Councilman Frank Rizzo

Today, at-large Councilman Frank Rizzo introduced a resolution calling for the city to restore mechanical leaf collection, a service which Mayor Nutter cut last November, during the fiscal budget crisis.

The resolution was co-sponsored by Councilmembers Anna Verna, Jannie Blackwell, Curtis Jones, Joan Krajewski, Donna Reed Miller, Marian Tasco and Brian O’Neill.

It passed 14-2, with Councilmembers DiCicco and Green dissenting and Councilman Greenlee absent. (*corrected from an earlier draft, which gave the vote incorrectly as 15-2).

The Mayor’s office has said that it opposes re-instituting the service, choosing to spend the money elsewhere: “We’re asking citizens to work with us on this issue so we can meet our spending priorities such as police, fire, and libraries,” said spokeswoman Maura Kennedy yesterday.

Rizzo, however, saw it a different way:

“There are certain things that the city has an obligation to do,” he told the Inquirer.

“There are certain things you can’t put a price tag on,” he told the Daily News.

Actually, putting a price tag on the service is pretty easy: it cost the city $400,000 annually.

And, it turns out, only about 10% of the city was ever getting the service. And, it turns out, that 10% includes the richest neighborhoods in Philadelphia.

Streets Department maps obtained by the CP show that only tiny pockets of the city were receiving mechanical leaf collection services in the first place.

I apologize for the poor image quality, and we’re working on getting better maps. A Streets spokesperson confirmed that the different shadings (solid vs. striped) simply refer to different scheduled weeks of collection.

Shaded portions (only) received mechanical leaf collection in 2008

Among the pockets of Philly that did get the service, Chestnut Hill and West Mt. Airy seem to dominate in the northwest. Elsewhere: Somerton, Bustleton, and a few other pockets of the northeast; the small gentrified triangle of West Philly that extends west from the University bounded by Chestnut, Baltimore, and 52nd Street; and the swath of Overbrook that hugs City Ave; and a teeny, tiny little pocket of South Philly.

The rest of West Philadelphia, North Philadelphia, the River Districts, and South Philadelphia — had to rake their leaves themselves.

Asked why these areas - and not others - received service, Streets spokeswoman June Canton pointed out that they have more leaves. And we don’t doubt she’s right: but they’re also wealthier – a lot wealthier, in some cases – than the rest of the city.

There may be “certain things the city has an obligation to do,” as Councilman Rizzo put it: but is this really one of them?

So City Council is guaranteed a “cost-of-living allowance” salary increase from legislation passed in 2003. But, of course, circumstances in the city are a bit different than they were in 2003, and for members (who already make very good money) to accept those increases at a time when city workers are looking at potential layoffs and the rest of us service cuts could seem a little … untoward. So, via Philly Clout, today Council President Anna Verna sent a letter to Finance Director Rob Dubow saying that most members will pass on part or all of their raises.

All but one, in fact.

Councilman W. Wilson Goode is not returning his raise to the city general fund or another cause. He said that he plans to make several early property tax payments during the current fiscal year, to provide the city and school district with additional funds.

I’m not entirely sure why the latter half of that is significant. He would eventually pay all of his taxes anyway, right? So he’s paying early, which is fine, but still accepting the raise?

It could certainly be that Goode needs the money or feels he deserves it. But I also wonder if (to indulge in a bit of crappy psycho-speculation), on the tail of all the Latrice Bryant stuff, he’s just basically in “screw everybody” mode. He’s tired of the media, tired of the protesters, tired of the commenters on philly.com. And he’s just not gonna pay much mind to anyone’s criticisms anymore. If so, it’ll be interesting to see if he still feels that way come next election, and whether it matters.

whyy.org

This is a little late, but just stumbled across a piece on Heard in the Hall last Wednesday which described Al Schmidt, Republican candidate for City Controller, shadowing Mayor Nutter in Harrisburg and lobbying against the city’s proposed tax increase, saying they didn’t cut as much as they could have.

