COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA COMMITTEE ON LAW AND GOVERNMENT Room 400, City Hall Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Thursday, November 19, 2025 1:05 p.m. PRESENT: COUNCILWOMAN KATHERINE GILMORE RICHARDSON, CHAIR COUNCILWOMAN CINDY BASS COUNCILMAN ANTHONY PHILLIPS
COUNCIL PRESIDENT JOHNSON COUNCILMAN ISAIAH THOMAS
241056, 250651, 250950 RESOLUTIONS: 241070, 250970 - - -
All right. Greetings and good afternoon, everyone. I now note that the hour has come to begin today's hearing. Clerk, will you please call the roll to take attendance. Members that are in attendance will please indicate that you are present when your name is called?
I am present. Also, joining us today in chambers is Councilmember Mike Driscoll and also Councilmember and Majority Whip Isaiah Thomas. Thank you both so much for being here. A quorum of the committee is present and the hearing is now called to order. This is the public hearing of the Committee on Law and Government regarding Resolution Nos. 241070 and 250970, and Bill Nos. 241056 and 250651 and 250950. Clerk, will you please read the titles of the bills and resolutions.
Resolution 6 241070, proposing an amendment to the Philadelphia Home Rule Charter to eliminate the requirement that City officers and employees resign from their City office or employment before becoming candidates for public office; and providing for the submission of the amendment of the electors of Philadelphia. Bill No. 241056, providing for the submission to the qualified electors of the City of Philadelphia of the proposal set forth in a Resolution approved by Council proposing an amendment to the Philadelphia Home Rule Charter to eliminate the requirement that City officers and employees resign from their City office or employment before becoming candidates for public office; and authorizing the appropriate officers to publish notice and to make arrangements for the special election. Resolution 250970, proposing an amendment to the Philadelphia Home Rule Charter providing for this creation of the Philadelphia Retirement Savings Board; and providing for the submission of the proposed amendment to the electors of Philadelphia. Bill No. 250950, providing for the submission to the qualified electors of the City of Philadelphia of the proposal set forth in a Resolution approved by Council proposing an amendment to the Philadelphia Home Rule Charter relating to the creation of the Philadelphia Retirement Savings Board; and authorizing and directing the appropriate officers to publish notice and to make arrangements for the special election. Bill No. 250651, amending Title ("Finance, Taxes 9 and Collections") of The 10 Philadelphia Code to add a new 11 chapter, creating the Philadelphia 12 Retirement Savings Program as an 13 automated savings program for 14 certain employees in the City of 15 Philadelphia, to establish the 16 Philadelphia Retirement Savings 17 Board, and to establish the 18 Retirement Savings Administrative 19 Fund, all under certain terms and conditions.
Thank you so much. Before I ask the Clerk to call the first panel, I'd like to recognize the presence of our Council President Kenyatta Johnson, who is the sponsor of legislation in this committee. Council President Johnson, I'd like to recognize you for remarks.
Thank you, Madam Chair. And I want to thank all the members who are present today. And I just want to offer a brief overview of a piece of legislation that I've introduced in this committee, and it's known as the auto-IRA legislation, also known as PhillySaves, and my office has been working and developing to expand access to retirement savings and strengthen the financial future of working Philadelphians. First, I want to thank my colleague Councilman Mike Driscoll for his collaboration with my team on this bill and his leadership. For those who do not know, Councilman Mike Driscoll played a key role in advancing the auto-IRA legislation at the state level when he served in the General Assembly of Pennsylvania, and that work helped pave the way and groundwork for where we are today with the PhillySaves legislation. I also want to thank our Mayor Cherelle Parker for also helping lay the foundation for our work today through our formation of a citywide task force that examined the issue of the private sector retirement security in 2016. Today we are here to hear testimony on a package of bills which will focus on creating a Philadelphia Retirement Savings program and the Philadelphia Retirement Savings Board which will oversee the program. Currently across the United States, states have passed auto-IRA legislation and 14 states have programs running. And if PhillySaves is passed, Philadelphia has the opportunity to be the first city to establish an auto-IRA program. Philadelphia needs PhillySaves as over 200,000 private sector workers in the city do not have access to a retirement savings program at work. While we are no longer the poorest big city in America, our poverty rate -- let me say that again -- our poverty rate is still an astonishing 20%. Unfortunately, the poverty rate for our older population is even higher at 23%. Because the number of older residents living in poverty has increased, more older Philadelphians are being forced to work past the age of 65 or return to the workforce after retiring. We want to make sure we are lifting all Philadelphians out of poverty, building generational wealth and ensuring our seniors are financially stable in retirement. PhillySaves is a long-term solution to reducing the retirement savings gap and ensuring our residents are able to retire comfortably. PhillySaves will be an opt-out program for employees who work for qualified employers so employees don't have to jump through hoops to enroll in the program but can easily opt out at any time. And I'm going to say that again, employees do not have to jump through hoops but most importantly, employers have the opportunity to provide an initiative and an opportunity for individuals to participate, but also employees have the opportunity to opt out at any time. Contributions will come from payroll deductions at a default contribution rate to be set by the board, but employees can change these rates at any time. This comes at no cost to employers, whose only role is to facilitate payroll deduction. And if employers decide to offer their own qualified retirement plan, they will no longer have to offer PhillySaves to their employees. The package of bills being heard today also includes a Charter change that will create the Philadelphia Retirement Savings Board upon approval of the voters in the May 2026 election. My team has been meeting with various stakeholders, such as the Diverse Chambers of Commerce and AARP to inform this legislation. We are committed to minimizing administrative burdens on employers that may arise from this legislation as well as educating employees on the financial benefits this program brings.
