the bill, my concern is it would cancel that bill out. So that what we did the other day, which I think is a good thing, controlling the stop-and-goes, could possibly be canceled out as a result of this bill if this Mayor's veto is upheld.
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman Mariano.
Thank you, Madam President. To the sponsor of the bill, Councilman, could you explain this a little? Is it as clear as it looks, just to prohibit t the after hour sale of alcohol in this certain area? Is that it in a nutshell.
Well, there are other issues in there, types of businesses. I don't recall all of them off the top of my restricted use is no take-out windows for fast food eateries. I'm trying to remember. There are a number of them. But the other issues that are involved in the bill are very similar to what all of the special service districts throughout the City have. This one is a little bit different in the sense that it would prohibit after-hour sales. We don't want any after-hour clubs opening up. It is a traditionally a neighborhood/commercial residential corridor, and we have gone a long way in trying to revitalize that and we think that the sale of alcoholic beverages after the hours would impede that effort to revitalize the Passyunk Avenue corridor.
Thank you. I would reiterate, an aye vote is a vote to override the Mayor's veto and a vote of no is a vote to sustain the Mayor's veto the. time, I would ask the Clerk to please call the roll. THE
Aye. The ayes are 14, the nays are 0. A majority of all Members having voted in the affirmative, the Mayor's veto is overridden. Our next order of business is the consideration of the Calendar. The Clerk will please read the bills on the First Reading Calendar. THE
Bill No. 030670, an ordinance to amend the Philadelphia Zoning changing the zoning designations of certain areas of land located within an area bounded by Second Street, Turner Street, Hancock Street and Oxford Street.
And bill No. 030709, an ordinance approving the Fourth Amendment of the redevelopment proposal for the Point Breeze East Urban Renewal Area.
And Bill No. 030721, an ordinance approving the Second Amendment of the Redevelopment Proposal for the Jefferson Square Urban Renewal Area.
And Bill No. 030730, an ordinance amending Title 14 of the Philadelphia Code entitled "Zoning and Planning," by adding a new Section 14-1628, entitled "District Special Controls," prohibiting certain uses in relation to the and brewed beverages, under certain terms and conditions.
And Bill No. 030656, an ordinance authorizing transfers in appropriations for Fiscal Year 2004 within the General Fund to distressed businesses affected by the Market Street Elevated Construction Project, all under certain terms and conditions.
And Bill 030771, an ordinance authorizing transfers in appropriations for Fiscal Year 2003 within the General Fund from certain or all City offices to certain or all City offices, departments, boards and commissions.
And Bill No. 030740, an ordinance to amend the Philadelphia Zoning Maps by changing the zoning areas of land located within an area bounded by Allegheny Avenue, Collins Street, Westmoreland Street, and Tulip Street.
The Chair agrees. The bills read on the First Reading Calendar today will be placed on the Second Reading and Final Passage Calendar next week. That concludes the First Reading Calendar. The Chair now recognizes Councilwoman Blackwell for the purpose of calling up bills to be considered today on the Second Reading and Final Passage Calendar.
Thank you, Madam President. Today, Bill No. 010368A is being called for another amendment. The other bills to be called up for second reading and final passage are: Bill No. 010509A, 030686, 030716, 030719, 030660, 030562, 030642, 030662, 030684, 030689, 030711.
Thank you Madam President. Madam President, I will be offering an amendment on Bill No. 662.
It's a technical amendment. I've circulated the amendment.
030711, 030713, 030671, 030672, 030681, 030683, 030685, 030687, 030688, 030691, 030692, 030693, 030694, 030696, 030697, 030712, 030714, 030715 and 030720. Thank you, Madam President.
I'm sorry, whose point of information? The Chair recognizes Councilman Cohen.
I heard nothing 010509A. Isn't that on the schedule for today?
You're welcome. The Clerk will please read the title of Bill No. 010368A. THE
An ordinance amending Title 14 of the Philadelphia Code, entitled "Zoning and Planning," by amending Section 14-306.2 entitled "C-7 Commercial District," by deleting certain uses from the list of uses that are permitted in C-7 Commercial District, all under certain terms and conditions.
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman O'Neill.
Madam President, I move to offer an amendment to this bill, and I'd like to have the opportunity to speak on it briefly.
Thank you. And it is my understanding, Councilman, that the copy of the amendments have been circulated.
The amendment changes a date at the very end of the bill from November 1, 2001, to today, December 4, 2003. This bill was introduced quite a while ago, passed Council, was on the Mayor's desk. I brought it back for an amendment at that time back in September of 2001 to grandfather in under a non-conforming status all new car dealers existing at that time. There was a particular car dealer who was in litigation at that time with me and eventually just with the City. That case has been settled. The new car dealer is up and running, and I'd like to that car dealer is included in the grandfathering. This C-7 bill basically takes car dealers in C-7 -- C-7 is usually a single use neighborhood zoning with off-street parking, whether it be a Wawa, a 7-Eleven, a gas station, Rite Aid. Those are usually the C-7 uses. As of now, if this bill does not change it, a used car dealer could open overnight without anyone having anything to say about it. And Council passed this unanimously. There was quite a wrench thrown into it, and I've held off until all the litigation and legal matters were finished. And I think this is the last piece is to make sure that that particular car dealer is given the same status as all other new car dealers in the City. So I would bring it up at the next Session for final vote, but I wanted to make it clear on what this particular amendment does, and would call for approval. (Duly seconded.)
It has seconded that the amendment be adopted. All in favor will signify by saying aye. (Aye.)
The ayes have, it and the amendment has been adopted. The Chief Clerk will please read the title of Bill No. 010509A. THE
An ordinance amending Section 20-101 of the Philadelphia Code, entitled "Residents Requirements," by providing that active law enforcement officers from elsewhere in the United States entering into civil service positions in the Philadelphia Police Department need not be boni fide residents of the City when appointed, but must establish and maintain bona fide residents in the City within six months after appointment.
Thank you, Madam President. I request to be -- I'd like to speak on this bill. I'm calling this bill up today after a lot of consideration. And some of the questions that were asked of me prior to November 4, I believe Councilman Goode in the Caucus Room last week in October when I was then prepared to call the bill up for final passage, asked me if I had heard from Commissioner Johnson because previously I had stated that I would be contact with the Commissioner to find out what the Police Department's position on this bill would be. And at Councilman Goode's request, I held the bill until today because, as I reported two weeks or so ago via a phone conversation Police Commissioner Johnson. He indicated to did not have a problem with this bill band he was in support of it. It wasn't until 10 o'clock or so this morning that I now find a letter that has been circulated to all Members of Council that the Police Commissioner has since apparently changed his mind and is no longer supporting the bill. I'm totally confused as to why that letter was not -- a communication, either a letter, a phone call, an e-mail had not been forwarded to me prior to today or at least in the two-week period that has passed since my last conversation with Commissioner Johnson. My staff attempted up until about 6 o'clock yesterday last evening to contact Commissioner Johnson, seeking a letter expressing his support for the bill. So, again, up until this morning, I had no knowledge, I had no reason to believe that the Commissioner was not supportive. So I want it at least on the record to be understood that when I made that statement in the Caucus Room two weeks or so ago that it was in fact Commissioner told me. I have the highest respect for Commissioner Johnson. I don't what is influencing him to change his mind. We do have a letter, as I think all Councilmembers have in front of them, a letter from the FOP strongly endorsing this bill as well. Again, I just wanted to put that on the record that for some reason or other, the Commissioner has now changed his position, but unbeknownst to me until 10 o'clock this morning. I had no reason to understand that he would be changing his position.