Sure, Schmidt is a Republican, and railing against tax increases and government waste is one of those things Republicans do. Sure, he’s a long shot for winning the Controller’s seat. But still, isn’t there something a little untoward about his actively trying to derail the city’s budget?

Like it or hate it, Council already passed a budget which raises sales tax and delays payments to the city pension fund, both measures that require approval in Harrisburg.

Should Harrisburg decline to approve those measures — which is what Schmidt seems to be encouraging them to do — the city which he hopes to city-control will be, if you’ll pardon the expression, royally screwed.

During budget negotiations, Nutter talked about the dreaded “Plan B.” But that plan, which is scary enough, counted on a property tax hike, which is no longer on the table.

So we’re actually talking about “Plan C.”

I don’t know exactly what that would look like, but it would almost certainly mean layoffs, the closing of at least one health center, libraries closing, homeless shelters closing and much, much more.

Schmidt wants to be seen as the responsible guy. But is trying to screw over Philly to make his point the way to do it?

Rest assured, Philadelphia, your city hasn’t totally turned green.

After recent attempts to jump on the “green” trend and turn the city of brotherly love into the city of mother earth loving, City Council has taken a step back and stopped Philadelphia before it got in too far.

This morning, City Council shot down a ban on the use of traditional plastic bags in Philly stores. The bill, introduced by Councilman Frank DiCicco, and co-sponsored by Councilman Jim Kenney, would have introduced alternative plastic bags, paper, and reusable bags in stores July 2011. The year-and-a-half leading up to that date would have been used to educate the public on the issue. Current traditional plastic bags, as opposed to the alternative bags, do not meet standards of biodegradability. In other words: they’re filling up our landfills and staying there.

The bill, rejected in a 6-10 vote, originally allowed for the continued use of plastic bags, but with a 25 cent fee per bag. The hope was that the fee would encourage the use of reusable bags. Instead, it was interpreted as an attack on the poor, and the bill was changed to an overall purging of traditional plastic.

But, the ban met resistance. (Surprise!)

Kenney and DiCicco blame ShopRite and the plastic bag industry for fighting the bill until it deteriorated.

Kudos to you, plastic bag lobbying industry, for saving us from public service
announcements ,and having to bring our own bags shopping.

Now put that plastic bag over your head, hold it tight, and inhale deeply.

Neal Santos

At a meeting yesterday, the Philadelphia City Planning Commission voted unanimously to raise the penalty for biking on sidewalks. The fine, which currently applies to everyone over 12 years old, will go up from $10 to $50. It’s unclear whether the currently spotty enforcement of sidewalk biking will change as a result.

The measure, known as Bill 090444, will also give the Streets Department the power to designate certain sidewalks for mixed pedestrian and bike traffic upon recommendation from the Planning Commission.

Don’t expect your neighborhood’s sidewalks to become hybrid bike lanes anytime soon, though.

“You’re not going to see a proliferation of recommendations from us,” said Alan Greenberger, the Planning Commission’s executive director. “The commission’s default answer,” he went on, “will be no.”

The city does at least plan to connect trails, specifically the upcoming Central Delaware Riverfront Trail, via legal sidewalk biking.

As Isaiah Thompson’s cover story argues, Philadelphia has a lot of potential to become a haven for cyclists, provided it take certain steps. There might even be an ally for that cause on the Planning Commission. Commissioner (and President of Philadelphia’s council of AFL-CIO) Patrick Eiding remarked at the meeting that he hoped the bill would raise some awareness about the state of Philadelphia’s bike lanes.

The Planning Commission’s recommendation is non-binding, so the City Council will vote on the bill again tomorrow.

In a hastily arranged press conference yesterday afternoon, Mayor Michael Nutter and City Council president Anna Verna announced that Council and the mayor had reached an agreement over the budget. (For those who haven’t been following this siuation closely, I’ve included a sum-up that can you read after the jump.)

The new plan has the city extending a temporary 1 percent sales tax increase (contingent on approval by Harrisburg) from three years, as originally proposed by the mayor, to five years. That still leaves a hole of about $271 million, most of which will be taken care of by deferring payments to the city’s pension fund for two years, making up the sum within this five-year plan.

