Madam President, as I was stating, I was first elected...
As far as I know... Well, I see the light is red again. I've had a very interesting and delightful career over the last 39 years when I was elected the ward leader of the 17th Ward. I'm still the ward leader. I've been the only ward leader the 17th Ward has ever had because that decision to create the 17th Ward came out of the United States Supreme Court decision, which said that stated - 6/21/04 people ought to have certain rights, and all people ought to be treated equally. And therefore, it required a... in those days we called it a one man one vote rule. Now we call it one person one vote rule. And the 17th ward was created. During that time I've had a delightful experience because it's wonderful to see how many people don't seem to be too concerned about government and how people have changed in the years. They've become quite cynical. But I'm not one of those. I've lasted 39 years as the ward leader. I've had ups and downs. Various people have decided that they had too much of Dave Cohen after one year. Some people decided after ten years. And other people now have decided after 39 years. But I haven't so decided nor has the Lord. And until the Lord and I and the voters of Philadelphia decide, I think you're going to have to live with me. Because there's one thing City stated - 6/21/04 Council can do. You can pass this bill today. But I wanted you to know I'll forgive all of you for passing this bill, but I will feel very bad because you will be on a slippery slope. Never before in that 39 year's history has anybody been authorized by a government agency to come into the 17th Ward and tell the people there you have no business making decisions, you have no rights, I am the leader, I'm going to make the decisions for you. Never before have we experienced the history of having community meetings called by a person who makes the decisions against the community. Hears the community, strong objections, and then ignores them. Up until this time I've been working on a theory that one elects representatives in government at every level, including the President of the United States, to be supportive of people, not to take the position that they have, by voting for a stated - 6/21/04 person that you've given that person the right to make all the decisions and taking away their right from voters. So I'm asking all of my colleagues if you want to vote -- If you feel threatened for some reason, and I don't understand why District Council members should feel threatened. In all these years I've never known any District Council member who before believed that because they were District Council members, people who were local leaders, community groups and the residents themselves had given themselves up as sort of hostages, that they've given up their rights to make decisions. It seemed to me that voting is a process by which people strengthen themselves. They don't give up their powers. They exhibited their powers by voting for them. So I say to all my colleagues today, vote whatever way you want. But one thing I think is bad is to permit a legislative stated - 6/21/04 body like this to be used as a tool whereby one Council member fights another Council member on a political basis and uses the Council procedure as a tool. That's all I'm suggesting, that you're embarking on a path that could be dangerous. Because for the first time the Council is taking the position that it's all right for one Council member to go into the domain of another Council member and overrule them politically and overrule the whole community. And I think that's a very unwise thing to do. And for that reason I oppose this bill. There were two meetings this past summer held in our District. The District Council member called the meetings. And no one except the District Council member and their staff spoke in favor of this proposal. The community residents all exhibited their very strong opposition and spoke against these bills.
The District Council member said flatly once and had stated - 6/21/04 another staff member say on another occasion that you would never permit a bill to be introduced on this subject. But we have this bill introduced. I don't think that's the way Council ought to participate, and for that reason I'm opposing the bill. You know, it's a strange thing how it's the importance of a one-way street. It's a single block. It's the roadway to the Expressway, the roadway to Broad Street. It clogs up everything else to divert traffic away from there. And in my judgment there was no study made. We went through the motions of it, but only the report of the Streets Department shows that on one day during the five and a half month period of the test there was a three-day counter, electronic counter, that counted the traffic. And I don't know what that's supposed to do. The report said this -this decision is not one that we would recommend or don't recommend. We take no position, but it's acceptable. stated - 6/21/04 Of course, if you -- it's acceptable because it has eliminated traffic except in the small one-way streets. And it's made life impossible for the neighbors. Now, I don't want to... You know, we pass hundreds of bills on directional signals each year. But certainly, if there's anything that's a local issue, it is the direction of a one-way street. And to me that's got to be a decision made within the 17th Ward. And I respectfully urge my members, my colleagues here not to permit City Council to be used as a means to overrule a local political leader. Now, if that's the case, well, we'll have to see because there are lots of community organizations throughout the City. There are thousands of committee people who are going to be deprived of their local rights by District Council members. I've never known any District Council member here to try to do it. This stated - 6/21/04 is the first case in all these years. Therefore, I suggest that what ought to be done in that Eighth Councilmanic District which happens to have the highest rate of fatalities -- of accidents between pedestrians and autos around the school areas, that the effort ought to be made as a matter of public safety, ought to be made to deal with the terrible public school situation which Girls High, Central High School and the Logan Elementary School and other elementary schools, the Pannel School, are being threatened. Instead, it does not seem to me to warrant the expenditure of time and money to worry about students crossing a 20th Street street. The street is about 15 or 20 feet wide, and I don't think that college students can't walk across one street safely. Incidentally, the report indicates that as a result of the changes, there's been absolutely no change whatever in the stated - 6/21/04 accidents. The accidents average one pedestrian automobile accident each year. It happened before the so-called test. It still exists at the same rate. So I'm just suggesting that this is an issue that City Council ought to stay away from; and therefore, I'm moving to table this motion, this ordinance today.
