It has been moved and properly seconded that the rules of Council be suspended in order to permit first reading this day of Bill No. 010125, 010126, 010560, 010617, 010632, 010666, 010718, and 010745. All in favor will signify by saying aye. Those opposed? The ayes have it, and the bills just read will be placed on today's first-reading calendar. 2/5/02 STATED - COMMITTEE REPORTS The Chair recognizes Councilman Goode for a report from the Committee on Transportation and Public Utilities.
Thank you, Madam President. The Committee on Transportation and Public Utilities reports out one bill for a favorable recommendation.
To the President and Members of the Council of the City of Philadelphia, the Committee on Transportation and Public Utilities, to which was referred Bill No. 010340, an ordinance amending Section 10-602 of the Philadelphia Code with respect to smoking on any vehicle of public transportation and in any public transit station or fare-paid area and increasing the amount to be paid in response to a violation notice to waive court appearance, respectfully reports it has considered the same and returns the attached bill to Council with a favorable recommendation.
Thank you. Bill No. 010340 will be placed on the first-reading calendar for our next session of Council. 2/5/02 STATED - COMMITTEE REPORTS The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Blackwell for a motion on Resolution No. 010672.
Thank you, Madam President. I move the adoption of Resolution 010672. (Duly seconded.)
It has been moved and properly seconded that Resolution No. 010672 be adopted. All in favor will signify by saying aye. Those opposed? The ayes have it, and Resolution No. 010672 has been adopted. 2/5/02 STATED - RECONSIDERATION OF BILL 010493-A
Council will now proceed under a special order of business to reconsider Bill No. 010493-A. This bill was passed by the Council on December 20, 2001 and was returned disapproved by the Mayor to the January 29, 2002 session of Council. At this time, the Chair recognizes Councilman Kenney.
Thank you, Madam President. I move that Council reconsider Bill No. 010493-A, which was approved by Council on December 2001. (Duly seconded.)
Madam President, may I speak prior to the vote being taken?
Thank you very much. Thank you, Madam President As everyone knows, this bill would 2/5/02 STATED - RECONSIDERATION OF BILL 010493-A eliminate the provision created by Council in 1953 that requires all civil-service employees to reside in the City for at least one year prior to any appointment of any civil-service job. " Requiring job applicants to already live in the City prior to their appointment hinders our ability to attract the most qualified applicants and discourages potential employees from moving to Philadelphia. Considering that we lost nearly 70,000 residents in the last decade, a new approach is needed to send the message that Philadelphia welcomes and encourages people to move into our city, including any potential applicants for our municipal jobs. In these economically difficult times, this is certainly no time to consider eliminating Philadelphia's residency for its employees once 2/5/02 STATED - RECONSIDERATION OF BILL 010493-A they are employed, and this bill would still require that all employees continue to live in the City of Philadelphia if they're employed by the City. Native Philadelphians, I believe, native-born Philadelphians, and residents of Philadelphia currently, I believe, are very competitive people. I think that they can compete with anyone in the nation, and I think the people who live in the City who would like to have City employment should have no fear of people outside the City; I think that they're competent and intelligent people who can compete as well as anyone can compete for jobs that are available within the City. Currently, non-civil-service employees do not have to live in the City for a year prior to application; thus, there is an unfair two-tiered system with two different residence standards, creating an appearance of preferential treatment. Instead, one uniform residency policy should be created for all City employees. Philadelphia is one of only two major cities that require civil servants to be City residents for a year before 2/5/02 STATED - RECONSIDERATION OF BILL 010493-A appointment, and other major cities have decided to eliminate their pre-employment residency requirements in order to attract more residents. Coincidentally, or perhaps not coincidentally, there are only two major cities in the country that have lost population in the last decade; Philadelphia is one of them. In order for this city to come into the modern times, and if it will ever be considered more than a bastion of parochial selfprotectionism, then we need to change the way we do business. We need to pitch the greatness of our city to others in this nation. We must be open to new ideas and to new people. Our municipal employment opportunities are a good way to start, a good resource to use to repopulate our city, and to attract the most qualified employees that we can find. Ironically, we do it now, with stellar appointment by the Mayor to his cabinet and commissioner level. Streets Commissioners Johnson, Recreation Commissioner Richards, Finance Director Davis, former Police Commissioner Timoney are examples of intelligent, bright, dedicated public employees that we sought 2/5/02 STATED - RECONSIDERATION OF BILL 010493-A out from other cities and regions from within the United States. This administration, to veto this bill, has conducted nine national searches for top positions in the last two years. The fact that the Mayor in his veto message said that not one shred of evidence has been presented to why this issue should change should look to his own employment resources and employment techniques, because he has also gone nationwide in looking for employees. So if we can have qualified, dedicated, top-level employees in this City, why not an accountant from California becomes a new resident of Mt. Airy? why not a social worker from Chicago who becomes a neighbor in Manayunk? how about a sanitarian from Michigan who will now reside in West Philadelphia? And on and on and on.