I also want to thank some of our key partners who worked with us on this initiative, including John Scott, Project Director of Retirement Savings at the Pew Charitable Trust, who completed a report for Council on retirement savings in Philadelphia, who is here today to testify as well as representatives from AARP who will speak on their support for PhillySaves. I am grateful to those who have engaged with my team on this legislation and those who are here today, and I'm hopeful with the passage of this legislation we can make Philadelphia build a more financially secure future for themselves. And just on a personal note, right, going off script, I just remember as a young man a member I worked for, Councilman Curtis Jones, Jr. with the Philadelphia Old Company Store under PCDC. And I remember us being employers and organizing and working with PCDC for a variety of different programs that could be offered to employees. And so, if somebody really would have pulled my coattail during those times -- when you're young, you think you'll live forever, there's another day, I don't have to put any money to the side, I'm going to be okay, there's always another day to make a few dollars, right. This is an opportunity for us to educate people from a financial literacy standpoint, and also not even paying attention to individuals who work in let's say our restaurant industries, right. And these are people that basically work off of tips every single day but don't have the ability to have a retirement savings, such as how we all have pensions here, such as how my children have IRA accounts because we set them up early. But there's other individuals who have employers that do not provide that type of service. And so, this is something that's minimum. But at the end of the day, we'll have long-term productive support. And so, I just want to say I ask for an affirmative vote and to be supportive of this legislation. And my team is here to ask any questions, issues and/or concerns. And I thank all the stakeholders for participating. Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
Thank you so much, Council President. And thank you for your robust work on this Retirement Security Initiative for residents across the City of Philadelphia. The Chair would like to recognize Councilmember Driscoll.
Well, thank you, Madam Chair. And thank you, members of the Law and Government Committee, for the opportunity to offer some brief remarks on this legislation. Retirement security has been a personal priority for me for many years. And, President Johnson, thank you for allowing me to introduce this bill on your behalf. Your team has been fabulous in working on this important legislation. During my time in Harrisburg, I sponsored and advanced KeystoneSaves, the statewide retirement savings proposal that passed the House this year in 2025. That experience made clear how many workers across Pennsylvania and here in Philadelphia move through their entire careers without access to a simple way to save for the future. PhillySaves builds on the same guiding principle. It gives the more than 200,000 workers in our city, who lack a workplace retirement plan, a straightforward payroll deduction option that they can take with them from job-to-job. It's portable. They can take it with them. This legislation follows a successful approach used in other states. There is no cost to the employers. I'm going to say that again. There is no cost to the employers, no employer contributions and no fiduciary liability. The goal is to make it easy for employees who want to save and not burden employers who are already managing their many responsibilities. I appreciate President Johnson's office, their hard work, their valuable improvements to the bill. The proposed amendments strengthen the composition of the board, add clearer fiduciary protections, allow for a phased rollout that reflects business size and payroll systems, provide flexibility to hire necessary staff and clarify penalties and initial program funding. At every point, the intention has been to keep the program workable and accessible while expanding retirement options for the workers who need them the most. I want to thank the Administration, AARP, Pew, our small business partners and the employers and employees who are participating today. I'm proud to support this effort and the opportunity it creates to improve long-term financial security for Philadelphians. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you. Thank you very much, Councilman Driscoll. And thank you for your work too in the Pennsylvania General Assembly on retirement security. We appreciate your continued service here in Council on this issue. Thank you both very, very much. Clerk, will you please call the first panel we have to testify on Resolution No. 250970 and Bill Nos. 250950 and 250651.
Will John Scott, Rick Collins, Tiffany Chavous and Patrick O'Brien make their way to the podium. (Witnesses approached witness table.)
Thank you all so much for being here. Please approach the witness table. State your name for the record and proceed with your testimony.
Good morning. My name is Rick Collins. I'm a volunteer with AARP, Pennsylvania's Philadelphia team. I'm joined together today by several fellow volunteers. During the past five months, we have been engaged in conversations with members of the City Council to explore the creation of a citywide retirement savings program for the thousands of Philadelphians who currently lack access to a workplace retirement savings option. At AARP we know that without access to retirement savings programs at work, nearly all workers fail to save. In fact, AARP research shows that Americans are times more likely to save 12 for retirement when they are able 13 to do so at work. We call this 14 Work and Save. 15 Work and Save programs are designed to address the retirement savings gap using tools such as payroll deduction that are proven to work. This gels in synergy with our own program to support Social Security. So Social Security plus a Work and Save program could be the beginning of retirement for thousands of Philadelphians. All Philadelphians deserve the opportunity to retire with dignity and financial security. Yet the reality is stark. About 208,000 Philadelphians and private sector workers lack access to a workplace retirement program. These workers represent our neighbors, friends and family members who face difficult choices about their future. Rising costs for essentials like housing, health, food and utilities make it even more challenging to hard-working Philadelphians to set aside savings, let alone decide when they can afford to retire. As a lifelong Philadelphian, my volunteer commitment to AARP Pennsylvania is rooted in the desire to drive for meaningful change. My background as a military retiree, as a veteran advocate has shown me the value of secure retirement benefits. While my own life as a military retiree has a guaranteed, defined benefit, most Americans don't have that and many Philadelphians don't have that. And so, in this piece we want to endorse and want to thank Chairperson Gilmore Richardson as well as President Kenyatta Johnson and special shout-out to Anthony Phillips and Councilman Squilla and Councilwoman Bass for this opportunity to talk about the sense of security that PhillySaves would provide thousands of your constituents. I'm a proud resident of the 4th Councilmanic District and I want to say that it's time to ensure that every Philadelphian can build a secure retirement. It's time for Philadelphia to lead the way. Along that Amtrak corridor, Delaware, Virginia, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, they all have retirement programs. It's time for PhillySaves to be part of that group. Thank you very much.
