The Next Mayor

Both Al Taubenberger and Michael Nutter were on the job on Labor Day. And both were promising a real race in November, though that was undermined a bit by the fact that Michael Nutter began his day by speaking to a crowd of labor leaders gathered to also hear from AFL-CIO president John Sweeney, and Al Taubenberger started his day by listening to Michael Nutter. (Maybe Nutter's exalted perch was a Democrat/union labor thing.)

Still, I was relieved to hear not only that both promise to compete, but that they did it with a little wit.

From Chris Brennan's coverage in today's Daily News:

Nutter laughed at the notion of a hiatus between the May primary and Labor Day, asking: “Did we ever stop?”

On stage, Nutter spoke of Democratic unity after a five-way primary. “The primary is over and all five of us who ran in that race are all still working to make Philadelphia a great place,” he said.

The other four candidates from the Democratic primary were, however, noticeably absent at yesterday’s festivities.

As he marched with union members from Washington Avenue to Penn’s Landing, Nutter was repeatedly addressed as “Mr. Mayor” or “Mayor Nutter.”

But Nutter refuses to buy into the public perception of his inevitable victory.

“I learned a long time ago when I was playing high school football to play to the last whistle and when there is no time left on the clock,” Nutter said. “We’re not slowing down until the polls close at 8 p.m. on Tuesday, Nov. 6. That’s how I play.”

Taubenberger, who mingled with Republican City Councilmen Frank Rizzo and Jack Kelly, praised Nutter as a “good man” but promised a competitive race. He said Democratic control of the city for almost six decades had created unhappy voters ready for a change in City Hall.

“You know what? Underdogs do win,” Taubenberger said. “Ask Mike Nutter.”

Philadelphia Magazine makes asks a good question in their September issue. What does John Street do for a second (or third, but who's counting) act?

Make your own suggestions in the comments.

I've got an idea. In the middle of the worst wave of homicides to come over the city since the end of the crack-fueled epidemic of the 80s, let's cut funding for a program modeled on one that has been directly attributed to creating a "miracle" in another city:

FOR EIGHT YEARS, the Youth Violence Reduction Partnership has worked with troubled kids in some of Philadelphia's most dangerous neighborhoods, cutting murder rates among its target population and prompting calls to expand the program.

In the 24th and 25th Police Districts - in eastern North Philadelphia, Kensington and Port Richmond - where the partnership has worked longest, youth homicides have dropped by more than 40 percent.

Sigh.

Bribery.

In his latest e-missive, Philadelphia Forward's Brett Mandel brings attention to a low profile criminal case that demonstrates the flaws in the city's real estate assessment process:

James F. Lynch, a Board of Revision of Taxes tax assessor, and developer James F. Campenella both recently pled guilty to charges of bribery and fraud in a scheme where the developer paid the assessor $20,000 in cash in exchange for lowered tax assessments.

I found the Daily News story about this case in our Headlines Archive.

Chris Satullo made a very important point in his column in Sunday's Inquirer - patience, people!

But Nutter, a very smart guy who worked for a long time inside that ornate pile of stone called City Hall, knows something that eludes some of his giddy fans.

He will inherit national scorn and local panic over a frightening homicide rate. No man could reverse this statistic in a year, but he must appear to be mastering it or his other initiatives will pale. He'll have to deal, somehow, with the leadership meltdown in a school system that is vital to all of his long-term plans.

Readers of this blog, you're more likely than anyone to have been following this race very closely from the very beginning. You're also more likely to have a deep understanding of the difficulty and complexity of the issues facing the next mayor. That said, what are your expectations? What signals would satisfy you that the next mayor is moving the city in "the right direction?" How soon would those events have to take place before you get impatient?

One of the things I find most interesting about watching politicians (granted, it's a pretty short list) is watching them deal with the unexpected.

Government throws any of its practioners a lot of surprises. You thought it would be the Year of Making Schools Better but it turns out to be the Year of the Garbage Strike. Stuff like that.