Thank you very much. The Chair recognizes Councilman Nutter.
Thank you, Madam President. I certainly heard on two occasions Councilman DiCicco's explanation in the Caucus Room about his conversations. Now, obviously, none of us were participants in those conversations. At the same time, I respect both integrity of their conversations and their statements to any of us. It is, at the same time a bit confusing as to what is reported to us as being said in a conversation; and then subsequently, as the Councilman points out, the morning of the bill possibly running, a letter comes in. The Commissioner Johnson is traveling and unavailable. I have had some conversation with Councilman DiCicco. And to be honest, I would like to try to get to the bottom of this particular episode of this situation. I mean, it's either being supported or it's not. And I don't know whether the Councilman is of a mind at the moment because he's obviously been very accommodating to a variety of requests to try to get to the bottom of this with no expectation to hold the bill, obviously, for eve. But I don't know whether in the course of the next week we could get any clarity so the Members know one way or the other what the true position is. Second, Councilman, if you would not mind, it might be helpful for anyone who is session, either in person or electronic means, if you could very briefly, I guess, explain what the bill is, what the bill is not, what your view is who may be affected or not affected by something like this. There seems to be a significant amount of growing concern. But I am lastly, again, perplexed myself as to the nature of your private conversations and now this morning a letter coming in with no ability to contact the Police Commissioner because of his own professional traveling schedule. Thank you, Madam President.
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman DiCicco.
Thank you, Madam President. Thank you, Councilman Nutter. We all understand that in order for an individual who is seeking a position, a civil service position in the that individual must at the time that they make application and take the test must in fact be a resident of the City of Philadelphia. attempt a few years ago to -- I think we a actually introduced an ordinance, if I'm not mistaken, a couple of years ago that would remove that as a requirement for all Civil Service positions. That ordinance failed and was not approved. Since then on June 14 of 2001, I re-introduced a bill that was cosponsored by my colleague Councilman Kenney that would separate the Police Department from those requirements whereby basically what it says is if you're not a resident, you are entitled to take an examination for a position in the Police Department. If you are hired, subsequent to hiring, you would then have to be a bona fide resident of the City of Philadelphia. So what it says basically is that you don't need to be a resident of the City of Philadelphia in order to make an application and take a test for a position in the Philadelphia Police Department. I think it's an opportunity for us to open our doors, if you will, as a City to -
I'm sorry to interrupt. I thought the other issue was not only do you have to be a resident but you had to have been a resident a year before you can even take the test.
Thank you. Thank you for correcting that. Yes, you have to be a resident for a year. And in many cases, people are discouraged from even considering a position in the City of Philadelphia. I mean, it's difficult for someone, especially a married individual, to move himself or herself and their family from where they live to the City of Philadelphia, wait a year to take a test for a position and then maybe find out that they don't either pass the test or they're not being accepted. I think that puts a burden on individuals. I think it limits our ability to test and hire the best at whatever position that they're looking for. But again, we're only talking about the Police Department. We're talking about people who are now active in law enforcement in other country. So I thought this was a great opportunity to open our doors and welcome individuals to come to Philadelphia who may be considering joining our Philadelphia Police Department. I have all the respect and I do believe that the high-ranking officials at the Police Department, if there's any concern that the diversity of the Police Department as it is today will somehow be adversely affected if we open the opportunity for non-Philadelphia residents to come in and apply, I certainly have all the faith in our high-ranking officials and the people who are in charge of the hiring at the Philadelphia Police Department that they will make sure that the diversity that is in our Department today will be maintained. And if anything, if someone decides that they wants to take the test if this bill passes and they pass and they're accepted, we now start to repopulate the neighborhood. We're inviting people now to become residents of the City. All too often people leave the City because they're looking aren't in the City and they follow their jobs elsewhere. And it wasn't too long ago, which prompted me again to want to call this bill up for a final vote, is the City of New York came to Philadelphia and they were soliciting applications from our residents to become police officers in New York City. Now, how many of them took advantage of it, how many of those folks applied and passed and eventually moved, I don't know. But it's kind of the reverse of that is what I am proposing in this ordinance. Thank you, Madam President.
I'd just like to ask Councilman DiCicco for a clarification. Would this bill apply to individuals who are seeking entry level positions and not for promotional positions within the Department?
To the best of my knowledge, and I will be honest with you, I don't see it in the language of the bill. I entry level only. I mean, it would obviously exclude commissioners. We have in the past hired police commissioners who were non-Philadelphia residents, more recently Commissioner Timoney. Would it apply to a sergeant, lieutenant, corporal, a captain, I honestly don't know. That was not my intention. My intention was to open up at entry level positions only.
Did Commissioner Timoney have to move into the City first?
Yes, but he was not a resident at the time he was hired. He was hired and then became a resident.
As did Commissioner Tucker. And I'm not sure if there are any others before Tucker.
Thank you, Madam President. I'll be very brief. My recollection is, although it's fading, I thought that Council approved some number years ago a specific exemption to the one-year residency before he could take the police test, specifically for military personnel, a number of years ago. I think we all finally came to the conclusion that it would be virtually impossible for a highly trained military person to ever meet the one-year residency requirement in Philadelphia before they could take the test to become a police officer because there's so many of those military personnel who are stationed all across the country, and we did not want to deny ourselves the opportunity to access again those highly trained military personnel. So there is some amount of precedent to this particular issue. To the other point, I believe that most of our promotional opportunities within you to already be a Philadelphia Police Officer to promote into those particular positions. That is at least my current belief. So that's just the additional information, Madam President.
Thank you, Madam President. Madam President, I probably can't get this answer today, but there apparently was a letter -- I actually don't have a copy of the letter that was sent by the Commissioner, but I got wind of it. My understanding is that there was some reference to recent applicants, 2600 potential employees applied and passed the test and those particular applicants would be valid up until the year 2005. And I'm wondering if the sponsor or any other Member of Council can confirm?
Councilman Clarke, again, quarter after 10:00 this first time I saw this letter. I did not have an opportunity to discuss any of these issues that are in this letter with the Commissioner. Again, I can only repeat, at the request of Councilman Goode back in late October, I made certain that I placed a call in to Commissioner Johnson. We discussed it very briefly on the phone. And he said, "Councilman, I don't have a problem with the bill. I support it." That was the extent of the conversation. I don't know what, if any, impact it would have on the 2600 applicants.
So I guess my question is, at the time -- and I know you've been working on this for some time. Would the 2600 alleged applicants -- I'll say "alleged" because we haven't been able to confirm this, although I'd have to believe that the Commissioner wouldn't fake the number. Would that have any impact on your need to do a particular bill to solicit applicants from outside of the City of Philadelphia if we had we believe potentially qualified pool of individuals who are City of Philadelphia residents?