This is an opportunity for us to change the way we do business, and it's difficult to sit here today and make this argument because we already voted on this bill. We had an extensive public hearing, we listened to people testify, we voted to remove the bill from committee, we waited on the floor while I negotiated with Councilmember 2/5/02 STATED - RECONSIDERATION OF BILL 010493-A Clarke, And I want to thank Councilmember Clarke for his recommendation that we amend this bill to eliminate the entry-level, lower-skill labor position from this removal of the requirement for City residency. I listened to him, I understood his concern about people who were trying to gain City employment that maybe had minimal skills or no skills, to give them the first opportunity beyond people outside the City to gain that City employment, and I amended the bill, I considered it a friendly amendment. And we passed bill the 16 to nothing. With the exception of Councilmember Cohen, who, I understand, has been opposed to this philosophically from the beginning, and he expressed that to me in a consistent manner. He was not here that today, and I would assume if he were here, the vote would have been 16 to 1, so this is not directed at him. I would ask that those Councilmembers today who are going to change their vote on this issue -- and I understand there may be some -would just do themselves and this body a favor: In 2/5/02 STATED - RECONSIDERATION OF BILL 010493-A the future, vote against the bill in the first place. Listen to the issues, make up your mind, make a decision, and cast your vote and stay with it. It will in some way retain one of the last shreds of credibility this body may have. Thank you, Madam President.
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman Goode.
Thank you, Madam President. I'm not only going to change my vote on this bill, but I'm changing my sponsorship of this bill. I am one of the original sponsors, but I will be voting to sustain a veto today for some very simple reasons. We've had in the past a recruitment problem in terms of police and teachers, and I think the move has been made to remedy that problem. As I have been told, there are no recruitment problems for the general workforce in terms of City employees, and furthermore, since introduction of this bill, since my agreeing to cosponsor this bill for the right reasons, this city is in a hiring freeze at this point. The 2/5/02 STATED - RECONSIDERATION OF BILL 010493-A issues related to this bill are moot at this point. This bill can be reintroduced at an appropriate time if there is a recruitment problem in terms of the general workforce, so I will be voting to sustain the veto and I will be voting no on the override.
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman Clarke.
Thank you, Madam President. I, in fact, did negotiate an arrangement with respects to one of these on a laborer's issue, but I also voted against that particular bill in committee. That arrangement was after the committee vote. It was essentially a political bill that I thought that I can get the best that I can get out of that particular bill. Had I been able to defeat the bill in committee, I would have done that because I thought that there were more than enough individuals on the waiting list, as testified by the Administration and the personnel director at this particular time. So the particular amendment was relating to simply an elected official trying to getting what they could 2/5/02 STATED - RECONSIDERATION OF BILL 010493-A get out of that particular piece of legislation. And I indicated to Councilman Kenney that I would vote for that particular (inaudible) and I did do that so I just wanted to clarify that for the record.
Thank you. Anyone else want to be recognized? (No response.)
Thank you. A motion was made to reconsider Bill No. 010493-A, and it was seconded. All those in favor -
Madam President, I make this request: Could you please clarify what a "yes" and a "no" vote means so that there's no confusion.
Right now, we're talking about whether it should be reconsidered?