There is such a nasty surprise potentially brewing in a spot that I doubt many people have thought much about. It's not the most important program in the city. But it was a cool idea, and if it melts down, we'd be worse off.

It's Wireless Philadelphia, the ambitious plan to provide high-speed wireless Internet access across the city. In some parks and public areas, the access would be free; for most customers, it would require a subscription of around $20 per month.

The bad news about this idea is that it is failing in cities across the country. Last week, EarthLink -- the company that will provide the actual internet service for Wireless Philadelphia -- said it would cut 900 jobs and close four offices, including one in Harrisburg. That followed an earlier annoucement that the company was taking a wait-and-see approach to other citywide wireless grand schemes. Chicago shelved its plans. So did Houston, San Francisco, Alexandria and Arlington, Virginia, and St Petersburg, Florida.

Wireless Philadelphia was quick to announce, on its blog and in a story in the Daily News, that it would press on, undeterred.

How, and what on earth could the good news about such a program be? Turns out Philly got out ahead of the Wi-Fi fray by cutting a deal with EarthLink early, and we apparently -- surprisingly! -- engineered one heck of a deal. Industry analyst Craig Settles was quoted in Silicon.com:

"Everyone wanted to be another Philadelphia. But they didn't understand the complexities of how Philadelphia structured its non-profit organisation to help defray costs...."

The story continues:

By most counts, Philadelphia was extremely lucky in being the first major US city to propose such a network. As a result the company negotiated an extremely good deal with EarthLink, which promised to pay $15m to build the network and provide service. The contract, which spans 10 years, requires the city only to provide access to light poles and other structures to deploy the wireless radios. It does not require the city to spend any amount of money with EarthLink on services, although city officials say it will likely become a customer.

Also, Wireless Philadelphia subsidises the cost for low-income households through grants. That's because Wireless Philadelphia has, wisely, pitched itself as primarily a program to get the internet in the hands of poor folks and others now cut off from a healthy exchange of information.

So Philly actually did something both first and, apparently, well, and now the whole business model is threatened. Figures.

But this is where smart goverment can step in.

Programs like this work when they are supported by the words and actions of government leaders. The next mayor could help Wireless Philadelphia meet its goals by making sure the city signs up as a customer, for example, and by pitching Philadelphians to sign up too.

Is this the most important decision the next mayor will face? No.

But it will be an interesting test of how that man handles the X factor of the crazy, unexpected mess that gets thrown at government leaders every day, and whether or not he can turn it into opportunity.

There's a decidedly school-based theme to today's news headlines.

WHYY's 91FM news has two stories today about school-related issues. In these stories they chronicle two of the most important groups of people who work in Philly's schools - the teachers and the cops - neither of whom get paid enough for what they do.

In fact, according the Metro, not only do the cops not get paid enough, but there's way too few of them to keep order. They ought to talk to the prison guards, whose staffing shortages have led to a number of creative solutions.

Perhaps not as many cops would be needed if they had better food in those schools. Granted, this story doesn't mention the quality of Aramark's food but I can imagine that there's way too little fiber and way too much fat in the typical school cafeteria.

Finally, if you're the parent of a school-aged child and you want to evaluate his or her school, just listen to a Daily News Op-Ed contributor. After years of research, he's got it all figured out:

So four things - openness, honesty, service ahead of self and positive outlook - define the good school. Both parents and policymakers should note that none of these has anything to do with money, or certification, or in-service training, or the quality of the buildings, or how many reports get filed.

Philadelphia students return to school on Monday. Good luck, everyone.

On the list of things that got buried in my email box is this call to action by the Vote For Homes! Coalition.

They want "to keep the issues of homelessness and poverty on the next mayor's agenda."

If that's an issue you feel strong about, click through on the links and fill out one of the post cards on their website. While your at it, share your own thoughts about what the next mayor can do (or can't do, if that's what you think) to alleviate poverty and homelessness in Philadelphia.