No. What it would say is going forward that non-Philadelphia residents would have the same opportunity as Philadelphia residents to make application and take a test for the position of a police officer. It would not preclude anyone from doing the same. Would it have an effect on the 2600 applicants with someone who applies, say, next -
I was talking more with respect to your feeling that there was a need to solicit additional applicants if we already have 2600 applicants.
There was at one point in time my concern that because of the DROP Program and we understood that there was going to be about 800 positions that would be vacant that the Commissioner at that time back in June of 2001 or October, I think, of 2001, indicated that he thought that he would have enough applicants to cover those 800 occurring as a result of DROP Program. And that's when he had asked me if I would be willing to hold off and let's see how this played out. Obviously -- and I take the Commissioner at his word that there are 2600 applicants. Obviously, that doesn't impact the 800; that's covered. But I still don't think that we should limit the folks who are interested in obtaining a position in the Philadelphia Police Department for people who only live in the City of Philadelphia. Why not be more welcome? Welcome other folks to come in. Give them an opportunity. And if they decide that they want to be a police officer, they would now have to become residents. This bill came to me as a result of an individual who was a police officer in a very small township in south Jersey who wanted to become a big city police cop, is what he said. But for the fact that he would have to sell his home, move his wife and his family to the City of Philadelphia, establish residency for one year before he can take the test, he even attempt to do that because he had no guarantees that at the end of that year of establishing residency that he would be hired.
So I guess my question then is, why would we not open up all ranks of categories of municipal employees?
We attempted to do that, but that was -- I don't know if that vote vetoed or we never can get the votes to get out of Committee. Councilman Kenney, can you help me on that? We lost, but where was it lost? I forget
The Chair Councilwoman Tasco for a point of order.
I believe that Civil Service positions are open, tests can be taken, you do not have to be a resident and you have at least six months to move into the City. That's true.
The Chair recognizes Councilman Kenney for a point of
Just a point of information. And thanks, Councilman Goode, for clearing my memory because my memory is getting worse than Nutter.
Councilman Goode informs me that we did pass the bill. The Mayor vetoed it and we failed to override the veto. A bill that would remove the pre-residency requirement from all positions in civil service in the City. And at the time, when I did that bill with Councilman DiCicco, that was my intention. My intention was to use our human resource opportunities as a way to bring people into the City to have them come in and establish residences and live. As you know, over the last 20, 30 years, we've been losing people -- we've been hemorrhaging people out of the City. And if we could use our -- at the time I believed and I still believe now that if we could use our as another hook to bring people to come to live in our City that we should do not that. There's no private company in the country that limits themselves, their pool of applicants to people who live in one city or one state on one street. And I believe that -- I still believe that we could go across this country in military institutions and universities and other police departments and other offices and bring in qualified, diverse people who could come in and live in our neighborhoods and repopulate our City. Especially since the fact we're losing so many people, I thought that that was a great opportunity. If you had a law firm in Philadelphia or an accounting firm, they would never limit themselves to hiring only people in Philadelphia, they go and get the best and brightest form colleges and universities throughout the country. And I think we should be doing that. To kind of continue this parochial attitude that Philadelphia jobs are only for Philadelphians, well, we want to make non-Philadelphians have them come in and want to stay and live in our City. Teachers, you know, whatever, any position. We should never limit our pool of applicants to people who just live in the City. Although there's many qualified people living in the City, I would like to bring along -- and I'm voting for this bill. I would like to bring people into the City to live and use our employment opportunities to do so. Thank you.
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman Cohen.
Thank you, Madam President. Sooner or later in a discussion on residence requirements, I think we get to the bottom and I thank Councilman Clarke's questions for revealing the real purpose of this bill is to break down the residency rules for Philadelphia. That's what happens whenever City develops a large number of minority population. Then certainly residence rules which have been good as long the minority population was small suddenly seem that. I think that's bad policy. I think if the City of Philadelphia really made a determined effort they'd find many, many more people eligible to do a first class job than appear on the rolls. And I'm against this. I think the purpose of this bill is to eliminate residency rules step by step. I think the discussions made it clear that that's the real purpose of the sponsors. I will be voting no on this bill and urge my colleagues to vote no. I think Philadelphia has many very worthwhile applicants if only given the opportunity to perform for the City.
Thank you. I'm sorry, Councilman Clarke. I was distracted. Were you quite finished?
No, I wasn't. I just wanted to talk about the fact that not only in the police ranks where we're now being told we have 2600 ready made applicants, and I believe that in the other ranks in laborers and other categories of municipal employment a substantial amount of individuals. While I support Councilman Kenney's need to encourage individuals to move into the City, and I think there are a number of ways we can do that, I'm just concerned that somehow a non-resident would receive the same status of a resident, a person who's been paying taxes who's living in the City for whatever period of time. That concerns me. I think that a person who has lived in the City, has paid wage and resident and real estate taxes and lived and contributed to the City should not be put on par with an individual who may live in another state, let alone another municipality. That really concerns me that that in fact will be a case, particularly given the fact that we do have a substantial unemployment rate in the City of Philadelphia and we are talking about a set number of jobs. And we believe that somewhere down the line that those job opportunities will potentially decrease based on our need to shrink the municipal workforce. So that is my concern about this particular bill.
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Blackwell.
Thank you, Madam President. I will agree and support the position of Commissioner Sylvester Johnson. I would say that in this instance where we have a waiting list of people who are already on the rolls, who indicate they may be qualified, I believe that our first obligation is to those who live and reside in our City. That has to be our first consideration. I do not believe, as my colleague Councilman Nutter mentioned, we've already made allowances for those in the military. I support that. But I believe that this is not the instance as has been mentioned with Philadelphia teachers where we have applicants. We have people who are already in the rolls who are waiting to be considered and hired for the police force. It's not like public teachers. If you can't find them, that's one thing. But if we have over 20,000 people who are on the list who want to be considered, then our first be to those people in our City who can meet the qualifications and who can be trained to be on the police force. Therefore, I would support Commissioner Johnson, and I'll be opposing this bill. Thank you.
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Brown.
Thank you, Madam President. I would have to say bravo to the remarks made by my colleague Councilwoman Jannie Blackwell. As much as I appreciate and certainly accept the argument that we as public policymakers do need to be concerned about moving measures that bring more residents into our City, I'm of the belief that my first loyalty goes to those current Philadelphia residents who are already on the rolls at the Philadelphia Police Department. And yes, diversity may be a consideration for this bill, but the greater issue for me is opportunity for those who are already on the rolls, so I will not be supporting this bill.
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Miller.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I'll be voting to oppose this bill. I think it's our priority and our obligation to keep Philadelphians working. It sounds like -- at one point I know that we were talking a few years ago that there was not an adequate pool of applicants available to the Police Department. But according to the information we received this morning, there are a number of people, 2600 I believe I read for the 2002 waiting list, and I'm not sure what it said for the 2003. But my priority is to keep Philadelphians working, and I will be opposing this bill.
Thank you very much. The Chair at this time recognizes Councilman DiCicco.
