Aye. 05/01/03 - STATED - 2ND READING AND FINAL PASSAGE THE
Aye. The ayes are 16, the nays are 0. A two-thirds majority having voted in the affirmative, the resolution has been adopted. (Applause.)
The Clerk will please read the title of Resolution No. 030231. THE
A resolution proposing an amendment to the Philadelphia Home Rule Charter to create the Office of the Insurance Public Advocate and providing for submission of the amendment to the electors of Philadelphia.
Thank you, Madam President. I move for the adoption of the resolution. (Duly seconded.)
Since Resolution No. 030231 proposes an amendment to the 05/01/03 - STATED - 2ND READING AND FINAL PASSAGE Home Rule Charter, it requires the approval of two-thirds of the Members of this Council. The Clerk will please call the roll. THE
Madam President, I have to abstain on this particular resolution. Currently serving as the Co-Chair of the Mayor's Automobile Insurance Task Force, we are currently indicating three cases before the Insurance Commissioner, and I think that it would be inappropriate to vote for this resolution today.
Aye. 05/01/03 - STATED - 2ND READING AND FINAL PASSAGE THE
I have a quandary here. I'm in favor of this. I signed it, but since my Co-Chair seems to think -- I think I need some legal advice here. If we're going to get in trouble, I don't need anymore trouble. Can I speak to the lawyer? Let me talk to Council's counsel first.
Would you please proceed. We'll come back to Councilman Mariano. THE
Aye. 05/01/03 - STATED - 2ND READING AND FINAL PASSAGE THE
Aye. Councilman Mariano, have you decided how you're voting?
I've spoke with my bevy of lawyers in the back here that you so graciously supplied for me and, listen, I'm going to have to abstain, too. Thank you.
You're welcome. So the ayes are 14. And the record will reflect there were 2 abstention. A two-thirds majority having voted in the affirmative, Resolution No. 030231 has been adopted.
The Chief Clerk will please read the title of Bill No. 020728 on . THE
An ordinance amending Title 21 of the Philadelphia Code, entitled "Miscellaneous," by adding provisions requiring 05/01/03 - STATED - 2ND READING AND FINAL PASSAGE members of Board and Commissions of the City of Philadelphia to conduct certain of their deliberations, including deliberations with respect to adjudications pending before the board or commission only at meetings open to the public with certain exceptions and 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. 05/01/03 - STATED - 2ND READING AND FINAL PASSAGE THE
Aye. The ayes are 15; the nays, 1. This bill 05/01/03 - STATED - 2ND READING AND FINAL PASSAGE having majority of members voting in the affirmative it passes. The next bill to be called for consideration is Bill No. 030068. THE
An ordinance to amend the Philadelphia Zoning Maps by changing the zoning designations of certain areas of land located within an area bounded by Bridge Street and Frankford Creek.
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. 05/01/03 - STATED - 2ND READING AND FINAL PASSAGE THE
Council President Verna. 05/01/03 - STATED - 2ND READING AND FINAL PASSAGE
Aye. The ayes are 16, the nays are 0. A majority of all Members of Council having voted in the affirmative, the bill passes. The next bill to be called for consideration is Bill No. 030163. THE
An ordinance amending Chapter 19-1500 of the Philadelphia Code, entitled "Wage and Net Profits Tax," by decreasing in stages the rates of the tax imposed upon certain low income persons and providing for refunds of excess taxes paid, all under certain terms and conditions.
Thank you. Councilman Nutter, your light is on. Do you care to be recognized.
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman Cohen. Councilman Cohen, you want to be recognized? We're considering Bill No. 030163.