Sorry but I'm going off blog-topic for minute to pass along this piece of info from my daily Philadelphia Business Journal news update. Apparently, there's a comany out there that has the solution to obesity:

Small Bite Inc. of Haverford will use a $300,000 investment to help bring to market a mouth device that would force dieters to take smaller, slower bites.

Tonight, 7pm, at the Central Library on the Benjamin Franklin Parkway (1901 Vine Street), you have a chance to see Michael Nutter and Al Taubenberger in action, presumably as a opponents.

According to the flyer you can "let them know what you think about: crime, our schools, taxes." You know, the big three.

I'll be there, juggling a video camera, audio equipment and a notepad in an effort to be a one-man multi-platform reporter. Check out the website later tonight to see if I succeeded.

Apparently, before he rushes over to the Free Library at 7pm, Al Taubenberger is going to be partying with the college crowd at Temple.

He also appears (judging by the title of the press release) pretty confident in his ability to take down Nutter in the debate.

Coincidentally, on the same day that I finally get around to posting about the Vote For Homes! Coalition's push to put homelessness on the mayoral agenda, the Philadelphia Campaign for Housing Justice sends me a press release about a rally for Inclusionary Housing, taking place tomorrow.

Looks like some real rock stars of the housing justice world are scheduled to attend. If you're interested, check out Dilworth Plaza at City Hall at noon, tomorrow.

As you may have seen on the main site, I went to the first campaign forum of the fall season last night at the Free Library. You can check out the video summary of the event here:

Admittedly, the only thing you learn from the video is that both candidates favor giving the mayor more control over the school district and that Election Day is November 6th. That last bit of information may be critical for a lot of people who are likely to forget that there's an election this year. As short as it is, however, it's very likely the only video coverage you'll see.

Before we get to a summary of what was actually said by the candidates last night, let's get a little "meta" and break down the coverage of the event.

I was fortunate enough to pull up in front of the Free Library at exactly 6:30pm, which meant that the "Two Hour Parking 8am-4pm" and the "No Stopping from 4pm-6:30pm" time was over, making parking free. As one of the first cars to arrive in the post "No Stopping" time, I was able to get a spot directly in front of the building.

I unloaded equipment and walked across the street where I greeted Larry Eichel of the Inquirer, a very smart reporter who seems just determined as I am to find something interesting about the "contest" part of this campaign. We joked a little about how difficult it would be for me to find a spot for my tripod and camera given the army of television crews that were undoubtedly already inside jockeying for a spot near the mult box. I told him that my goal for the evening would be to find the one point on which Nutter and Taubenberger disagree.

Turns out that my mock fears of a scrum around the mult-box were unfounded (or founded?) since I was able to set up my tripod and plug in right next to the box in the back of the auditorium. There wasn't a single television camera in site. After testing my equipment to make sure everything worked, I grabbed by camera and went back outside to see if I wanted to shoot exteriors.

When I got out there I saw Dave Davies who ask me if anything exciting was going on. Since exciting was hardly the word to describe the scene in the auditorium, I used the opportunity to turn the conversation to one of our other common interests - our woeful Philadelphia baseball squad. He made some reference to 1977 which would have completely escaped me (I was 2) if I hadn't heard the story about leaving Greg Luzinski in left field for the ninth inning of Game 3 of the NLCS.

At that point, I saw "that news van" from Channel 6 pull up so I hurried back inside to throw some elbows to protect my spot. As it turns out, Action News didn't send a reporter, nor did they seem to have any intention of getting good sound from the event. The cameraman shot the candidates walking on stage, a couple more shots from the back of the hall, some shots close to the stage, a few pans and close ups of the crowd and then got the heck out of there. He was in the room for all of 25 minutes.

Fox 29 also sent just a cameraman but at least he plugged into the system to get some good sound. I didn't get to see the Ten O'Clock News but a search of their website reveals nothing about last night's event. Unless Channel 6 did the story after sports and weather, they didn't have anything at 11.

Other than that, I saw 3 or 4 still photographers, apparently with the Evening Bulletin, Inky and Daily News.