Madam President, I do appreciate the conversation that has taken place this morning. And I made a valid point. So I'm not belabor this proceeding. I'm just going to call for the question.
Thank you. The Clerk will please call the roll. THE
Aye. The vote is 7-7 . The motion fails. The next bill to be call up for consideration is Bill No. 030686. THE
An ordinance amending Title 14 of the Philadelphia Code, entitled "Zoning and Planning," by on land sought by acquisition by the City, under certain terms and conditions.
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
Aye. The ayes are 14, the nays are 0. A majority of all Members having voted in the affirmative, the bill passes. The next bill to be called for No. 030716. THE
An ordinance approving a new plan estimated cost and proposed method of charges of the City Avenue Special Services District to portions of the City Avenue area of the City of Philadelphia and Township of Lower Merion.
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
Aye. 14, the nays are 0. A majority of all Members having voted in the affirmative, this bill passes. The next bill to be called for consideration is Bill No. 030719. THE
An ordinance amending Section 14-312 of the Philadelphia Code, entitled "Commercial District Rules and Exceptions for All Districts," adding the area of Lancaster Avenue, both sides.
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
Aye. The ayes are 14, the nays are 0. A majority of all Members having voted in the affirmative, the bill passes. The next bill to be called for consideration is Bill No. 030562. It's the top of . Councilman O'Neill, on the bottom of , it is my understanding you want Bill No. 030660 to be held?
The Clerk will please read the title of Bill No. 030562. THE
An ordinance amending Title 20 of the Philadelphia Code, entitled "Officers and Employees," by adding a new chapter entitled "Campaign Contributions and Expenditures," under certain terms and conditions.
This bill having been read on two different days, the question now is shall the bill pass finally. please call the roll. THE
Miller, how are you voting? Councilwoman, it's Bill No. 030562, the top of .
There's a little confusion on the floor, Madam President.
I understand there is some confusion. We are considering Bill No. 030562, which is on the top of . The title has been read. Anyone who has cast a vote, if they want to change it, please say so now.
We were just confused, Madam President because we were told in the Caucus is the bill was being held.
Madam President, can we just restart the roll call, please?
Well, I think Councilman O'Neill has a question.
I just have a question for the sponsor. Councilman Goode, I know that this puts restrictions, different kinds, on how much we can receive, how much we spend, but my question is -- and this really applies to both bills that I think are being called day. Does it have any impact whatsoever on what political action committees that aren't ours, City-elected officials, can spend on behalf of or against us?
Now that everybody knows where we are, I would suggest that the Chief Clerk start the roll call again please. THE
Aye. The ayes are 10, the nays are 4. A majority of all Members having voted in the affirmative, the bill passes.
When we were on caucus, we were requested to hold Bill No. 030710. The sponsor is now asking that we consider it. Therefore, I would ask the Clerk to please read the title of Bill No. 030710. THE
An ordinance amending Chapter 2600 of the Philadelphia Code, entitled "Standards of Conduct and Ethics," to limit the receipt of contributions by elected City officers or candidates for or businesses who are applicants for or recipients of City contracts or financial assistance if they have made political contributions within City time frames to elected City officers or candidates for City offices, and prohibiting any individuals or businesses from receiving City contracts or financial assistance if they had made contributions to elected City officers or candidates for City offices, all under certain terms and conditions.
This bill having been read on two different days, the question now is, shall the bill pass finally? I'm sorry. The Chair recognizes Councilman O'Neill.
Madam President. Thank you. I just want to ask Councilman Kenney the same question I asked Councilman Goode on the previous bill. Does this bill have any impact on what can be spent against the City candidate or on behalf of a City candidate by a political action not controlled by that candidate?
It does limit the ability of any candidate or elected officer in Philadelphia from accepting a certain amount of money, but it does not limit the ability of an outside pack to spend money in an election cycle. The individual Councilmember or Mayor would not be able to accept the contribution above a thousand. But the other thing that it does do is it requires the disclosure of by individuals who have contributed to packs who are going after or have City business -- it requires them to disclose that information at the time they are proceeding to be considered for any contract, non-bid contract. So that must be disclosed. If, in fact, there his's ABC Pack that collects money from various individuals, that individual makes a contribution to that pack, that must be disclosed that that pack had accepted that contribution and what the amount was.
But if you're running for office in Philadelphia, as each of this year, and your opponent has a friend or an ally who controls a pack, that person and that pack can spend whatever they want against you; and if you don't have a similar friendly pack, you're limited by the amount in this Committee.
Certainly, packs can buy air time or do whatever they do.
If it is something that's directly related to that elected official candidate, I think that it would be exposed by the media and would be ripe for criticism by your opponent, that if you were trying to do an end run that way. But you are correct.
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman Goode.
Thank you, Madam President. In response to Councilman O'Neill's question, I'd like to respond in a truth of the matter is the bill we just passed in Council has voluntary spending limits because that's what's Constitutional. The question that Councilman O'Neill is actually asking is whether people can join together under their right to freely assemble to exercise whatever political wishes they want. The truth of the matter is, of course these bills allow people to do that because it's only Constitutional to allow people to do that.
And if the State limited those expenditures, that would be Constitutional, correct?
It's a First Amendment right of people to have freedom of assembly which means that you cannot limit spending on behalf of candidates or packs.
Thank you, Madam President. While I understand and I respect questions, I think they're legitimate questions both to myself and to Councilmember Goode upon consideration of these bills. I do think it's important that this Council at this time pass both bills. We really truly need to send a message even if the State reluctant do anything about campaign finance reform or pay to play legislation. Even if that is the case, which I believe it is, I think this City needs to take a step forward on this issue. I recognize the pitfalls that other packs may create as a result of this, but if we as a group, as a body and as a government agree that we need to do something about this in a very public way to change the way in which we conduct business or the way it's perceived we conduct business -- I think a lot of times what is perceived is not accurate. But as long as the public perceives it, I think that the belief is there that it is the case. So I really do believe -- and to tell you the truth, the other group of people that would be very much supportive of this, I think, are the contributors. I think that in many, many ways -- and we all have our friends and our supporters. As time goes on, the campaigns get more and more expensive, and those people are beleaguered. We beat them up for money all the time. And I think if we kind of just ratchet down the amount of money out of the cycle, out of the circle of business, the way which it's been done in the past -- not the way it's been done in the past, but the way we'd like to see it in the future, I do think it sends a first-step message. Now, as time goes on and things need to be adjusted or things are shown not to be fair or to be problematic, we've always had opportunities to change legislation to adjust it. But I think at this time in our City's history at this particular place, I think it's time for us to send a message both for the passage of this bill and hopefully -- the passage of Councilman Goode's bill and hopefully with the passage of this bill. Thank you.
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman Mariano.