Good afternoon. Thank you, Council President Johnson and Councilmember Driscoll, for your leadership on this issue and thank you, Chair Richardson and members of the committee, for the opportunity to testify. My name is John Scott and I direct the Retirement Savings Project at the Pew Charitable Trust. Pew is a non-partisan, nonprofit public-policy organization. I am testifying today in support of Council Bill 250651, which would create the Philadelphia Retirement Savings program, also known as PhillySaves. PhillySaves would make it easier for tens of thousands of Philadelphia private sector workers to save for retirement. This testimony is based on a report Pew submitted to the Philadelphia City Council in June. The City Council requested Pew to assess what other states and cities are doing in terms of retirement security and recommend a program that would be best for Philadelphia. In general, employers are not required to offer a retirement plan. And while many small businesses want to provide one, they often cannot afford to provide retirement benefits. As a result, roughly half of working Americans do not have access to a new workplace retirement plan. We know that people are much more likely to save if they do so through payroll deduction. So a lack of access to workplace savings mechanisms greatly reduces total saving. Insufficient savings will have profound negative effects on households, the economy and communities and we need to boost savings in a city like much of the nation that is getting older. An August report by Pew's Philadelphia Research and Policy Team found that the median income for older households in Philadelphia is 39,412, but older non-Hispanic, African American households had a lower median income of $30,931. And older households at or below those median incomes are highly reliant on Social Security and retirement savings. Savings options are available outside the workplace, but the individual worker would need to know what types of accounts exist, evaluate them, make decisions about investments and set up recurring contributions. Perhaps as a result, only 14% of Americans save for retirement outside the workplace. In the face of these issues, states and cities are addressing retirement savings shortfalls, focusing on three types of programs, automated savings programs, also known as auto-IRAs, multiple employer plans, also known as MEPs and Marketplaces. Because of their voluntary nature, neither MEPs nor Marketplaces have significantly increased the number of people saving for retirement. 17 states and 2 cities adopted the auto-IRA as of September 2025. 5 billion in savings across more than million participants and 260,000 employers. In terms of what a Philadelphia auto-IRA program might look like, approximately 208,000 workers could be eligible for a citywide auto-IRA program. Additional uncovered workers could be independent contractors and other non-traditional workers who have very low rates of access to a retirement plan, but such non-traditional workers are difficult to reach. We also estimated that the cost of a citywide automated savings program to be roughly a little over $1 million in the first year and $647,000 for the second and subsequent years. We recommend the auto-IRA, as proposed in Council Bill 25061, for the City of Philadelphia because it best fits four criteria: One, any solution should aim to increase the retirement savings by workers at scale. Bill 6 No. 250651 would extend coverage to all private sector workers at employers with one or more employees and non-traditional workers like gig workers could self enroll. Most importantly, workers would be automatically enrolled with the ability to opt out. Two, the solution should not compete with the private employer-sponsored retirement system.
Covered employers can start their own retirement plan at any time and we are seeing an increase in retirement plans when states adopt these auto-IRA programs. Three, any solution must be fiscally responsible. Under PhillySaves, an appointed board provides oversight, and through a prudent bidding process, could delegate recordkeeping and investment management to outside financial firms. As the program grows, program revenue will at least partially offset program costs and partnering with other state auto-IRA programs could reduce costs and quickly implement the program. Four, finally any approach must be attractive to small business. PhillySaves would not charge a fee to employers, but would require that employers deduct payroll contributions if employees participate, something they do already, and employers can adopt their own retirement plan at any time. For these reasons, Pew supports City Council Bill 250651. Thank you again for this opportunity to provide our views and I look forward to your questions.
Thank you so much for your testimony. Are there any questions for the witnesses, members of the committee?
Chair recognizes Council President Johnson.
Thank you very much. Could you just clarify why IRAs have to be chosen by other states running this program as a default option to enroll employees in?
Can you explain why Roth IRA has to be chosen by other states running this program as the default option to enroll employees in?
That's a great question. So you have traditional IRAs where you put your money in and get a tax deduction for that contribution. Then you have Roth IRAs where the money is taxed before you put the money in. And really, every state program offers both types of IRAs, but they make the Roth IRA the default if the participating employee doesn't make any choice. And the reason they've done that I think is twofold. One, the tax deduction that you get from the traditional IRA isn't as appealing to employees in these programs, many of whom don't have a federal income tax liability. But I think the more important reason is that under a Roth IRA, you can pull out your contributions at any time without taxes or penalty. And that's appealing for a lot of workers who sometimes have fluctuations in the work schedule or they might have a financial shock like a car repair. They really don't have any other savings. For many of these workers in these programs, this is really the first opportunity to save money. So life happens and sometimes they do need to pull that money out and the Roth IRA is really the best vehicle to do that. And we also find that these workers keep saving even after they pull that money out.
I just wanted you to clarify that question only because a lot of times, and I experienced this early on as a young man working for the state for several years and had to pull my savings out for closing costs for a home, and because it's not this particular IRA, Roth IRA is not taxable. I see it's more beneficial because sometimes life shows up, right. And you have the ability to pull your savings and also not be taxed on it as an added benefit. And so, I just wanted to clarify that just for the record.
And if I could just add a little bit more to my answer. Having worked in the retirement industry, the one question we always got from workers was can I get my money if I need it. And so, I think there's an element of trust there, that I'm giving my part of my paycheck over to you and I want to trust that you're going to take care of it and have access to it if I really need it. And so, I think that's another reason why they do that.
Well, John, I'm going to personally just say thank you for doing a deeper dive on this legislation with my team. I know there's a lot of talk about affordability now in our country, and the prices of groceries are going up and just life in general. But the financial literacy around savings and having the options to save I think is key to that whole equation when we talk about the issue of affordability. So I just want to thank you for taking time out of your schedule, for being here and the technical assistance that you have provided. And Mr. Rick Collins as well, and I know the work that you do and AARP does as well, personally just thank you as well. That's all I have, Madam Chair.
Thank you so much, Council President. And thank you both for your testimony. If you two could please approach the witness table. State your names for the record and proceed with your testimony. (Witnesses approached witness table.)
Good morning. My name is Tiffany Chavous. I am the CEO of Somerset Academy Early Learning Center. Thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony today regarding the Council President and Representative Driscoll's legislation for the creation of PhillySaves, an automated retirement savings program. As an employer that is deeply committed to the well-being of our staff, I see the PhillySaves program as a gamechanger, especially for employees in fields like child care where wages often make it difficult, if not impossible, to set aside savings for the future. These are individuals who dedicate their days to nurturing and educating our children, shaping the next generation with patience, compassion and skill. Yet many of them lack the access to even the most basic benefits, retirement, savings, in some provider's establishments, health care and in some paid leave. For example, we'll name one of my employees Maria. She's been with us for several years and she's one of the most dedicated educators I've ever met. She arrives early, stays late and treats every child as if they're her own. But despite her commitment, despite wanting to be there, taking off little time, Maria doesn't really have access to a retirement plan. She's a single mom. And after rent groceries and child care for her own kids, there's simply nothing left to save. Life, as they say, be lifing. And she's not alone. This is the reality for so many in the early childhood field. The truth is even as employers we face real constraints. Child care providers operate on a razor-thin margin. Reimbursement rates for the public programs don't reflect, as we know, the true cost of care, and we can't just raise tuition for private-paying families without making care unaffordable. That means offering comprehensive benefits like retirement plans or health insurance is often out of reach despite our best efforts. No matter how much we want to provide them, a lot of times providers just don't have the extra means to do so. That's why PhillySaves is so important. It offers a simple no-cost way for employees to begin building financial security. It's automatic, portable and flexible. Employees can adjust their contributions or opt out entirely. And for employers like me, it fills a critical gap. It allows us to retain quality staff in an atmosphere and in a program where a lot of people are leaving because they just -- not that they want to leave, but they just don't have programs like this to be able to sustain their own households. We can finally offer a meaningful benefit without the administrative or financial burden that typically comes with retirement plans with the PhillySaves program. This is more than just a policy. It's a step toward equity. It's a way to honor the people who care for our children, clean our buildings, serve our meals and keep our city running. It's a way to reduce poverty among older residents and build a more stable, resilient Philadelphia. PhillySaves is the kind of smart, compassionate policy that helps take care of the people who take care of us. Let's all make sure they have the tools they need to build a future with dignity. Thank you again for introducing this. Thank you for thinking of small businesses, of people that may not always have the money to save. Thank you for allowing me this time.