The coverage in print, which includes an article in The Evening Bulletin, emphasized the cordial tone of the affair:

Daily News -

Democratic mayoral candidate Michael Nutter and Republican nominee Al Taubenberger engaged in another friendly wonk-fest last night at the Free Library's central branch.

While the candidates emphasized different points in their answers to questions from an audience of about 400, not a single disagreement between the two emerged from the exchange.

Davies, wiley veteran that he is, dug up perhaps the only dirt to be found last night - that the moderator of the event was a Nutter supporter:

One other measure of the lack of partisan edge to the forum: No public notice was taken of the fact that the moderator, William Sasso, the Free Library Foundation's board chairman, was an early supporter, fundraiser and contributor to Nutter.

Larry Eichel actually found a point of disagreement between the two candidates:

One area of disagreement did emerge: how to deal with the planned move to full-value reassessment of residential properties in the city.

But Republican Taubenberger opposed it, saying that the assessment of a home should be based on what the buyer paid for it - regardless of when it was purchased - rather than current value.

Eichel has a little bit of an advantage there since he's written extensively about full-value assessment and has therefore developed an immunity to the eye-glazing that affects the rest of us when this complex topic gets brought up.

[An aside: I'll leave it up to Brett Mandel at Philadelphia Forward to explain why Taubenberger's idea is just as unfair (if politically easier to sell) as the current situation:

Cap Assessment Increases or Freeze Assessments — Assessments must keep pace with changes in value or the system will become even more unfair. Rate reductions or tax deferments are better tools to help homeowners.

For example, if assessment increases are capped at 5% and two homes worth $100,000 today increase in value at different rates (one at 5% per year and one at 20% per year), after five years the owner of the first house will be paying taxes based on an assessment of 100% of potential sale value but the owner of the second will be paying taxes based on an assessment of only 51% of sale value.

Now I'll leave it up to you to decide whether you agree with that or not.]

Eichel also calls the event "full of smiles and chummy kidding" - a little different from the Local 98 fueled invectives hurled at Sam Katz in 2003.

The Bulletin did the yeoman's work of event stenographer, dutifully recording most of the issues that were brought up and the candidates' answers to those questions.

Hopefully we'll able to tease some more fundamental differences in policy out of the two candidates. My quick breakdown of the event, including what, in my opinion, was the real difference between the two candidates, will follow in the next post.

WHYY's Joel Rose went to one of the Nutter for Mayor House Parties that took place last night and reported on Nutter's ability to be in several places at once (mp3).

Wait... Nutter can be omnipresent too? Apparently high expectations aren't that much of a problem afterall.

Proving that the internet can be more than just an easy way to get porn or download music, Nutter conducted a video web chat that beamed him into the living rooms of all of the house parties. He took questions from partygoers who shared in the experience.

This gives me a chance to make a big announcement for an event that The Next Mayor project will be putting on in late October.

Shortly after 10am (so you an watch from your computer at work - shhhh!) on October 25th, WHYY and its partners at The Next Mayor will welcome Michael Nutter and Al Taubenberger to Studio 1 for a live debate to be broadcast via the web and on WHYY's Digital Cable Channel 242. More information will follow at a permanent spot on thenextmayor.com. We'll have a small studio audience but we'll also be soliciting user-generated video and emails to ask the candidates about a whole range of issues.

We're also going to use the information and video that we've gotten by conducting our Community Forums and Issues Forums to provide jumping off points for deeper conversations about the issues. (That's a hint for the candidates. Watch those videos!)

Stay tuned for more information and instructions for submitting your own videos for the event!

Elmer Smith wrote more extensively about this video but I figured it might be interesting to use it as a jumping off point for a discussion about race relations in Philly. [Warning: Please keep your comments at least somewhat productive.]

Setting aside the made-up statistics being thrown around in the video, many questions are raised in this confrontation between a older black man, who claims that he can never get a cab to pick him up, and cab drivers, who themselves are overwhelmingly persons of color.