Thank you, Madam President. I appreciate the sponsor's vigor on this bill, but I have to agree, I think it was with Councilman Clarke, or maybe it was Councilman O'Neill, that this has to be done at the State level. This pay for play, it's the new buzz word created by the editorial board of the Inquirer. And if you notice today that they told us to have some real leadership here. Well, if they really wanted leadership, what they would do is write an editorial and have it done at the national level, then at the state level, then it would be fair. What Councilman O'Neill is trying to do, we just want a fair game. I mean, we could dissect what we all do, what we do in our private lives, what other businesses we have on the side, whose wives have what jobs, and it could take forever. But let's be fair about this. This isn't a shot at the sponsor If we're going to do this, it has to be done at the state level. And all them packs, especially the packs that spent 3 to $400,000 to feed people in the Primary, that should be involve in this. But we know that the people that have been doing this for so long -- they know who they are, we don't have to say any names -- they'll just find another way around this. So until the television stations get involved, the paid television stations, and offer candidates free time, that's where all the money goes. If you're running for Mayor, you've got to spend a couple million dollars to be on TV. Thank God Jersey had elections so we didn't have to watch the two candidates here beat each other up anymore for a couple more weeks. So I'll be voting against this bill, but I do admire the Councilman's vigor in trying to do this. Maybe we can get together with some leadership from the State House and the State Senate and maybe the United States Congress and do this once and for all where it affects the City and the State. you, Council President.
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman Nutter.
Thank you, Madam President. I just want to make sure that I was completely understanding this particular bill as distinguished from Councilman Goode's bill that we just passed. This particular bill, Councilman Kenney, is primarily dealing with individuals making contributions who do business with the City; is that correct?
This is directed at basically non-bided contracts for professional services and other types of contracts that do not go through the normal business process. This is not somebody who wants to sell staplers or computers to the City where it's, you know, four or five companies bid and the lowest responsible bid is chosen. This has to do with basically no-bid contracts and also has to do with government gives to businesses who want to develop. For example, any TIF that's over $50,000, any other type of economic or tax incentive in the excess of $50,000. All I'm saying and all the bill is saying is that if you are seeking that kind of help from the government or you are seeking that kind of contract over $10,000 from the government, you will not give me or you or any Mayor more than a thousand dollars in an election. And going back to Councilman Mariano's point, I agree that it would be better suited for all of us if the State were to do campaign finance reform and this type pay to play legislation. They're not going to do it. And they're not going to do it in the foreseeable future. The City of Chicago, which is a storied political history as any other city, including us, has done this and it's been successful. And from what we've been able to see, it has really changed the attitude of people who live in the City of Chicago. I respect, but is, with all due respect, an insider's argument, it's an argument that we make amongst ourselves worrying about re-election as we should. It's an argument for elected officials and politicians and people who are involve in campaigns. I think this bill is necessary because we need to send a message to the outside, the people who are living in this City, working in this City, paying taxes every day, going to work and thinking that they can't get a fair shot in accessing business. The other problem that we face, and we have no way of quantifying it, is how many companies and developers and people won't even come here to try to develop because of the environment they believe or perceive exist in this City. And again, I think a lot of this is perception. In fairness to this Administration, they did not create this system. And the Mayor is right that it was there when he got there and he had to deal with it and play rules, and he's done so. But the point is, how many people from California or from Michigan or from Florida when they think about developing in this City call people up and say, "How's the environment there?" And they say, "It's terrible. I can't believe what you've got to do, not only from a regulatory standpoint and a tax standpoint, but the political climate is terrible." And they just move on to another city or another state. I don't even know how we quantity that because we don't know who's decided not to come here. So I think this is a message that we need to send to the populace at-large, to the citizenry at-large. And if we need to adjust down the road, if we need to fix things down the road as a result of the passage of this legislation and its implementation, then we'll come back and do that. Again, I think this is the time and this is the place and I hope you agree with me. And Councilman Nutter, I'm sorry, that was a long answer to your question. Do anymore?
That's okay Councilman. It was comprehensive. Thank you.
Thank you, Madam President. Madam President, this particular piece of legislation concerns me for a number of reasons. And one of the reasons, I'll have to it ask the sponsor because I'm not clear on it. But one, it suggest by nature of its title that somehow -- and I understand the sponsor is not necessarily targeting the bill at me, but the nature of it suggests somehow that an individual -- and I'll speak about myself, somehow will not have enough discipline to make decisions on legislation and the selection process as it relates to developers in the district without considering any financial contribution. I think, frankly speaking, that I have enough discipline to any money in direct correlation to the support of a particular developer or any consideration of legislation. I can count on probably everybody's hands in this Council the number of times that I send a check back. And I agree with you, Councilman, that a lot of people probably think that's the way that it is done. But as an elected officials, have enough discipline to send that check back when I'm considering legislation or in the midst of a development. So I'm concerned that I would be limited terms of my ability to raise money because the perception that I somehow can't discipline myself. The other issue with respect to -it was brought up earlier -- outside packs. I happen to be a Councilperson that has no outside packs or no outside support. And I know some people think that I get a lot of favors from the second floor, but that tends to be centered more around constituent service issues and things of that nature. But I have no way of raising money. I do not have a non-profit corporation that affords me an to community groups on a substantive basis. As a matter of fact, I find myself more often than not making a contribution to the non-profit corporations in my district as I represent in one portion of my district a very needy community. Throughout the year I have to make contributions to corporations for purposes of purchasing drill team equipment, for purposes of getting tickets to support boy scouts. I mean, I don't have a pack. I don't have a non-profit corporation. And I find myself having to raise money. I had to sponsor a job fair that cost me a substantial amount of my campaign coffers, but I'm okay with that because I think that's what that money is there to do, to support the individuals within my district. And I understand technically it is influence an election. And I think, frankly speaking, we all know that when you do good things for people in your district, you do in fact influence the election because that word quickly gets around that particular elected official supported that individual or So I think that will also put a considerable limit on my ability to do that. One other issue, as was referenced earlier, with respect to outside packs and the hope that somehow a particular editorial board or a newspaper would scrutinize those outside packs, as a person that was never endorsed -although this time I ran un-opposed, I still for some reason couldn't receive the endorsement of either major newspapers. I, frankly speaking, don't feel very comfortable in the fact that I would have to depend on a newspaper to try to do the level of scrutiny on the outside pack's contribution. And lastly, I would like to ask a technical question on the bill itself. With respect to other elected officials, other than Councilmembers or mayoral candidates or other municipal elected officials, it's my understanding both on the state level and on the congressional level, those individuals can run for seats -- I'm obviously not suggesting that a Congress person is going to give up a run for a Council seat.
But I know in many instances State Representatives and every now and then a State Senator has expressed an interest in running for a Council seat. My question is, if that money that's in their coffers and their ability to raise money prior to the election cycle can somehow be utilized for purposes of getting elected to a Council seat?
I appreciate the Councilmember's questions, and a lot of them are directed, I think, at Councilman Goode's bill which we've just passed. In no way does this bill intend to question the integrity of any elected official or candidate for office. And I agree with you, that you have the discipline that's necessary. I think all of us have the discipline that's necessary to know when we're walking that edge. The problem, however, is the perception of the general population, I believe, is that this is how we do business. And I think that if that is the perception, I think that is what's unhealthy. I don't question's anyone in the ability to discipline themselves. But I believe the population as a whole believes that, and I think we need to do something to change that, which I also think would help the political environment in general. Secondly, there is not limit of what you can take from any individual as far as a pack or as far as -- under my bill -- as far as an individual who wants to help you. The only prohibition after that is that individual cannot seek a City contract or seek to get help, either tax help or other types of financial help from the City. So when you make a decision to give somebody 5,000, 10,000, 50,000, you then acknowledge the fact or understand the fact that you are now prohibited from seeking that kind of help. So there's no limit -- if you have a wealthy benefactor, someone who believes in you, that person can give you a million dollars to get re-elected. However, that person is then precluded from any type of no-bid City contract or any type of City financial other one was people that were running for office?