The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Miller. (Boo's from the audience.)
Thank you, Madam President. I've been a District Council person here for eight years. And in 1996, 1997 -can remember the exact date -- was my first time going over into the community, and to that particular community, to discuss the issue of 20th Street. The community was very angry with stated - 6/21/04 me. And that anger was actually based on a lot of rumors and untruths. And there are people here today that are very angry. And sometimes as a leader you can't make -- you don't make decisions that pleases everyone. What I believe is a strong vibrant community is a community made up of residents, businesses and institutions. As an elected leader, we have to listen to our citizens. We respond to businesses and listen. We respond to our citizens and listen. And we also respond to institutions. LaSalle University is not the only institution in my District. We also have Chestnut Hill College, and we have Temple University, just as an example. And we're always doing something with the institutions. It has been my goal since I've been a Council person to create win-win situations for all, to work on compromises. The one-way is a compromise. stated - 6/21/04 VOICES FROM THE AUDIENCE: No. No.
It is not a permanent closure. VOICES FROM THE AUDIENCE: No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No.
The one-way is a compromise to closing the street permanently. It's an alternative to closing the street permanently. We look for alternatives. Now, does this make everyone happy? No. Are some people using this to promote their political agenda? The answer is yes. VOICES FROM THE AUDIENCE: No. No. No. No. (Shouting from the audience.)
We think it's fair. We don't think that we're creating a lot of harm. Again, it is our goal to promote work on enhanced communities by building strong relationships with residents, businesses and institutions. We met with groups. We worked with block captains -stated - 6/21/04 (Shouting from the audience.)
We worked with block captains, including -(Shouting from the audience.)
Councilwoman, just a minute, please. Let's have respect for each other. I think the Councilwoman is making a statement. I would please request -- I would please request that the speakers not be interrupted. Thank you. Please continue, Councilwoman Miller.
We've worked with block captains. And you know, just as I know, that we get requests all year from people that want to redirect direction of a street. We get them all the time. I just got one a few days ago from a minister that wants to change four streets near his church one way. stated - 6/21/04 This, unlike some of the other streets, is a street where no one resides. The only people on this block -- The only parties on this block actually is LaSalle. We met with block captains, and in our meetings there were actually six 17th Ward committee persons that met with us on a regular basis, and not just two times last summer. And we continue to meet with those same individuals. We've worked on lots of neighborhood issues that deals with life -- quality of life issues in neighborhoods where college students live. And we know it makes people a little bit unhappy about some of the behavior. We worked on a lot of those issues. (Shouting from the audience.)
And at this time I'm not going to continue to go on and on and on, but we think this is a fair compromise. We don't think that it's harmful. And we want to move on and continue to do whatever we can for the stated - 6/21/04 good of the community. Thank you. (Applause.)
Madam President, the Councilwoman speaks of compromise. The only way you get a compromise is when two different parties who have differences agree. But in this case the community was totally excluded, as was the whole political body was excluded from making a decision. Councilwoman Miller's not in the 17th Ward. I don't know who she compromised with. She originally had agreed to close the whole street, and gave that up when she saw it was impossible with the community. And she developed a compromise with LaSalle. The two groups that were trying stated - 6/21/04 to create problems for the community by closing the street decided on what they call a compromise. But the people who live there, it's a wonderful community. The homes are beautiful. But like every community where there is a university, there's always some tension between students who are living away from home. And for 40 years this question has divided the community and the university. And the reason it's divided it is that the university came in originally on the theory that it was going to be a commuter college, that people were going to come each day and leave each day. And over the years the students got to like the area. It's a lovely area. It's very convenient to everything in Philadelphia. The homes are nice. And so, the people decided to live there. And now the institution is beginning to threaten the people in the community with a view that they, the university stated - 6/21/04 people, are the real people in the community. And it's not true. There are residents that have lived there 50 years. I happen to be one, about two blocks away across from the park. But the people that are here are a small group of home owners who are fighting for their lives. When there was a fire there two months ago that was advertised in paper at Ogontz and Olney, the people left their homes. They thought they were going to be able to get in their car and get to the Expressway quickly. But they found they were landlocked because the only place they could get through was Ogontz and Olney. And that was jam packed and the small streets were jam packed. Now, this -- You know, Council is engaged today in a futile exercise because one thing Council does not have the power to do is to amend the United States stated - 6/21/04 Constitution. So that the people in the 17th Ward are going to continue to protest. They're going to be out there, led by seven women, each of whom is more than 70 years old, who every day in the last six months, bear winter days, as well as warm hot days, have been out there on the street protesting. They have a great interest in the homes and in economic value of their place. And they don't understand why it is that an institution doesn't respect their right. They live there. It's their home. And that's what they're fighting for. And so, under the Constitution, even if Council votes this bill today, it's going to mean absolutely nothing. It's an utterly futile act because I can tell you, the protest will continue tomorrow and every workday of the week for as many years as it takes to win this. (Applause and cheers.)