Do the cab drivers have a point when they say that their safety an experience are factors in their decisions to pick up certain riders in certain neighborhoods?

Should a young black male be essentially penalized for dressing according to a style that is often associated with the gansta-shiek culture that glorifies crime and violence? In other words, if a young black male wants to increase his chances to get picked up by a cab, especially, it seems, by these cabbies, should he just change his style of dress?

If the city wasn't currently, in the words of one of the drivers, the "murder capital" where most the crimes are instances of black-on-black violence, would this be less of a problem?

Essentially, it gets down to this - do you think that the burden of proof (or whatever) falls on the cab drivers or on the prospective customers? Should the cabbies pick absolutely everyone up no matter what the circumstances or should cab customers do what they can to conform to an appearance or style of dress that is less frightening (for lack of a better word) to the cabbies?

I realize that asking these questions pretty much assumes that what Joe Sam says - that many cabbies are less likely to pick up black customers - is true. But many of the cab drivers in the video seem to be agreeing with him while also claiming that he's wrong. They seem to be saying that they all pick up everyone BUT if a young, black male is wearing sagging pants and affecting a tough-guy look at 3am, he's not likely to get picked up.

Issues of race have always been difficult in Philadelphia, traditionally between whites and blacks. This video demonstrates that there's also some intraracial strife going on.

Oh and here's the obligatory question: What can the next mayor do to fix this?

(Special thanks to Jonathan Tannenwald at philly.com for suggesting the video.)

I get a biweekly email from the Kennedy School's Government Innovators Network that summarizes unique technological advances and new techniques being used throughout the country by municipal governments.

A couple of the items in today's email caught my attention:

New "Spymobile" catches vandals at work.

Of course, building strong cases against graffiti vandals has always been difficult, even with enhanced police attention paid to the problem. The vandals invariably try to strike when no one's looking, and the only evidence they leave, typically, is damaged property.

"These guys are great," Mr. Oddo said of MTA Police Officers Mike Yannelos and Chris D'Onofrio, who made the first-ever arrests mounted from the new vehicle. "The first day this thing was out and it paid immediate dividends," and within an hour of when it first hit the road.

We shouldn't forget that Philadelphia has its own unique and award-winning method of dealing with graffiti - The Mural Arts Program. But there's no reason we couldn't use both.

And...

Robots put garbage on a new path: Several South Florida cities are swapping the muscular biceps of their human garbage haulers for robotic arms
Pembroke Pines is the latest South Florida city to replace its noisy garbage trucks with new "one-armed bandits," whose sleek hydraulic robot arms scoop up custom cans and deposit the waste cleanly into the truck's bin.

The driver, like some heavy-duty video gamer, manages the entire operation with a joystick inside the clean, air-conditioned cab.

Not only does this reduce the need for sanitation workers, possibly freeing them up to for other tasks, but the workers who do operate the trucks are spared the wear and tear that leads to sick days, disability claims and early retirement. Of course the initial investment is large, new trucks and custom made trash cans for every property, but the long term payoff could be huge. That is, if they ever figure out how to keep this from happening:

But every new technology has bugs, and some of the automated trucks appear to have a big one: For reasons that are in dispute, they occasionally burst into flames.

Oh well, maybe not. That spymobile still seems pretty cool. Just some neat stuff for a Friday afternoon.

Multiple stories in today's headlines about Mayor Street's latest idea to generate revenue - actually collecting unpaid taxes! (DN, Inky, PBJ)

From the Daily News:

Starting today the city will mail tax notices to 23,000 property owners and thousands of businesses in hopes of collecting on tax debt totaling $688 million - $394 million in delinquent property taxes and $294 million in delinquent business and other taxes.

Over the next five years, the Street administration projects, the school district would get $126.6 million from the delinquent-tax-collection program and the city would get $109 million.