There are a few reasons why we might like this. First, we get to keep most of our city services without paying a whole lot more in taxes. And unlike Council’s proposal, we don’t have to borrow money from outside lenders (although we are, in effect, borrowing money from ourselves).

That’s where it gets sticky. Council’s plan — and now the hybrid Nutter-Council plan — both depend on the economy getting better within the next year or two, which is what Nutter’s finance team believes will happen.

But what if it doesn’t? Nutter’s original plan, love it or hate it, raised taxes now to curtail a deficit now. The new plan borrows (by delaying payments we have to make) from the future to pay for present deficits.

And the future seems (to me, anyway) anything but certain. The economy is still shrinking (Obama just raised the projected deficit for the country; will Nutter be doing the same in a few months?). The jobless rate is still hovering its highest mark in 25 years. The global economy, meanwhile, may just be sipping on the first shot of a global bender.

Maybe the economy will get better in a year, or in two years. But it seems risky to bet on it.

At the press conference yesterday, Inquirer reporter Marcia Gelbart raised this very issue, asking Nutter what would happen if revenues did not meet projections.

“I know that there are others around that will have more of a doom and gloom outlook on life,” the mayor answered. “I do not believe that we’re going to stay in this kind of economic crisis forever.”

Call me Mr. Doom and Gloom — but two years and “forever,” it seems to me, are a long ways apart.

(more…)

Fascinating news breaking today: Philly.com’s Heard in the Hall and Philly Clout are reporting that Mayor Michael Nutter has conceded that he will not seek to raise the property tax.

This is a surprising 180 for the mayor, who, up into the weekend, seemed to be sticking to his guns on this issue — even though passing the proposed hike through Council seemed all but impossible, especially in the wake of an Inquirer investigation of ineptitude (and worse) at the Board of Revision of Taxes.

But three hours ago, Heard in the Hall broke the news (Sorry, Clout — they had you by five minutes, according to Mr. Google Reader) that Council and the mayor were working on a deal that would not involve raising the property tax.

But then, within an hour, both blogs seemed to be getting the same message from Nutter: It’s not a done deal. From Heard in the Hall:

“Nothing has been finalized,” [Nutter spokesman Doug] Oliver said. “There are still some moving pieces, and we’re still talking with Council leadership. We’re cautiously optimistic that we will find common ground and able to move forward with one voice.”

Most recently, Clout reported that Councilman James Kenney, an ally of the mayor on Council, is confirming that there’s a “tentative” deal in place.

The idea seems to go along with Council’s plan of extending a temporary sales tax hike of 1 percent from Nutter’s proposed three years to five years.

That still leaves about a $200 million hole, that would have been filled with the mayor’s proposed property tax increase.

Council wanted to borrow money to fill it, an idea which the mayor promptly rejected. Apparently, there’s been some compromise on that, too. Heard in the Hall reports that “Nutter has apparently proposed some form of financing involving the pension fund.”

If anyone out there can decode that one right now, please have at it — but for the moment, we can’t help much.

We’ll keep you posted.

Rumor has it that Philadelphia City Council will announce a consulting contract with economic consulting firms Econsult and Fairmount Capital Adivsors today.

As Philly Clout already noted, Econsult and Council are not the most likely pair: Mayor Nutter, who briefly worked for the company himself, has cited Econsult studies to justify his own budget. Meanwhile, he’s derided Council’s proposal — which calls for an extension of the sales tax, and borrowing money off a project surplus — as irresponsible.

Econsult’s supposed to be Nutter’s sweetie. How did the company manage to get under the covers with Council?

Maybe Council is simply so dedicated to getting the best study, finding the truest truth, that they hired a company that’s been supporting the mayor. Or maybe they already expect Econsult to agree with them.

I’m reminded of this little tidbit from last week’s Inky:

Council leaders said they were encouraged about their plan to borrow $200 million after meeting yesterday with experts from two municipal finance firms, Econsult and Fairmount Capital Advisors.

“We’re being informally told that, yeah, you can do this,” O’Neill said. He noted the money could stem from a bond issue or a loan from a consortium of banks.