Thank you. Thank you very much for your testimony. Please state your name for the record and proceed with your testimony.
Good afternoon, distinguished Councilmembers. I am Patrick O'Brien. I'm a founding member of the Northeast Philadelphia Small Business Alliance. We are honored to be asked to testify here today concerning the proposed legislative matter. The Alliance membership includes over 1500 small businesses representing less than million in annual revenue and less than 24 employees. These businesses are primarily in the 6th, 9th and 10th Councilmanic Districts. The Philadelphia Chamber of Commerce deems these businesses as micro businesses. Micro businesses are often women- and minority-owned businesses. And unfortunately, they're often overlooked or ignored in reference to the contribution to the economic stability and their local communities. These small businesses frequently do not or cannot participate in programs that the mid and large businesses have access to, such as tax incentives, health benefits, subsidies and additional programs and incentives. Lack of access to these programs often result in small businesses deciding on a priority-based model how to be creative in offering benefits and hybrid-type compensation models in order to attract and retain the best talent. Our research has determined that approximately 200,000 private sector workers, about a third in Philadelphia, lack access to workplace retirement plans. This gap contributes to senior poverty, higher social service dependency and lower consumer spending. The PhillySaves aims to strengthen small business, employee, financial independence and security, help small business attract and retain talent and promote a stronger growth-oriented city economy. Auto-IRA programs like PhillySaves have already been implemented in 14 states, with 4 additional states considering programs. This directly impacts Philadelphia small businesses to recruit employees as neighboring New Jersey and Delaware already offered this program. New York City is the only major municipality that has a mandated program at this time. These programs have shown high participation rates, approximately 70%, and significant asset growth, 2.5 billion. Compared to Marketplace or multiple employer plan models, auto-IRA offer, simplicity, scalability and no 12 employer costs. Northeast Philadelphia Small Business Alliance has determined that the PhillySaves program presents a major step forward, reducing the city's retirement savings gap. Pending voter approval in May of 2026, this initiative could possibly launch in 2027 providing portable, secured retirement options for over 200,000 workers as a part of an overall revitalization effort. We predict that this program will improve long-term economic stability across Philadelphia. Northeast Philadelphia Small Business Alliance endorses these efforts of the Council to launch this initiative and welcome an opportunity to work with and support Council in a grassroots education initiative to include conducting further research to determine whether to operate standard loan or join a Pennsylvania or interstate alliance, developing outreach and marketing plans targeting small businesses and low-access workers, and establishing a framework for enforcement and reporting mechanisms. Thank you all for the opportunity to participate in today's hearing. I welcome any questions at this time.
Thank you. Thank you both so much for your testimony. The Chair now recognizes Councilmember Bass.
(Inaudible). Improvise. There we go. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. I just wanted to say, number one, I want to thank the sponsor of the bill, our Council President, for bringing forward such a groundbreaking piece of legislation. This really has the opportunity to be a gamechanger. When we talk about Philadelphia and our struggles and challenges and we know that we are among the top I think second now largest big city with a large population living in poverty, this is the kind of program and programming that we need to see to be able to change that. When folks have the opportunity to grow their wealth by having a retirement savings plan that will allow them to retire with dignity in our communities, it makes all the difference in the world. And just to underscore, there was a time when you could retire just on Social Security alone and that day has come and gone. You just can't do it anymore. You just cannot have the level of financial independence that anyone wants or needs to have and be able to participate fully in our society, in our city. So I just really wanted to say a big thank you to the sponsor, Council President, and also to all of my colleagues who have been supportive of this effort, which would affect, as it was mentioned earlier, over 200,000 Philadelphians. So again, this is a major gamechanger and I'm just excited to be able to support these pieces of legislation today. Thank you, Mr. Pres -- thank you, Madam Chair and Mr. President.
Thank you so much, Councilmember Bass. The Chair now recognizes any other members of the committee for remarks or questions? (No response.)
Seeing none, thank you all so much for your testimony and thank you all for being here --
Madam Chair, I just wanted to thank the two of you for providing your testimony as well as Representative CEO of Somerset Academy. We appreciate you taking time for being here today.
Thank you. Thank you so very much. I'd also like to recognize that we received written testimony from Rob Dubow, Director of Finance for the City of Philadelphia and that testimony has been disseminated to all members of the committee for the record for these proceedings. Are there any further witnesses here to testify on Bill 16 No. 250651, Bill No. 250950 and Resolution No. 250970? (No response.)