This is the bill 05/01/03 - STATED - 2ND READING AND FINAL PASSAGE which will introduce for the first time fairness and equity in the City wage tax. In the City of Philadelphia, long known as a City that supports labor and low-income people and working people, the City wage tax represents a very regressive, unfair tax because it attacks the poorest citizens no matter how little they make. Whenever anybody earns anything -- for example, originally, until a legislation that I introduced about 20 years ago passed, even an election day worker who worked two days a year earning at that time about $50 each day for serving on the Election Board had a wage tax deducted. What this means is that -- what Councilman Lucien Blackwell used to describe as the little old ladies with the gray sneakers who would do a little baby-sitting or get a part-time job at a department store nearby or a retail shop, whatever they made to supplement their small social security income would be taxed. At the federal and at the state levels, people with lower incomes are exempt from income taxation. Yet here in Philadelphia, they pay the wage tax. That's very unfair. It's unfair to senior citizens who often times have to get a part-time job to supplement their small social 05/01/03 - STATED - 2ND READING AND FINAL PASSAGE security payments. Sometimes it's unfair to a single mother to gets a little job and maybe earns 5,000 or $10,000 a year earning it but pays a wage tax. This bill is aimed at using the same standards that the state and federal government use to determine exemption from income taxation. And it introduces fairness and equity in our tax system in Philadelphia. We have a very impressive NTI program, the Neighborhood Transformation Plan. It is aimed at rebuilding neighborhood. But a real problem in the neighborhoods is that retail businesses can't stay in the neighborhood because there isn't enough income in the neighborhood. We know that when you add money to the income of people who live in the neighborhoods in Philadelphia, you increase the purchasing power so that can also be seen as a way of revitalizing neighborhoods. It fits perfectly into a plan to rebuild our neighborhoods, to get supermarkets, retail shoe stores, clothing stores, and so forth into the neighborhoods. It also stimulates business economy because it means that workers from an outside plant 05/01/03 - STATED - 2ND READING AND FINAL PASSAGE or from an outside retail establishment don't face the loss of 4 to 5 percent in their income if the company moves into Philadelphia neighborhood because once they move into the neighborhood, the wage tax applies. This is a win/win for everybody and it would be forward and historic moment in Philadelphia life. It would indicate that we're fair to everybody. Just before on the universal health matter, we dealt with a matter which is strange in that the very low income have more health protection than the upper income and the middle group that. That resolution looking for a Home Rule amendment was aimed at giving fairness to middle-income workers. This bill is aimed at giving fairness to the low-income workers by increasing their income. In the past, whenever this matter has been voted upon in City Council 12, that's three-quarters of the current Members have indicated their support. Eleven of them have voted for this bill when it was before the Committee on the Whole in an earlier version. The earlier version, this bill over a six-year period would cut the wage tax a 05/01/03 - STATED - 2ND READING AND FINAL PASSAGE half percent each year. But the first time the City would have to pay out money to refund wage tax payments under this bill would not occur until 2006. So that the City has plenty of time to make the plans. It is my judgment -- I can't say I can prove it by hard facts. It's my judgment that this bill will not cost any money but will actually make money for the City because it will produce a healthier City.
But in the event that the Mayor's concerns proved to be true and there is some kind of a loss, it the won't be very much. But that's the reason for this version of the bill which sets this working date two years later. It gives the Mayor two more years, any Mayor. The current Mayor or whoever is Mayor at the time. This bill comes into life, gives them two more years to plan the program. It's the road to fairness and justice, and I point out that 12 of the 16 Councilmembers have supported this in the past; one, through sponsorship of the original bill, and 11 who voted for it for the Finance Committee. Whenever there's been a vote, it's had strong support in City Council. I hope that will be the case today. Thank 05/01/03 - STATED - 2ND READING AND FINAL PASSAGE you, Madam president.
You're welcome, sir. The Chair recognizes Councilman Ortiz.
Madam Chair, I'll be brief. We have given tax relief here to the very rich and the upper echelons of society. This affects those individuals that make $30,000 or less. I suggest that my colleagues support this legislation. Thank you.
You're welcome. The Chair recognizes Councilman Kenney.