Great idea but it begs the question: why has the city been so lax, up to now, in collecting the money that is properly owed to it? Also, what faith should we, the law abiding suckers who actually pay our taxes, have that the city will actually come through with this latest plan? I feel like giving some kudos to the city for doing this would be like congratulating someone because they started shoveling the snow from their sidewalk.

For those of you who fear that this could lead to a wholesale eviction of thousands of low-income home owners, don't worry. It seems that the city has anticipated this:

Street said the city will set aside $1.5 million, a "safety net fund," to fund loans and other support services for "people who are really, really desperate and need some help."

Services will include housing counseling, exchanging predatory loans for "fair interest rate" loans, and actual tax forgiveness, according to the city's consumer advocate, Lance Haver.

Are you a candidate groupie? Do you want to know where your favorite mayoral wannabe will be at all times this weekend? Well, you're in the right place...

Michael Nutter's public schedule.

If you plan on tagging along, you better stretch and warm up. Nutter will be participating in the Bicycle Coalition of Greater Philadelphia's BikePhilly Tour on Sunday morning.

If you're a fan of the arts in Philadelphia and like to mix your arts with a little politics, there's a Town Hall Meeting on the Arts on Sunday night at The Painted Bride Art Center. WHYY's Susan Phillips has more on that.

Enjoy!

Today, Philadelphia public school students will go back to their classes. And they will re-enter a district with no permanent chief executive officer, no permanent chief academic officer, no permanent chief financial officer and no permanent chief operating officer. (Oh, and there's that remaining deficit to deal with.)

But that's sort of par for the course.

What I'd rather talk about is how to deal with it. And how the long-suffering supporters of Philly schools could find unlikely allies in some places that I doubt very seriously the average city seventh-grader has heard of:

Philadelphia should unite with the state's poorest, most rural counties (Pike County, anyone?) to demand school funding that depends less on property taxes and more on statewide funding.

I realize this is not a new idea; education advocates are working on it now. So should the next mayor.

Here are some facts to consider:

In 2004-05, the state share of school costs in Pennsylvania funded by the state budget amounted to 35.8%. Nationally, the average is closer to 50% paid by the state.

There is a $10,259 gap between what the highest and lowest spending school districts in Pennsylvania spend per pupil on current expenditures. The highest spending district spent $18,064 per student in 2004-2005; the lowest only $6,991. This translates into a $276,825 gap per classroom of 25 students.

As a result of insufficient state funding, public education in Pennsylvania is more dependent on local taxes than in most states, and school district property taxes in Pennsylvania are therefore among the highest in the country.

Those facts are from Good Schools Pennsylvania, which is one of those groups fighting for a statewide solution (the group is strongly pro-state funding; former Philadelphia schools superintendent David Hornbeck, who knows the schools' needs personally, is on its board). But they are largely backed up by non-partisan sources including Standard and Poor's.

I don't want to get sidetracked on a discussion of how much money Philly schools should or should not get. We will learn more about that from the ongoing "costing out" study the state government has launched, which is designed to determine just how much it costs to run each of the state's 501 school districts.

I think we can assume that Philly isn't getting everything it needs, though I also think there will be other poorer districts with deeper needs, many in rural areas.

And let's not call this "impossible" because of Pennsylvania's deep divide between city and country. Another state -- one far more divided between black and white, between rich and poor -- has already done it. That was South Carolina in 1984, and the fact that one of the nation's most fiscally and socially conservative states has beaten us to this crucial reform should shame Pennsylvanians into at least giving the idea a thought.

The next mayor has a smart political play to make here. He can reach out to those rural districts and begin to build the trust required to make a joint appeal to lawmakers and to the governor to launch a big-thinking reform of state funding for education. Somehow, this seems more helpful than re-taking control of the schools.

It was not a popular idea down in the Palmetto State when then-Gov. Dick Riley began working for it in 1983. He spent months waving around facts that sound alarmingly like what Good Schools PA pushes. But what became the South Carolina Education Improvement Act, which raised sales taxes statewide to pay for school improvements, was eventually passed and quickly became the savior of some of the nation's worst schools.