Okay. Seeing none, we will now proceed with Bill No. 22 241056 and Resolution No. 241070. And the Chair now recognizes Majority Whip Thomas for remarks.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Good afternoon, colleagues, members of the committee. Good afternoon to the listening public. My name is Councilmember Isaiah Thomas and I am the sponsor of the Resign-to-Run legislation, which is Bill No. 10 241056 and Resolution No. 241070. I want to first start by acknowledging the amendments on the bill for the committee members. When we originally introduced the bill, we were looking to strike Resign-to-Run. The bill was introduced over a year ago. So I just want to remind folks that this bill was introduced over a year ago. We've spent a year talking to people around the legislation. And based on that due diligence over the last year, what we have done is we've amended the bill to reflect the following based on feedback from members and stakeholders. Number one, the way the bill has been amended, city-elected officials can only Resign-to-Run -- I mean, can only keep their job to run for state and federal seats. If you're looking to run for a city seat, you still have to resign. If you're a city employee, you still have to resign, and you cannot appear on the ballot twice. So based on the amendments, I would not be able to run for District Councilperson as well as Councilperson At-large. I would not be able to keep my seat and run for mayor. And on top of that, we also did not touch anything with the Mayor's office. So the Mayor's office, as it relates to Resign-to-Run will stay the exact same way. It is based on the amendments that's been circulated to members of this committee. What will change in Resign-to-Run will be that a city- elected official can run for a state or federal seat and keep their position. Anything besides that, that city-elected official would have to resign. You're going to hear testimony in a little bit from the Board of Ethics. I want to say thank you to the Board of Ethics for providing perspective as it relates to this particular piece of legislation. I actually read the testimony of the Board of Ethics, and we agree with some of the testimony there. So one of the amendments that's been circulated to members of this committee is a specific reflection of the ask of the Board of Ethics that we change the language on the ballot. So in our original amendment, we had it being read one way. Based on looking at the testimony from the Board of Ethics, we're now changing that. So the Board of Ethics said that we need to look at the ballot question that would be on the ballot in the spring. And they said that they believe it should be more precise and accurate and it should refer to the elected position as city- elected officials. So we agree with the Board of Ethics. And the most recent amendment that has been circulated to members of the committee specifically looks to address that issue, and we want to thank the Board of Ethics for providing their testimony. I just want to close out by providing some facts out of respect for members of the committee because I'm not on the committee. I did not ask a bunch of people to come down to testify because I know that that can be a little time-consuming for you all, especially in the afternoon. We had a long hearing yesterday. We have a long hearing tomorrow. This is the life that we signed up for. So out of respect for your time, let me just give you some facts about people who some of us we'll call friends and other people we'll call colleagues. When you look at the last mayors in the City of Philadelphia, our current mayor, Mayor Cherelle L. Parker, former member of City Council, the mayor before that, Mayor Jim Kenney, former member of City Council, the mayor before that, Mayor Michael Nutter, former member of City Council, the mayor before that, Mayor John Street, former member of City Council, in the spirit of Resign-to-Run, the purpose of the legislation was to assure that you see turnover and to assure that people when they're looking to run for office, they have to resign. They can't do both.
So think about the fact that no member of City Council since 1970, 75 years, no member of City Council has resigned to run for any other office but mayor. So the spirit of Resign-to-Run will remain based on the amendments that we've produced, but based on what we know about the bill and what is done in the past. The only thing members of City Council have resigned to run for is mayor, and that doesn't change. If a member of City Council wants to run for mayor, they still have to Resign- to-Run. Now, the unfortunate side of what we've seen over the last 75 years is why it's been a lot of talented people that have sat in this chamber, a lot of them before us and had this seat. Nobody, not one member, has been put in a position to be able to do things that our state partners have done. So I'll start with one of my mentors and former boss, former City Controller Alan Butkovitz. A lot of people don't realize Alan Butkovitz was a State Rep before he became City Controller. He did not resign his State Rep seat to run for City Controller, and he was able to do that. State Rep Ahmed Brown recently ran for mayor. He did not have to resign his job to do that. State Senator Hardy Williams ran for mayor. He did not have to resign his job to do that. Our Lieutenant Governor Austin Davis was a State Rep. Austin Davis sat in the House as a State Rep and he kept his job as a State Rep, and he ended up becoming the first Black Lieutenant Governor in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. I can go on and on and on. I got four pages of examples like this, including our own Council President, Council President Kenyatta Johnson, who was a State Rep and was able to keep his job when he decided to run for City Council. We can even look at our members of Congress. We appreciate Congressman Evans on his way out, he resigned from his job but he had a choice. He could have kept his job. Congressman Brendan Boyle did not resign his job when he decided to run for State Rep. And I can go on and on and on, folks. I have notes, pages of notes, including my former colleague behind me, who actually was a State Rep as well too who did not have to resign his job to run for City Council in an election. With that being said, colleagues, I just want us to think about how intelligent and talented the members of City Council are. And when we think about representation of the City of Philadelphia, especially in a climate that we're in right now, I think it's fair to put City Councilmembers in the exact same position as State Reps, State Senators, members of Congress and other legislators to best represent the City of Philadelphia and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. I'm not here to play politics, but the reality is we know we have some very important and controversial elections that are happening in 2026, 2028 as well as 2030. I think for the City of Philadelphia to be best represented, some of my colleagues, some of the amazing people who do a phenomenal job here in the City of Philadelphia should be considered for some of those seats. Madam Chair, that is it. I could probably go on for another 15 minutes, but I respect the time of the members of this committee and I just want to make sure that we understand that this is important legislation, not for the present but for the future of our city. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you. Thank you very much, Whip Thomas, for your work on this legislation. I know you've had a ton of conversations over the last year and I appreciate your work on this and the continued partnership. Any other comments prior to receiving testimony? The Chair now recognizes Councilmember Bass.
I didn't have a question, but I just had a comment. I wanted to thank the Councilmember for his work on this. And for me, it's an issue of consistency across the board. So there's one policy for city legislators. There's another policy for state and federal legislators. So I think if we just have one policy across the board in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, either everybody's doing the same thing or everybody's doing something different. It's crazy when everyone's doing something different because you have no idea. People ask me all the time, well, does that person have to resign to run, does that person have to stay. You know, people just don't know because it's clearly a different set of rules for different legislators and it just doesn't make any sense. So I think that you bring a very commonsense approach to just having one policy across the board. So thank you.
Thank you, colleague. I appreciate that and in a dream world, I would have it that way. But this is reflective on what people asked for. I personally think that you shouldn't have to resign to run for anything, but this is a compromise. That's our life. And in order to put us in a position to have legislation that I feel like everybody's comfortable voting for as well as advocates in the public are comfortable supporting, this is what I felt like is the compromise and it's the closest thing to everybody being able to adhere to the same rules. So I agree with you 100%. Thank you. I appreciate you, colleague.
You're welcome. It's a step in the right direction towards having a consistent policy that makes sense.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, colleague. I appreciate you.
Thank you so much, Councilmember Bass. And again, thank you, Councilmember Thomas, for seeking to bring parity to this conversation. So now, we will have the Clerk call any witnesses for Bill 6 No. 241056 and Resolution No. 7 241070.
Will Jordana Greenwald please come up to testify. (Witness approached witness table.)
Thank you so much for being here. Please state your name for the record and proceed with your testimony.