Thank you, Madam President. I know that our Rules provide for the opportunity to propose a motion to table any bill that's before this Council on final passage. Frankly, I don't understand how that rule historically ever came about. I'm sure there must me some legislative history as to why in this particular Rule of Order that we follow here, why a motion to table exists at all. I really think people need to know, especially on an issue as important as this how we stand on things, what we 05/01/03 - STATED - 2ND READING AND FINAL PASSAGE believe and whether or not we're willing to cast our vote based on our beliefs. I don't think I've every -- and correct me if I'm wrong; I think the record will. But I don't think I've ever proposed a motion to table in almost 12 years that I've been here. I don't mind taking a stand and taking a position and also taking some grief for it or some praise for it if in fact it's due to me. But I think that we really need on this important issue to let ourselves and let our constituents know where we stand. And if a motion to table is issued, I duly thing we're putting our constituents and voters and taxpayers at a severe disadvantage not knowing where we stand on a particular issue as important as this. Thank you, Madam President.
You're welcome. The Chair recognizes Councilman Clarke.
Thank you, Madam President. Madam President, while I am truly supportive of this particular initiative conceptually, one of the concerns that I have, first of all, is that we didn't do this before we did Bill 92 because I think that, frankly speaking, providing relief to those most needy should have been a part 05/01/03 - STATED - 2ND READING AND FINAL PASSAGE of our earlier agenda as it relates to wage tax cuts. But I do have a couple concerns about the timing of this. One is the proposed state budget where Governor Rendell, if he's successful in getting reductions through the state for wage taxes for the citizens of Philadelphia, hopefully below 4 percent, that obviously will have a substantial impact, not only on low-income individuals, but people across the City of Philadelphia. And I'm not sure how this particular bill impacts upon that as we move ahead. So I, frankly speaking, would have liked for the sponsor to hold this particular bill. And I'm not suggesting that he's going to do that, but I would have like to have seen him hold this because I am interested in the issue. Until after the State finishes its budget process, particularly since one of the primary focuses of that is wage tax cuts for citizens for the City of Philadelphia. The other issue is as it relates to its impact on the Five-Year Plan, which I understand that we will probably have to resubmit a new Five-Year Plan. I'm not clear how this will impact the out years. In the earlier version, as the 05/01/03 - STATED - 2ND READING AND FINAL PASSAGE Councilman indicated, there was a substantial -based on Administration projections -- substantial increase in the first fiscal year. And fortunately the Councilman has moved this process back, but it still could impact on the Five-Year Plan and I'm somewhat concerned without seeing an analysis of what that would be on that Five-Year Plan, which also we haven't determined what it will ultimately be, us locking ourselves into some legislation that can impact on that without knowing what ultimately both the State and the five-year projection will be for this particular bill. I would like to ask -- I don't anticipate that I'll receive a positive response, but I would like to ask the sponsor to hold the bill until we can, at a minimum, receive the Five-Year Plan next, I believe, and hopefully, most ideally, to wait until the State is finished in its deliberations on this wage tax cut proposal for the citizens of Philadelphia.
I would not want to wait until the State acted. I have no idea when the State will act. I don't know how they will accept 05/01/03 - STATED - 2ND READING AND FINAL PASSAGE Governor Rendell's proposal. I hope Governor Rendell's wage tax proposal will incorporate this idea because it makes sense, it's good judgment; and if we pass it, it will be an indication to the Mayor that that's the way he ought to go instead of having the same kind of wage tax cut that occurred before that applied to everybody and gave very little relief to the people in the neighborhoods and to low-income workers. So I don't think it's wise to wait. I think we've got to act. But in the event that there were some unforeseen great problems, the beauty of this bill is that it gives us plenty of time to correct it. In the Caucus, I talked about the Mayor having followed the Mariano principle. Councilman Mariano introduced a bill that might affect revenue cuts a couple of years down the road, and the Mayor said, "Yes, I can sign it because this if something develops and we have to revisit the question, we have the time to do it." So I suggest we have plenty of time to revisit this question if it ever prove necessary. As I said in my opening statement, actually no refunds will be paid until either the end of Year 6 which is 3 and a half years from now, or Year 7 05/01/03 - STATED - 2ND READING AND FINAL PASSAGE which is 4 years from now. Plenty of time to reconsider changes. In life, we learn things occur to change the situation day by day. Although everything seems permanent today, by tomorrow it may look altogether different. But this sets a plan in motion, it sets Philadelphia on a fairness course, and it will be ample time to make any changes if ever any were needed. I would hope not because I think this, for the first time, as I said before, introduces fairness into the tax structure. Thank you.