So Econsult and Fairmount Capital appear (O’Neill, to be fair, doesn’t say who is telling them they can “do this”) to tell Council “informally” that their plan will work. A week later, guess who’s lined up for a contract to give a “formal” — and, theoretically, objective — opinion?

Yesterday afternoon, Mayor Nutter officially signed legislation to prohibit the use of handheld cell phones while operating a car, bicycle or “any other vehicle” (this includes Rollerblades, kids) while traveling in Philly. Sponsored by councilmen William Greenlee, Frank Rizzo and William Green, the bill will carry a fine of $150 if you’re caught chatting en route, a fee that’ll drop to $75 if you pay it within 10 days of being issued the ticket. The use of hands-free devices such as Bluetooths while driving, however, will still be permitted.

According to a statement from the mayor’s office, the city will begin enforcing this new law on November 1, 2009. Until that time, the city government has vowed to properly educate Philly drivers about the restrictions.

PREVIOUSLY:

- Put down the cell phone, d- bag

- Council passes no-hands cell phone bill; the Car Talk guys would say they’ve missed the point

- Mayor Nutter to sign cell phone ban at 4 p.m. today

The cell phone driving ban that City Council passed unanimously (17-0) on April 16 will be signed into effect this afternoon. Michael Nutter will discuss the particulars of the legislation during a press conference at 4 p.m. today at the Eakins Oval, where a number of passing motorists will likely bust out their phones and call their friends to brag about how they just drove by the mayor.

PREVIOUSLY:

- Put down the cell phone, d- bag

- Council passes no-hands cell phone bill; the Car Talk guys would say they’ve missed the point

A newly united anti-casino coalition is challenging city officials — Councilman Frank DiCicco in particular — to put some teeth on a law DiCicco recently proposed that would lay the groundwork for Foxwoods to set up shop in Market East. Members attended a meeting of the Philadelphia Planning Commission yesterday to make their point.

The “No Casino In the Heart of Our City Coalition” (NCITHOO … aw, forget it) is a relatively new anti-casino group. It was founded by Arch Street Methodist Church, the Philadelphia Black Clergy and Asian Americans United, but has had more than 40 groups sign on since, including churches, civic groups and business associations.

Recently, as part of an effort to which Mayor Nutter has enthusiastically attached himself, DiCicco put forth legislation that would rezone the former Strawbridge & Clothier site in Market East into a Commercial Entertainment District (CED) so that Foxwoods casino can set up shop.

While maintaining their opposition to any casinos in the city, the Coalition has meanwhile sent a letter to DiCicco asking him to insert into that legislation various regulations and requirements for the casinos:

As it currently stands, the CED contains no consumer protections. It spot zones. It dispenses with all land use studies such as traffic, environmental, etc. It also was most recently amended to remove public oversight and protections (like a final City Council review of the Plan of Development).

 

The CED can be amended to include reasonable zoning and land use regulations of both casinos. Such an amended CED would recognize the unique location of these casinos across from homes and near schools, children and families. As you know, the Gaming Act and the Supreme Court both recognize that the City of Philadelphia has full use of its zoning and land use power, so long as it is not exercised to change the location of a casino.

Specifically, they’re asking for:

1)  Restricted operating hours.

2) A ban on any ATM machines, lending or check-cashing services, etc.

3)  Open and transparent annual reports and consumer protection studies of slot machines.

4) Mandatory monthly statements to gamblers.

5) Analysis of gambler demographics and economic impact on local communities.

6) A Ban on off-track betting.

According to Coalition member Helen Gym, the Planning Commission was less than receptive to public input. “People felt rudely mistreated by the Planning Commission,” said Gym. “There was no effort to acknowledge our presence beyond emphasizing our 3-minute limit to speak … there wasn’t even a ‘thank you’ for the fact that community people, some of whom were victims of gambling addiction, had spent 4 hours in a hot room, standing, waiting patiently to give testimony.”