Good afternoon, Chair Gilmore Richardson and members of the committee. My name is Jordana Greenwald. I am general counsel for the Philadelphia Board of Ethics and I thank you for the opportunity to speak about this legislation, which would, as we've said, revise the Resign-to-Run rule found at Section 4 10-1075 of the City's Home Rule Charter. Since its inception, the Board of Ethics has administered the rules of the Charter in the Code that relate to ethics and transparency, including the political activity restrictions that are found in that part of the Charter. The Board has interpreted parts of Section 10-107 through Board Regulation No. 8, and the board and its staff are the sole source of legally protective guidance on Section 10-107. I personally have been with the board since 2019. For context, I provide a lot of the training and advice on Section 23 10-107 and was involved in both 2019 and 2020 amendments to Regulation 8. So the proposed legislation -- and I appreciate the sponsor's acknowledgement of our input and response to the input so far. This would narrow the Resign- to-Run restriction as it applies to city-elected officers, and specifically to allow city-elected officers, as I understand it not just Councilmembers, to run for any non-city office without resigning their city position. That would allow certain officers, other than the Mayor, who's further restricted under Section 3-400 of the Charter to run for any state, federal or non-city local office in addition to running for re-election. The board and its staff were not involved in the drafting of the proposed legislation or of the amendments that have been introduced at hearing. And I have I don't think seen the most recent form of amendments to the proposed legislation. So I will do my best to keep up and comment on what you all are looking at without having seen it. We learned of the amendments on Monday and I do really appreciate the efforts of staff from Councilmember Thomas' office to meet with us that morning. But the reality is that the board has not yet had the opportunity to fully consider this proposal. And I also note just as a caveat the board didn't have a chance to deliberate on the testimony that I submitted yesterday, so I am presenting sort of the preliminary opinions of staff members and individual board members as they were expressed to me. m. today and did adopt I guess a resolution 4 essentially that they're just not able to support the proposed changes at this time. As you know, the drafters of the Charter saw the political activity restrictions in 10-107 as really a core value of the new form of city government that that Charter established. And we believe that it really is critical to take great care in making any changes to this provision. With that said, we also recognize the value of assessing how well the restrictions on political activity are meeting the needs of the city and of city government and of city residents. That assessment should be grounded in thorough research and discussion, and those efforts are really critical to making sure that any changes that are made are effective, benefit the city as a whole and won't result in unintended consequences. So while we haven't really gotten to fully analyze the amended proposal, we do have several concerns about the downstream effects of this. These transparency and ethics laws that the board administers were all written and drafted with the premise that nobody who is a city employee or officer could run for office. And as a result, even a narrow change to Resign-to-Run potentially affects not only the other political activity rules, but also the ability of the city's Campaign Finance law, the Lobbying law, the Pay-to-Play contracting rules and the other ethics rules to be a fully effective, because it just wasn't contemplated when those rules were drafted and they were tailored to the existing landscape.
So some of the resulting impacts, if this legislation moves forward and the voters approve it, might require a legislative fix or even further Charter amendments. I'm not sure that all of them can be resolved through regulatory work of the board. So while we're still evaluating the impact, I will give you a couple of examples of the concerns. Under Section 10-1074, as it was amended in 2020, Regulation 8, as you probably know allows most city employees to volunteer in a non-managerial, non-fundraising role for non-local campaigns. And under this proposed legislation, we potentially are looking at a situation where an employee of the Administration could be prohibited from volunteering for a Councilmember's re-election campaign, but would not be prohibited from volunteering for that same Councilmember's campaign for a statewide office such as Governor. I'm excited to hear that the new amendment seemed to address the concern about running for two offices at once. I think even on a statewide level that's been something that's been raised as a concern, having folks running for two offices at once. But really where the concerns lay in this area in terms of the volunteering for campaigns is around concerns about pressure to either participate in the campaigns of sitting city officials, which they couldn't otherwise do if they're running for re-election because that's a local office, and also potentially a chilling effect on their willingness of city employees to participate in the campaigns of folks who are opponents to sitting city officials for state or federal office. I think we've addressed the simultaneous election issue. I think there are still some concerns that we have around campaign finance law because the existence of multiple committees means that there are potential pitfalls I think both for candidates and for folks who are participating on the political activity side. But really, the end of the day it's about the opportunity for potential circumvention of the city's campaign finance laws and contribution limits and access to the records, because the records for state and federal campaigns will not be something that is filed with the board. We did have a concern. It's a little technical, but as I pointed out I think the way I understand this to be drafted is that any city-elected official could run for state or federal office. And as it is applied to the City Commissioners, have some concerns that that could result in incumbents who are unable to supervise elections because state law requires them to step down from that role as a City Commissioner if they are running for office. So that's not a law or change that the city could effectuate, and we do have some concerns about that piece. In addition to sort of the downstream issues, we have some technical concerns about the wording. It does sound like some of that has changed. So again, I can only speak to what I have. What was shared with me, the language seems to create separate rules within 10-1075 for officers and employees. And officers are the ones for whom the rules are changing. We have some concerns because the board's reading of officers and employees appears in several places in the Code and in the board's regulations, including in Regulation No. 8, which interprets other parts of 10-107. And the way that the board currently understands and the Law Department has approved our understanding of officers includes far more than just city-elected officials. I'm not sure if that language has been adjusted in the most recent amendments, but we certainly would want to make sure that if the change is intended to apply beyond city-elected officials, that that be made clear both in the ballot question and in the language of the Charter amendment itself.
I think it sounds like Councilmember Thomas' staff has reworked some of the language in the ballot question, which raised some concerns for us around the reference to local-elected officials because that's also a defined term and we appreciate that responsiveness. All together I think there may be other things that we haven't yet identified. The board has not spoken to sort of the general idea of the legislation. Our concerns are much more technical and we want to make sure that we have a full understanding and a plan to address legislatively, if needed, any downstream impacts to make sure we can still carry out the purposes of the other parts of the laws we administer. It is our understanding that if the committee advances the legislation today, Council will vote on it before the board's next public meeting on December 17. But I want to make sure you understand that the board would --
I apologize. I didn't hear that last part of what you.
Oh, I'm sorry. It's my understanding timing-wise that if this moves out of committee today, it would go to Council before the Board of Ethics next meets publicly, their next scheduled public meeting on December 17. I don't have confirmation of the exact dates of what the plan is for timing on this. But I wanted to make sure it was clear that while the board isn't scheduled to meet until December 17th, they do welcome the opportunity to participate in further discussion about this legislation with Councilmembers and staff. And with that, I would be happy to answer any questions you may have and thank you again for taking up this important issue. We look forward to working with you.