Actually, I was asking you about the last one. Other elected officials, particularly State Reps.
The last one, my bill doesn't affect that at all. My bill deals with ethics in contracting. Councilman Goode's deals with campaign finance reform which limits those numbers. So even though my bill and Councilman Goode's bill are connected from a general standpoint in issue, they amend two separate.
You kind of connected them. I guess I shouldn't ask you, per se.
The question on -- now, since the bill's already been passed, the question on other elected officials who don't have to resign to run for office running against us, I think, is an issue for the campaign finance issue on campaign law. This is contracting. This has do with the another elected official running against us.
Councilman Clarke, I'm sorry. You're going to have to speak into the microphone.
I'm sorry. Councilman Kenney, you're correct, I shouldn't have asked you specifically that question. My question was general, and I guess lends more to Councilman Goode's bill. What happens when an individual is a State Representative has a sense that they're going to run against me next year, they decide they're going raise a lot of money, they start this process. Whereas, we're limited within the guidelines of this legislation to raise money, but this person can raise $500,000 in that year and gear their race towards my particular seat with no limits whatsoever because we don't have state-wide campaign finance reform.
I don't know the question. Again, let the record be clear that it does not apply to my bill.
Councilman Clarke, are you asking Councilman Goode?
You're questioning me about a bill that already passed?
I don't view the two bills as being totally connected. I do support both bills, but I'm not going to answer a question about a bill that already passed.
That's fine. I'll bring it up as an informational point as it relates to this discussion.
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman Cohen.
Thank you, Madam President. For Councilman Kenney, who I believe the record show is the largest fund-raiser among City Councilmembers in campaigns, for him to have seen the day of light as he does in this bill, I think, is great. I think Councilman Kenney is right on the ball in this bill just as I though he was dead wrong this morning when he supported Councilman DiCicco on the Port Richmond bill. Excuse me for making that dig, but expect it to be repeated until it comes to everybody's mind. And if Councilman Kenney can be converted to being a opponent of the kind of loose fund-raising that take place this days, I think there's hope for everybody. I will be supporting Councilman Kenney's bill fully. I think it's a real step in the right direction.
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman Kenney.
Thank you, Madam Councilman Cohen's remarks. I respect him tremendously. But let me tell you, being a prolific fund-raiser is not fun; it is a chore, it is a job, it is embarrassing and degrading. And to continue to have to ask people for money all the time because of the -- I mean, I spent close to if not over $400,000 in this last election as an endorsed third-term incumbent, endorsed democratic candidate in a primary. So I recognize how difficult it is to raise money all the time. And what I would like to do is, along with supporting Councilman Goode's legislation, is to change this environment so that we don't have to beat up our friends and supporters for more dollars every time we run for office. But thank you for your kind comments, Councilman.
Thank you. Anyone else want to be recognized? The Chair again recognizes Councilman Clarke.
Yes, Madam Chair, and I'll be brief. I'm just concerned about this alleged environment, and to be honest with you, having worked in the City, worked in the council district for 20 years, I can count on -- and this time I'll limit it to my hands -my hands the number of times individuals in my district has raised this as an issue. Whereas, every other day, if not every day, I see it in the newspaper, but I never hear people in districts, people who walk the streets raise this an issue. So my question is, be it perception or whatever, how much of an issue is this with the population of the City of Philadelphia? In the recent mayoral election, the targeted candidate by at least one of the newspapers there was a continual reference, even by the newspaper that supported the Mayor, reference to this pay to play scheme. But yet the Mayor won by 85,000 votes. Now, I know some people would like to contribute that to the folks at Sixth and Arch, but I have to think that realistically a lot of people cast the candidate because they thought the candidate was doing a good job. And if you look at the rankings with respect to the polls, that was so far down on the polls as issues as it related to concerns of residents, I'm wondering is this issue really an issue for the press or is it an issue for the average citizen? And I, frankly speaking, don't think it is, given what I hear out on the street. So I don't think it is as big an issue in the general population as we're making it out to be here today or as it is in the newspaper. Thank you, Madam President.
You're welcome. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Brown.
Thank you, Madam President. I'd like to directly answer Councilman Clarke's question. There was a poll done for the general election of issues that matter and resonate with Philadelphia voters, and the No. 1 issue was improving the public education system in our City, with lowering taxes as the second. Of the 10 issues cited, campaign finance reform ranked No. 8.
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman Kenney again.
Thank you, Madam President. I just would like to comment that I understand Councilman Clarke's position. I do believe that it is -- I respect his position. I do believe it is more a pressing issue than would seen in the polls, because polls are usually conducted by people who have a specific agenda and are paying to see how that goes. Councilwoman Brown's comments are interesting to me because I believe -- and this is my personal belief -- that the way in which we conduct business in the City actually cost the taxpayers more money. That is my believe. Now, there's no way to actually quantify it, but I believe that when you have a bond deal than we had before, it's going to cost more money. And my position on that is that when we're trying to find the resources to improve our schools and to improve tax structure and our other things, I think a lot of that money goes in that direction as opposed to direct services to people. So a lot of it is hidden within the cost of doing business in the City, and I think that that's important issue. I would just like to say prior to the vote that I want to thank my colleagues for the very respect and thoughtful way in which this debate was conducted. I think we've come a long way over the years to be able to disagree and ask questions and to have a dialog about issues. So I want to thank, however the bill goes, I want to thank my colleagues who spoke for their thoughtful comments and for their civility in this whole debate. So I thank you very much.
Thank you, Madam President. I appreciate Councilman Clarke and Councilwoman Brown being so anxious to indicate that the Mayor suddenly developed this huge popularity in the last few days of the campaign based upon his record. I think more likely he got that tremendous vote of support based upon the people's understanding that President Bush and the Republican Party were up to their dirty tricks again against a minority population as he's been for many, many years. But in any event, I certainly don't think that the bug incident suddenly won support for the Mayor's program. It certainly won support against any dirty tricks by President Bush and it did that rightly and it helped to unify the people behind the Mayor. But anybody who thinks that the Goldenberg Group made a contribution of $165,000 to the Mayor late October didn't expect a return, obviously is pledge smoking or something or other. Obviously, Goldenberg thought it was going to pay off. It looked good, didn't it, when he came here with his whole bevy of attorneys and supporters? But he's found life difficult so he's had to advertise, as most of you saw in the Inquirer saying that his motivation was pure and simple. We'll let the American people judge and the people of Philadelphia. But we wouldn't be in the position of having people question things like the TIF that Goldenberg was trying to get five million, maybe six and a quarter million dollar return on a $165,000 investment. As long as businessmen are free to invest, they're going to invest in political campaigns because it gives the biggest possible return. I know of no business that would make the return of five to six and a quarter million dollars on an investment of 165,000; or if you want to count all of his contributions, on an investment of a half million. It's an enormous return. And if a businessman wasn't good at getting returns, he wouldn't stay in business long. So it's not a question just of morality, though some of that is involved, it's a question of ethics, a question of confidence of people in their government. Government ought to act in such a way that everybody knows the decision is being made on merit, not on political contributions. And I'm supporting Councilman Kenney's bill because I think it's a good, long-needed step overdue for many, many years to clean up the atmosphere in Philadelphia. So I urge all my colleagues, please rethink your positions. I think this bill ought to be supported. Whether it's legal or not, that will depend on the courts, but we can do our share here today. Thank you.