Okay. So if you're voting aye, it would be to reconsider the bill; if you're voting nay, then there's no consideration that would be taken. Everybody clear? Am I making myself clear? Okay. 2/5/02 STATED - RECONSIDERATION OF BILL 010493-A It has been moved and seconded. All those in favor will signify by saying aye.
Aye. Aye the nays are 10, the ayes are 7. A two-thirds majority of the members of Council not having voted in the affirmative, the Mayor's veto is sustained.
The next order of business is consideration of the calendar. The clerk will please read the bills on the 2/5/02 STATED - FIRST-READING BILLS first-reading calendar.
Bill No. 010125, an ordinance amending Title 14 of the Philadelphia Code, entitled "Zoning and Planning," by adding a new Section 14-1601.
And Bill No. 010126, an ordinance amending Title 14 of the Philadelphia Code, entitled "Zoning and Planning," by providing that fortune-teller establishments and tattoo and body-piercing establishments are prohibited uses within the district, all under certain terms and conditions.
And Bill No. 010560, an ordinance to amend the Philadelphia Zoning Maps by changing the zoning designations of certain areas of land located within an area bounded by Poplar Street, Ninth Street, and Percy Street.
And Bill No. 010617, an 2/5/02 STATED - FIRST-READING BILLS ordinance providing that no agreement, memorandum of understanding, or other commitment for the operation, financing, or management of the School District of Philadelphia will substitute for or supersede the functions of the School Board of Education.
And Bill No. 010632, an ordinance to amend the Philadelphia Zoning Maps by changing the zoning designations of certain areas of land located within an area bonded by the general vicinity of the northeast corner of Island Avenue and Lindbergh Boulevard.
And Bill No. 010666, an ordinance proving that no agreement, memorandum of understanding, or other commitment for the private administration, management, or operation of any school within the School District, which would require the appropriation of City funds, the imposition of taxes by the City of Philadelphia or the authorization by City Council of the levying of 2/5/02 STATED - FIRST-READING BILLS taxes on behalf of the School District of Philadelphia.
And Bill No. 010718, an ordinance to amend the Philadelphia Zoning Maps by changing the zoning designations of certain areas of land located within an area of bounded by Chelten Avenue and Germantown Avenue.
And Bill No. 010745, an ordinance to amend the Philadelphia Zoning Maps by changing the zoning designations of certain areas of land located within an area bounded by Christian Street, Christopher Columbus Boulevard, a line 143 feet north the and I-95 Expressway.
The Chair agrees. The bills read by the clerk will be placed on the second-reading and final-passage calendar for our next session. That concludes our first-reading calendar. 2/5/02 STATED - SECOND-READING CALENDAR
The Chair now recognizes Councilwoman Blackwell for the purpose of calling up bills on the second-reading calendar.
Thank you, Madam President. There are no bills being called up for second reading and final passage today.
The Chair thanks Councilwoman. This concludes our calendar. 2/5/02 STATED - ADJOURNMENT
Are there any speeches on the part of the Minority? (No speeches on the part of the Minority.)
Are there any speeches on the part of the Majority? (No speeches on the part of the Minority.)
Seeing none, the Chair recognizes Councilwoman Tasco for a motion to adjourn.
Madam President, I move that the Council stand in recess until Thursday, February the 7th, at 11 a.m.
There's a motion on the floor; is there a second? (Duly seconded.)
It has been moved and seconded that Council stand in recess until Thursday, February 7th at 11 o'clock. All in favor will say aye. Those opposed? The ayes have it and the motion carries. Thank you all very much. 2/5/02 STATED - ADJOURNMENT (Proceedings end at 11:12 a.m.) CERTIFICATE I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing proceedings of the Council of the City of Philadelphia of Tuesday, February 5, 2002 are contained fully and accurately in the stenographic notes taken by me upon, and that this is a true and correct transcript of same. RE: STATED MEETING _______________________________, Josephine Cardillo Registered Professional Reporter and Notary Public (The foregoing certification of this transcript does not apply to any reproduction of the same by any means, unless under the direct control and/or supervision of the certifying reporter.)