Thank you. Thank you very, very much for your testimony. I will recognize Councilmember Thomas. But prior to doing that, I just wanted to address a few things that I heard in your testimony. You all are prepared as a board that if this legislation should go before the voters, you are prepared to give us a list of your concerns in a format that is easy for us to digest. And when I say that, I mean I read your testimony at midnight last night, okay. And so, in reading your testimony my first thought process was for all the legislation that you referenced, give us the draft, okay, so that way it addresses the concerns that you notated in the testimony, but also it gives you all an opportunity to further address it at the board meeting for all the additional regulations in the subsections that you all administer. And so, the only thing that I would request is if, based on what your testimony stated, you said there were a number of areas that you wanted to address, whether it be regulation, legislation, potential additional Charter change, I would ask that you give us what that list is and list it out to say, this is an if-then. Because this is not a situation where we're not able to make the correction, we would technically be changing one thing which would then trigger, as you stated, a downstream impact on how other areas of your regulations and code is stated for members of Council and for other elected officials. I would ask that you give us that list because that way we can ensure that you know if this legislation comes out of committee and goes before the voters, that we have everything that you all need to ensure that it aligns with that happening. But this is an if-then situation. So you understand what I'm saying?
Absolutely. And I think that's exactly what we're trying to do and what we tried to put together at a very low level as quickly as we could. I think there are probably things we haven't even identified yet. But, yes, absolutely happy to try and provide a list of where we see the potential issues that need to be addressed. Getting together drafts, we don't have our own legislative staff, so getting together drafts is something we can work on. It doesn't happen as quickly for us as it does for you all --
No, and that can happen in consultation with the sponsor's office.
But I'm just stating that it's not as if there is not an opportunity to make this correction. I think from Council's standpoint this is an opportunity for parity for members of Council, the same way that members of the State House and also federal- elected officials have the ability to run for other offices without having to resign. And so, seeking to level the playing field, right, you just need to let us know what you all need to see additionally in order for this to be done in a way that happens in decency and in order and we have enough time to do that right now. And I would ask that we don't wait or belabor to do that because the Primary is May 19th of 2026. And so, we have enough time to have an additional hearing to address any of those additional concerns. But I don't think that should necessarily preclude us from deliberating on this particular legislation today. And I receive everything you say, okay, but I don't think that that should necessarily stop what we're seeking to accomplish today, but that we should commit to work with you all to do everything that you have stated.
And that is exactly what the board I think is hoping for, is that this is the beginning of a discussion and wants to just ensure that that was understood, that there are sort of a broader ripple that comes out from this and that we want to be part of the discussion and how to address that appropriately. Again, there's no statement from the board at all on whether this is the parity. The reasons for it are not what the board is addressing. They really want to address the cooperative process of moving forward to make sure that it all hashes out in a way that doesn't have unintended consequences for other laws or for the people who are hoping that this will bring parity. Because what we don't want is for this to be passed and then it to become something where there are unintended problems or pitfalls for people who choose to take advantage of it.
Received. No, I 19 received that very much so, more 20 than you probably understand. So 21 we want to ensure that you all 22 continue to work together after 23 today. And I even made a notation 24 here around the plain language statement as well. We know that Councilman Thomas' office updated the question language that you notated in your testimony that will also potentially spill over to the preparation of the plain language statement with Law. So I'm hopeful that we'll have that included as well. Okay. All right. Chair now recognizes Councilman Thomas.
Madam Chair, first of all, thank you for the opportunity and the platform. And honestly, you just condensed my remarks by about three minutes because everything you just said, I agree with you 100%. But I think it's important that the Board of Ethics hear it from me. So first and foremost, I want to thank you for being here and thank you to the entire Board of Ethics for the great work that you do. I reach out to the Board of Ethics often. I also want to go on record and apologize. This bill 6 was introduced 370 days ago. Over the last 370 days, I've had so many conversations with so many people. And, Madam Chair, I can assure you that had I known that I should have talked to the Board of Ethics, I would have done it. That is my mistake. I apologize. I am more than willing to put that on the record. But at the same time, I did not have the Board of Ethics reach out to me to say, hey, Councilman, you introduced Resign- to-Run, can we have a conversation about this legislation to see how you feel about it and what direction you essentially plan on going. So for my part of that, I do apologize. But I do want to commit to the members of this committee as well as to the members of City Council and all of those who are interested in this legislation that my door is open, my office and my team are very inclusive. As soon as the Board of Ethics reached out to us, we immediately moved things and canceled things to be able to have an emergency meeting. Once we listened to concerns that we were able to address, we addressed them right away in today's amendments. That spirit will not change if we are fortunate enough to see the bill 19 voted out of committee. And even if the bill is passed off the Council floor, I am committed to working with the Board of Ethics as well as other stakeholders to make sure that the concerns, some that were communicated today, some that may come in the future are addressed and there are not any unintended consequences. If we can do something about it, I'm more than willing to jump out and do something about it. But, Madam Chair, I'll close out by just repeating after you. If you could just give us a list of every single thing that you feel like we need to be thinking about, what we should be doing, how we can do this and do it the right way. I just want to close out by saying what Councilmember Bass said, we just want to even the playing field. That's it. We have some very important elections that are on the horizon. And I think in order to put Philadelphia in a position to have as best possible representation, we should be able to choose from as many phenomenal people as possible. So thank you. Thank you to the entire Board of Ethics. We are committed to working with you if the members of this committee feel the ability to pass this bill out of committee and members of Council vote for it. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you. Thank you very, very much. And so, we'll look forward to ensuring that you all are working together to receive the list. And you could just send it to my office and we'll disseminate it to all members of the committee so that we have the follow-up of that information as well. Because one thing I will say, nobody wants to intentionally get in trouble. That's not even a thing anymore -
Okay. All right. So we want to get this straight on the front end. Okay. All right. Are there any further questions for this witness? (No response.)
Okay. Seeing none, we thank you very much for your testimony and look forward to the continued work. We appreciate you. Thank you very, very much. Are there any further witnesses on Resolution No. 241070, on Bill No. 241056? (No response.)
Seeing none, are there any witnesses here to provide public comment? (No response.)