Thank you, Councilman. The Chair recognizes Councilman Clarke.
Thank you, Madam President. I'll try not to delay the issue. A couple of things in response to my colleague's statement. One was it's impact as it related to the State and your preference that the State would use this as a framework. I want to ask the question, have we talked to anyone from the Governor's Budget Office to talk about him adopting the principles of this particular bill. As the State deliberates on this -05/01/03 - STATED - 2ND READING AND FINAL PASSAGE
Not as yet because there's no reason to until the Council takes action.
Well, I've never known to be a barrier from having a discussion.
Because it would have no meaning to propose an idea that hasn't taking any form. If we pass this bill, which I hope we will, and the Mayor signs it, I will certainly be moving in the direction of Governor Rendell very, very quickly because it will be expression of what Philadelphia desires. And that's what I would hope to do, and this will indicate whether there is sufficient support in City Council for that bill.
I've never known the passage of the bill to be barrier for dialog. So to suggest that we have pass the bill before we can have a dialog with the Governor's Office -
Well, if you know Governor Rendell, you know you're waisting your time unless you have something very specific. And very specifically, we'll have this bill and say "This is the will of City Council," hopefully, also the will of the Mayor, and then we'll have a strong point. At least that's my point of view. But I would have 05/01/03 - STATED - 2ND READING AND FINAL PASSAGE no objection if you raised it today with Governor Rendell. I think the more people that raise it, the better. But my view is that we have to have action locally or Governor Rendell has an easy answer. He says, "What are you talk about? That's your idea. Tell me what the City feels."
I don't know that particular Governor. I found the Governor to be open to debate. He may not ultimately agree with your proposal, but I've never known him not to hear it, whatever stage -
Well, he can hear whatever, but I'm talking about Philadelphia policy, not Governor policy. I don't understand why we should wait to have the Governor of Pennsylvania decide whether it's a good thing. What we are trying to do is formulate policy covering the people of Philadelphia. He is now the Governor; he's not the Mayor. And we want to go to him in a strong position, not a weak-kneed position on our knees, saying "Dear Mr. Mayor, would you consider at some later point the idea of helping the poor folks who earn small sums of money in Philadelphia to exempt them from the wage tax." 05/01/03 - STATED - 2ND READING AND FINAL PASSAGE I want to go to him saying, "This City Council has spoken on this issue." They represent the people of Philadelphia, as they're elected represent. We don't wait until Governors or Mayors tell us what to do. We have a responsibility to our constituents to express our opinion and then to fight for that, and that's what I intend to do. (Applause.)
Councilman, I don't want to get into a spirited debate with you, because I surely would lose.
I'm simply suggesting that given the fact that we have a money problem on the state level, on the national level, on the municipal level, that we sit down and have some reasonable dialog before we bankrupt the City. That's all I'm asking you to do.
Well, how come with growing deficits with the elimination of surplus at the federal level, the President of the United States is still calling for tax cuts for the rich? I mean, that's happening now, and we're not getting 05/01/03 - STATED - 2ND READING AND FINAL PASSAGE any tax relief for working people. It's about time we got some tax relief. And it won't bankrupt Philadelphia. As I said before, it's going to strengthen particularly your district, the non-affluent part of your district -- Councilman Clarke has a district of both rich and poor. He probably combines the -- he has in his district the richest part Philadelphia and the poorest. But for the poorest areas we need this. We've got to strengthen our neighborhoods because we have, not only loss the jobs in the City, we have the loss of people.
The Chair recognizes Councilman Goode for a point of order.
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
Councilman Clarke. 05/01/03 - STATED - 2ND READING AND FINAL PASSAGE
Councilwoman Reynolds Brown. 05/01/03 - STATED - 2ND READING AND FINAL PASSAGE
Aye. The ayes are 11, the nays are 5. The majority of all members having voted in the affirmative, the bill passes. (Applause.)