Councilman DiCicco, meanwhile, canceled an appointment to meet with the Coalition after the meeting. Gym says she’s spoken with DiCicco since and hopes that there will be another opportunity to meet.

Tom and Ray’s Facebook page

These guys think hands-free isn’t enough.

A bill sponsored by at-large Councilmembers Frank Rizzo, Bill Green, and Bill Greenlee that would require drivers to use hands-free cell phones while driving passed in Council yesterday, 17-0.

The intent of the bill is safety; but it’s worth pointing out a philosophy that Car Talk gurus Ray and Tom Magliozzi have really taken a stand, in their own way, on this issue. Their point: it’s not your hands that are the problem, stupid, it’s your brain.

In a letter to the San Jose Mercury News, the brothers wrote:

Some cell phone companies are in favor of a hands-free law. (Now there’s a coincidence. Taking this stand gives them a chance to sell new phones to millions of customers.) Some legislators see the hands-free option as a compromise. It’s not a compromise. It’s a cop-out. When you’re talking on a cell phone, it’s the brain that’s distracted, not the hands.

The cell phone lobbyists will tell you that using a hands-free phone is the same as talking to a passenger, but it’s not. We’re not psychologists, but it’s clear that talking on the phone while driving somehow drags you away from the here and now. It may have something to do with visualizing the person you’re talking to. Drivers talking to a passenger do not stray from lane to lane; cell phone users do.

Do we trust all drivers to know when enough alcohol is enough? Of course not. Laws are necessary, since we can’t trust everybody’s judgment.

Our suggestion is that any proposed legislation focus on distraction; that is, the bills should ban any behavior that dangerously distracts a driver’s attention. The ban should include talking on cell phones of all kinds, hands-free or not. And to answer the critics who say, “What about other distractions?” the ban should also cover surfing the Web while driving (it’s coming); blow-drying one’s hair while driving (we’ve seen it); and building a model airplane out of balsa wood while driving (just anticipating the next trend).

I think they’ve got a great point; the bill passed in Council today might be a step in the right direction, but it also misses the larger point: drivers need to focus on driving.

Does it kind of suck? Yes. But, as Tom puts it: I know it’s inconvenient to pull over to make a call. But it’s inconvenient to be operating your motorized wheelchair with your tongue, too. Think about that the next time you start fumbling for your keypad.”

Interesting little piece in the DN today about a recent increase in enrollments in the controversial DROP program. Reports Catherine Lucey:

Applications to enter the city’s controversial retirement plan doubled in March compared with February, fueled in part by worker concerns that the perk may be eliminated.

Records show that 302 city employees applied to enter the Deferred Retirement Option Program (DROP) in March. That’s up from 158 in February.

There are no plans to get rid of DROP, but Mayor Nutter has recently raised questions about it.

This is the controversial program that allows city workers to set a date for their retirement, and then collect their pension in a big lump sum payment.

Most of the controversy, however, has to do with Council members who enroll in the program — a loophole allows a Councilperson to “retire” for a few days, collect their payment (as much as half a million dollars in some cases) and then run again for office.

The issue blew up recently as Council and Mayor Nutter duked it out over the budget. To learn more about the issue, you can listen to the most recent episode of Philly From Scratch: The Podcast, in which we interview Committee of Seventy’s Zach Stalberg and Councilman Frank Rizzo about the program.

scottoncapecod.wordpress.com

City Council just approved a ban on the use of handheld cell phones while driving. From CBS3:

Motorists in Philadelphia will soon have to hang up and drive.

City council approved a proposed ban on using a handheld cell phone while driving.

One of the bill’s sponsors, councilman Bill Greenlee  said violators would face a $50 fine for their first offense.

The ban will apply only to handheld phones, so handsfree devices would still be permitted. The ban also applies to those riding bicycles or in-line skating.

What?! So no more blading and chatting? What if I’m on rollerskates? Does that still count?

I think this is a great idea and should specifically be geared at the douchebag making the right hand turn on Fourth and Chestnut a couple weeks ago who ran over my foot and then proceeded to yell at me even though I had the right of way, all without hanging up. Yeah, I’m talking to you, silver Acura.