And why Council wants to get involved in a futile stated - 6/21/04 anti-democratic action, I don't know. And Councilwoman Miller, like all of us, are elected through the political process. The one group she's ignored totally is the political organization there, as if it doesn't exist. We're not going to tolerate that. You know, there's so many people that have tried to bring about changes in the 17th Ward because they happen not to like the fact that I fight very hard to have communities feel empowered. Communities ought to have the right to decide the conditions under which they live. And I think Council makes a mistake today by trying to indicate, like Councilman Mariano and Councilman O'Neill, trying to indicate they're not interested at all. They know they're affected by this decision. Because if Council can act against me, it can act against anybody. And why Council wants to take an action to stated - 6/21/04 encourage, fight some -- one Council member, I don't know. But one thing I thought Council members knew about me. And that was, I may look old. I may look decrepit. Maybe I limp when I walk. But when I get into a fight, I always know how to fight, and fight in support of the people. (Cheers and applause.)
And that fight goes on in the 17th Ward regardless. So, thank you. Whatever you decide to do, God bless you. But I think all of you know in your heart that at some point in the future -and I don't think it will be too long -20th Street between Belfield and Olney Avenue will become again a two-way street. (Applause and cheers.)
Because that's what we have a right to. Thank you. (Applause and cheers.)
Thank you. stated - 6/21/04 I would ask the Clerk to please call the roll.
Aye. The ayes are 16. The nays are one. A majority of all members having voted -(Cheers and boos.)
-- in the affirmative, the bill passes. (Extended shouting from the audience.) stated - 6/21/04
The next bill to be called for consideration is Bill Number 040561.
An ordinance authorizing revision of lines and grades -(Extended shouting from the audience.)
The Chief Clerk will please read the title of the bill.
An ordinance authorizing revision of lines and grades on a -(Extended shouting from the audience.)
-- portion of an area of City Plan Number 178, bounded by Olney Avenue, Belfield Avenue, Ogontz Avenue and Wister Street. (Extended shouting from the audience.)
This bill having been read on two different days, the question now is, shall bill pass finally. stated - 6/21/04 The Clerk will please call the roll.
Councilman Nutter stated - 6/21/04 voting aye. Councilman O'Neill.
Aye. The ayes are 16. The nays are one. A majority of all members having voted in the affirmative, the bill passes. (Applause.)
The next bill to be called for consideration is Bill Number 040562.
An ordinance authorizing the installation of an all-way stated - 6/21/04 stop sign at the intersection of Front Street and Elfreths Alley.
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.
Just a moment. I think some of our guests are leaving, so let's wait for a moment. I would ask the Chief Clerk start the roll again, please, regarding Bill Number 040562.
Aye. The ayes are 17. The nays are zero. A majority of all members having voted in the affirmative, the bill passes. The next bill to be called for consideration is Bill Number 040563.
An ordinance authorizing revision of lines and grades in a portion of City Plan Numbers 271 and 146.
This bill having been read on two different days, the question now is, shall the bill pass finally. stated - 6/21/04 The Clerk will please call the roll.
Councilman Nutter stated - 6/21/04 voting aye. Councilman O'Neill.
Aye. The ayes are 17. The nays are zero. A majority of all members having voted in the affirmative, the bill passes. The next bill to be called for consideration is Bill Number 040568.
An ordinance granting permission to Narliss Dizario, owner and operator of the newsstand located on the northwest corner of 16th Street and J.F.K. stated - 6/21/04 Boulevard.
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.
Aye. The ayes are 17. The nays are zero. A majority of all members having voted in the affirmative, the bill passes. The next bill to be called for stated - 6/21/04 consideration is Bill Number 040569.