Thank you, Councilman. At this time I would ask the Clerk to please call the roll. THE
Aye. The vote is 7-7. The motion fails. I would ask the Clerk to please read the title of Bill No. 030642. THE
An ordinance authorizing the Commissioner of Public Property on behalf of the City of Philadelphia to purchase from the United States Postal Service fee simple title to a parcel of land known as 3061 Island Avenue.
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
Aye. The ayes are 14, the nays are 0. A majority of all Members having voted in the affirmative, the bill passes. The next bill being called for consideration is Bill No. 030662. THE
An ordinance authorizing the Commissioner of Public Property to execute and deliver to the Redevelopment Authority of the City of Philadelphia without consideration a deed to the Mount Tabor Community Education and Economic Development Corporation a Redevelopment Authority redevelopment agreement.
Thank you, Madam President. Madam President, I would like to offer an amendment for Bill No. 030662. I have distributed the amendment earlier. The amendment essentially places the address of the parcel of land. In the public hearing earlier, there was not specific address. That address is 907-959, 973-1003 North Seventh Street. This is a project that will, hopefully, be done by Mount Tabor Church. They're hoping to build a senior citizen development, and the Redevelopment Authority will convey that. So it is a technical amendment.
Thank you. Any questions on the amendment? (No response.) Councilman, did you make a motion?
Madam President, I'd like ask for a motion on the amendment for Bill No. 030662. (Duly seconded.)
It has been moved and seconded that the motion, as presented, be adopted. All in favor will say aye. (Aye.)
The ayes have it, and the Bill No. 030662 has been amended. The Clerk will please read the title of Bill No. 030684. THE
An ordinance authorizing the Commissioner of Public Property on behalf of the City of Philadelphia to purchase fee simple title to a certain parcel of land known as 2212 West Indiana Avenue.
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
Aye. The ayes are 14, the nays are 0. A majority of all Members having voted in the affirmative, this bill passes. The next bill being called for consideration is Bill No. 030689. THE
An ordinance authorizing the Commissioner of Public Property on behalf of the City of Philadelphia to exchange fee simple title to certain Fairmount Park land with the improvements thereon located northeast of Manayunk Canal.
This bill on two different days, the question now is shall the bill pass finally. The Clerk will please call the roll. THE
Aye. The ayes are 13, the nays are 0. A majority of all Members having voted in the affirmative, the bill passes. (The vote is 14 to 0. Councilman Kenney recorded as voting aye.) Bill No. 030711 is to be called please.
An ordinance amending Section 15-201 of the Philadelphia Code relating to areas under the care and jurisdiction of the Fairmount Park Commission.
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
Aye. The ayes are 13, the nays are 0. A majority of all Members having voted in the affirmative, the bill passes. (The vote is 14-0. Councilman. Kenney recorded as voting aye.) The next bill being called for consideration is Bill No. 030713. THE
An ordinance amending Chapter 17-100 of the Philadelphia Code, entitled "Procurement Contracts," by adding a provision requiring that every contract which permits any person to place an advertising on City-owned or controlled property shall include a provision prohibiting the placement on such property of advertisements for alcohol, under certain terms and conditions.
This bill having been read on two different days, the question now is shall the bill pass finally. Councilman Cohen, you wish to be recognized, sir?
I'm supporting this bill, but I think it doesn't go nearly far enough. I think it ought to ban all advertising on any City-owned property to make that the City is not for sale. Generally today, it's thought to be for sale. And what the discussions that occurred just recently on campaign financing indicate a lot of concern on the part of many, many people, probably an overwhelming majority of Philadelphians who think the City is for sale and there's a lot of evidence to indicate that. But this bill is the beginning by banning the worst of the advertising that affects the communities in Philadelphia, the liquor and tobacco, and therefore I will be supporting it.
Thank you. The Clerk will please call the roll. THE
Is Councilwoman Miller in the room? Please proceed.
Aye. The ayes are 12, the nays are 0. A majority of all Members having voted in the affirmative, the bill passes. (The vote is 14-0. Councilmembers Kenney and Miller recorded as voting aye.)
The next bill being called for consideration is Bill No. 030671 THE
An ordinance amending Section 9-205 of the Philadelphia Code relating to sidewalk sales by restricting the prohibition of sidewalk sales on that portion of South Street and 900 West Nedro Avenue.
This bill on two different days, the question now is shall the bill pass finally. The Clerk will please call the roll. THE
Aye. The ayes are 12, the nays are 0. A majority of all Members having voted in the affirmative, the bill passes. (The vote is 14-0. Councilmembers Kenney and Miller recorded as voting aye.)
The next for consideration is on top of , Bill No. 030672. THE
An ordinance amending Section 2 of an ordinance, Bill No. 010268, approved August 31, 2001, entitled an ordinance to authorize the vacating of River Road to the Philadelphia/Montgomery County line, as amended.
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
Aye. The ayes are 12, the nays are 0. A majority of all Members having voted in the affirmative, the bill passes. (The vote is 14-0. Councilmembers Kenney and Miller recorded as voting aye.) The Clerk will please call the roll. THE
Aye. The ayes are 16, the nays are 0. A Members having voted in the affirmative, the bill passes. The next bill being called for consideration Bill No. 030681. THE
An ordinance authorizing the revision of lines and grades on a portion of City Plan No. 24S for the gas main purposes, under certain terms and conditions.
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
Aye. The ayes are 13, the nays are 0. A majority of all Members having voted in the affirmative, the bill passes. (The vote is 14-0. Councilman Kenney recorded as voting aye.)
The next bill to be called for consideration is bill 030683. THE
An ordinance amending Section 9-205 of the Philadelphia Code relating to sidewalk sales to permit sidewalk sales on Germantown Avenue, under certain terms and conditions.
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
Aye. The ayes are 13, the nays are 0. A majority of all Members having voted in the affirmative, the bill passes. (The vote is 14-0. Councilman Kenney recorded as voting aye.)
The next bill to be considered is Bill 030685. THE
An ordinance granting permission of Sally Ferry, owner of Sprig's Restaurant to operate and maintain an open air sidewalk cafe on the west footway of Midvale, under certain terms and conditions.
This bill having been read on two different days, the shall the bill pass finally. The Clerk will please call the roll. THE
Aye. The ayes are 14, the nays are 0. A majority of all Members having voted in the affirmative, the bill passes. The next being called for consideration is Bill No. 030687. The Chair recognizes Councilman Kenney.