Okay. Given that there are no further witnesses, we will conclude the public hearing and move into the public meeting. We will now begin the public meeting on the previously mentioned bills. Clerk, will you please call the roll to take attendance. Members that are in attendance -- pardon me one moment. Okay. Thank you. Clerk, will you please call the roll to take attendance. Members that are in attendance will please indicate that you are present when your name is called.
I am present. Thank you. A quorum of the committee is present. The Chair recognizes Councilmember Squilla for a motion on the amendment to Resolution No. 241070. 2
Thank you, Madam Chair. I offer an amendment to Resolution No. 241070. A copy of the amendment has been circulated to all members of the committee. I move that the amendment to Resolution No. 241070 be approved. (Duly seconded.)
The Chair notes for 13 the record that Councilmember Bass 14 seconds the motion. It has been 15 moved and properly seconded that 16 the amendment to Resolution No. 17 241070 be approved. 18 All those in favor of 19 the motion will signify by stating 20 aye. 21 (Aye.) 22
The ayes have it and the motion carries. The Chair now recognizes Councilmember Squilla for a motion on Resolution No. 241070 as amended.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I move that Resolution 11 No. 241070 as amended be reported from this committee with a favorable recommendation. (Duly seconded.)
It has been moved and properly seconded that Resolution 18 No. 241070 as amended be reported from this committee with a favorable recommendation. All those in favor of the motion will signify by stating aye. (Aye.)
The ayes have it and the motion carries. Pardon me one moment. Thank you. It has been moved and properly seconded that Resolution No. 241070 as amended be reported from this committee with a favorable recommendation. All those in favor -- we already voted. Thank you. My apologies. We'll move forward. The Chair now recognizes Councilmember Squilla for a motion on the amendment to Bill No. 19 241056.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I offer an amendment to Bill No. 241056. A copy of the amendment has been circulated to all members of the committee. I move that the amendment to Bill No. 3 241056 be approved. (Duly seconded.)
The Chair notes for the record Councilmember Bass seconds the motion. It has been moved and properly seconded that the amendment to Bill No. 241056 be approved. All those in favor of the motion will signify by stating aye. (Aye.)
The ayes have it and the amendment to Bill No. 241056 has been approved. The Chair now recognizes Councilman Squilla for a motion on Bill No. 241056 as amended.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I move that Bill No. 6 241056 as amended be reported from this committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended as to permit first reading of this bill at the next session of Council. All those in favor of the motion will signify by stating aye. (Aye.)
The ayes have it and the motion carries. Bill No. 23 241056 as amended will be reported from this committee with a favorable recommendation with a request that the rules of Council be suspended to permit first reading at the next session of Council. The Chair recognizes Councilman Squilla for a motion on the amendment to Resolution No. 9 250970.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I offer an amendment to Resolution No. 250970. A copy of the amendment has been circulated to all members of the committee. I move that the amendment to Resolution No. 250970 be approved. (Duly seconded.)
The Chair notes for the record that Councilmember Bass seconds the motion. It has been moved and properly seconded that the amendment to Resolution No. 250970 be approved. All those in favor of the motion will signify by stating aye. (Aye.)
The ayes have it and 11 the amendment to Resolution No. 12 250970 has been approved. 13 The Chair now recognizes 14 Councilmember Squilla for a motion 15 on Resolution No. 250970 as 16 amended. 17
18 Thank you, Madam Chair. 19 I move that Resolution 20 No. 250970 as amended be reported 21 from this committee with a 22 favorable recommendation. 23 (Duly seconded.) 24
It has been moved and properly seconded that Resolution 3 No. 250970 as amended be reported from this committee with a favorable recommendation. All those in favor of the motion will signify by stating aye. (Aye.)
The ayes have it and the motion carries. Resolution No. 16 250970 as amended will be reported from this committee with a favorable recommendation. The Chair now recognizes Councilman Squilla for a motion on the amendment to Bill No. 250651.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I offer an amendment to Bill No. 250651. A copy of the amendment is circulated to all members of the committee. I move that the amendment to Bill No. 5 250651 be approved. (Duly seconded.)
The Chair notes for the record that Councilmember Bass seconds the motion. It has been moved and properly seconded that the amendment to Bill No. 250651 be approved. All those in favor of the motion will signify by stating aye. (Aye.)
The ayes have it and the amendment to Bill No. 250651 has been approved. The Chair now recognizes Councilman Squilla for a motion on Bill No. 250651 as amended.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I move that Bill No. 7 250651 as amended be reported from this committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended as to permit the first reading of this bill at the next session of Council. (Duly seconded.)
It has been moved and properly seconded that Bill No. 18 250651 as amended be reported from this committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended as to permit first reading of this bill at the next session of Council. All those in favor of the motion will signify by stating aye. (Aye.)
The ayes have it and the motion carries. Bill No. 11 250651 as amended will be reported from this committee with a favorable recommendation with a request that the rules of Council be suspended as to permit first reading at the next session of Council. The Chair now recognizes Councilman Squilla for a motion on the amendment to Bill No. 250950.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I offer the amendment to Bill No. 250950. A copy of the amendment is circulated to all members of the committee. I move that the amendment Bill No. 250950 be approved. (Duly seconded.)
The Chair notes for the record that Councilmember Bass seconds the motion. It has been moved and properly seconded that the amendment to Bill No. 250950 be approved. All those in favor of the motion will signify by stating aye. (Aye.)
The ayes have it and the amendment to Bill No. 250950 has been approved. The Chair now recognizes Councilmember Squilla for a motion on Bill No. 250950 as amended.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I move that Bill No. 6 250950 as amended be reported from this committee with your favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended as to permit the first reading of this bill at the next session of Council. (Duly seconded.)
It has been moved and properly seconded that Bill No. 17 250950 as amended be reported from this committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended as to permit first reading of this bill at the next session of Council. All those in favor of the motion will signify by stating aye. (Aye.)
The ayes have it and the motion carries. Bill No. 10 250950 as amended will be reported from this committee with a favorable recommendation with a request that the rules of Council be suspended as to permit first reading at the next session of Council. There being no further bills or resolutions on the agenda this afternoon, this concludes the business before the Committee on Law and Government today. Thank you very much for your attendance and your participation. (Committee on Law and Government concluded at 2:24 p.m.) C E R T I F I C A T I O N I, hereby certify that the proceedings and evidence noted are contained fully and accurately in the stenographic notes taken by me in the foregoing matter, and that this is a correct transcript of the same. __________________________________ TANEHA CARROLL