Thank you, Madam President. I would like to be recorded as all bills I missed while I was out of the room.
The record will so indicate. Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Miller.
Thank you, Madam President. I'd also like to be recorded as voting aye in my absence, not being the room.
Thank you, Madam President. With Councilwoman Miller and Councilman Kenney putting on the record their votes for the bills that they missed, could the President put on the record what the actual total votes were for all of those particular bills?
Certainly. The two bills that were voted by 13 to 0, I was absent. He is now voting in favor, so the two bills would now be 14 to 0.
Bill Nos. 030713, 030671, 030672, 030681, and 030683, both Councilwoman Miller and Councilman Kenney were out of the room. The vote had been 12 to 0. The record will now indicate that the vote is 14 to 0 on those bills. THE
Bill No. 030687, an ordinance granting permission to Sandra Davis, owner of Hidden River Cafe, to operate and maintain an open air sidewalk cafe on the north footway of Krail Street.
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
Madam President, I would like to vote yes for this bill, and I would like to be excused from Council for a meeting in my office and vote yes for the rest of the bills.
Aye. The ayes are 14, the nays are 0. A majority of all Members having voted in the affirmative, the bill passes. The Bill No. 030688. THE
An ordinance authorizing the revision of lines and grades on a portion of City plan 163 for gas main purposes in the vicinity of Ridge Avenue and
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
Aye. The ayes are 14, the nays are 0. A majority of all Members having voted in the affirmative, the bill passes. The next bill being called for consideration is Bill No. 030691. THE
An ordinance authorizing construction of sanitary sewer and appurtenant work on portions of West View Street, Springbank Street through Fairmount Park to Kitchens Lane.
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
Aye. The ayes are 13, the nays are 0. A majority of all Members having voted in the affirmative, the bill passes. (The vote is 14-0. Councilwoman Tasco recorded as voting aye.)
The next called for consideration is Bill No. 030692. THE
An ordinance authorizing the Water Commissioner on behalf of the City to enter into an agreement with the owner of 10 Westview Street, under certain terms and conditions.
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
Aye. The ayes are 13, the nays are 0. A Members having voted in the affirmative, the bill passes. (The vote is 14-0. Councilwoman Tasco recorded as voting aye.) The next bill to be called for consideration is Bill No. 030693. THE
An ordinance authorizing the construction of sanitary sewer and appurtenant work on portions of Dearly Street and Hillside Street.
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
Aye. The ayes are 14, the nays are 0. A majority of all Members having voted in the affirmative, the bill passes. The next bill to be called for consideration is Bill No. 030694. THE
An ordinance authorizing the Water Commissioner on behalf of the City to enter into an agreement with the owner of the property 201-299 Shawmont Avenue, all under certain terms and conditions.
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
Aye. The ayes are 13, the nays are 0. A majority of all Members having voted in the affirmative, the bill passes. (The vote is 14-0. Councilwoman Blackwell recorded as voting aye.) The next bill being called for consideration is Bill No. 030696. THE
An ordinance authorizing the revision of lines and grades on a portion of City Plan No. 97 within the bed of Resse Street, under certain terms and conditions.
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
Aye. The ayes are 14, the nays are 0. A majority of all Members having voted in the affirmative, the bill passes. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Blackwell.
Thank you, Madam President. I'd like to recorded as voting aye on the bill I missed when I stepped out of the room.
I think there were a couple bills, were there not?
I'd like to be recorded as voting aye for any bills that I might have missed.
Thank you. The next bill being called for consideration is Bill No. 030697.
An ordinance establishing a no-parking regulation on Red Lion Road between Norcom Road and Roosevelt Boulevard, both sides.
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
Aye. The ayes are 13, the nays are 0. A majority of all Members having voted in the affirmative, the bill passes. (The vote is 14-0. Councilman voting aye.)
The next bill to be called for consideration is Bill No. 030712. THE
An ordinance authorizing the construction of a sewer and appurtenant work required to alleviate unsanitary conditions on a portion of McCallum Street.
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
Aye. 14, the nays are 0. A majority of all Members having voted in the affirmative, the bill passes. The next bill to be called for consideration is Bill No. 030714. THE
An ordinance amending Section 11-505 of the Philadelphia Code entitled "Sidewalk Paving and Other Improvements by Property Owners," all under certain terms and conditions.
Thank you. Councilman Nutter, your light is on. Do you want to be recognized?
Yes, Madam President. Madam President, I just received a phone call. I have a personal emergency. I need to leave the Chambers immediately. I wish to be recorded as voting aye on the rest of the bills on the Calendar, but I need to be excused immediately.
This bill having been read on two different days, the shall the bill pass finally. The Clerk will please call the roll. THE
Aye. The ayes are 13, the nays are 1. A majority of all Members having voted in the affirmative, the bill passes. Would you read the next bill? THE
Bill No. 030715, an ordinance granting permission to St. Joseph's University, a Pennsylvania non-profit corporation, all under certain terms and conditions.
This bill having been read on two different days, the question now is shall the bill pass finally. please call the roll. THE
Aye. The ayes are 14, the nays are 0. A majority of all Members having voted in the affirmative, the bill passes. Our last bill to be called for consideration is Bill No. 030720. THE
An ordinance amending Section 12-2409 of the Philadelphia Code entitled, "Towing Zone Locations and Hours," by providing for additional towing zone locations, under certain terms and conditions.
This bill having been read on two different days, the shall the bill pass finally? The Clerk will please call the roll. Excuse me. Councilwoman Tasco, your light is on. Did you want to be recognized?
Madam President. I'd like to recorded as voting aye on the bills that I missed while I was out of the room. THE
Aye. The ayes are 14, the nays are 0. A majority of all Council having voted in the affirmative, the bill passes. At this time, the Chair recognize Councilwoman Krajewski for a motion on Resolution No. 030575.
Can I just make sure that I was recorded aye on Bill No. 030697, which I sponsored. It's on , second bill.
What bill number was that. COUNCILMAN O'Neill: 030697.
Very well. The record will so reflect that Councilman O'Neill voted in the affirmative on Bill No. 030697.
Again, the Chair recognizes Councilwoman Krajewski for a motion.
Move for the adoption of the resolution. (Duly seconded.)
It has been moved and properly seconded that Resolution No. 030575 be adopted. All in favor will signify by saying (Aye.)
The ayes have it. Resolution No. 030575 has been adopted. That concludes the Calendar for today. Are there any speeches on the part of the Minority? (No response.)
Are there any speeches on the part of the Majority? (No response.)
Seeing none, the Chair recognizes Councilwoman Tasco for a motion to adjourn.
Madam President, I move that Council stand adjourned until Thursday, December 11th at 10:00 a.m.
It has been moved and seconded that Council stand adjourned until December 11th at 10:00 a.m. All in favor will say aye. (Aye.)
The ayes have it. And Council will stand adjourned until December the 11th. (Council adjourned at 1:15 p.m.) C E R T I F I C A T I O N I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing proceedings of the Council of the City of Philadelphia of Thursday, December 4, 2003, were reported fully and accurately by me, and that this is a correct transcript of the same. RE: STATED MEETING _________________________ Lisa C. Bradley, RPR