South Carolina isn't yet an educational model, by far. But it gets an A for improvement and for effort.

While Pennsylvania hasn't even acknowledged yet that it needs remedial work.

I just got done catching up with all of the weekend's news. Nothing like 6 loads of laundry, 14 shirts and two pairs of pants to iron and simultaneous Eagles and Phillies games to keep a guy from following current events.

For now, if you've ever wanted to see Michael Nutter in a cycling jersey, here's your chance!

Discuss. I'll be back with more later.

Michael Nutter's edition of "My First Day of School" is a photo essay of his visits to Reynolds Elementary School and Vaux High School. It also includes a photo of the candidate greeting folks at yesterday's GreenFest Philly. The Nutter campaign was also sent out a pic of their guy with one of his former rivals from the primary.

The Taubenberger campaign informs us that Al will be spending tomorrow evening at a solemn commemoration of September 11th.

Both candidates for mayor will be in the same location tonight, but NOT for a candidate forum or debate. Michael Nutter and Al Taubenberger will commemorate September 11th at the Interfaith Remembrance Ceremony for Prayer & Peace on Bustleton Avenue in Northeast Philly.

The event, to be held at Maternity of the Blessed Virgin Mary Roman Catholic Church, 9220 Old Bustleton Avenue, and neighboring Temple Beth Ami Synagogue, 9201 Old Bustleton Avenue, will take place at 7pm, tonight.

Feel free to use this thread for comments about your own thoughts and memories of 9/11. As for me, I can clearly remember driving along the Route 30 bypass on my way from Exton to Downingtown to go to BJ's Wholesale Club to stock up. It was a crisp, beautiful fall day and for whatever reason, I was listening to Howard Stern. I had never been much of a Stern fan but I just happened to the channel in time to hear him recounting everything he was seeing on cable news.

I remember trying to call one of my friends in NYC and not being able to get through due to the intense volume of calls overwhelming the cell phone system in New York. I got an email from him a couple days later letting me and my other friends know that he was ok.

At the time I was working at a boarding school that had a pretty good amount of kids from New York as students. They and the rest of the student body were hastily assembled and assured that the school would do its best to help them contact their families to make sure everything was ok. As far as I know, no one at the school lost any family members or friends or knew anyone who did.

The rest of the day and the following weeks are all a blur, aside from the countless number of times that I saw the replay of the planes crashing into the buildings. Though I don't consider myself to have been or to be as "affected" by the incident as other people and I tend to think some local post 9-11 security measures (ie the fact that I can no longer walk over the plaque commemorating JFK's appearance at Indepedence Hall on July 4, 1962) are an overreaction, I think those memories of 9-11 will remain as vivid to me 50 years from now as they are today.

Brett Mandel and his merry band of reformers at Philadelphia Forward are at it again. His latest email/call-to-action encourages folks who just had their houses reassessed by the Board of Revision of Taxes to appeal those assessments.

He even provides all of the language to use on the form:

Attach the following language to your appeal to demonstrate that you understand that all properties are to be treated uniformly, but that in Philadelphia the entire assessment system is fundamentally flawed...(feel free to cut and paste and print it out to attach to your appeal)

Though it's not explicity stated, I think he may be trying to pick a fight that ends up in the Commonwealth Court system, at which point, the Court would almost certainly have to rule that the current assessment system violates the state constitution's "uniformity" rule:

The Pennsylvania Constitution demands that "all taxes shall be uniform, upon the same class of subjects, within the territorial limits of the authority levying the tax." The city is in comprehensive violation of uniformity and the most-recent assessments do not correct the problems. The assessment lacks uniformity with other properties within the taxing jurisdiction and is therefore illegal, improper and unjust.

Such a ruling would pretty much force the city to make the changes necessary for full/fair market valuation. The BRT has been preparing for this for a while and has completed the citywide reassessment, so they could probably have the new assessments out pretty quickly. That would put the ball squarely in the court of elected officials, who would then be responsible for setting the tax rates and putting the mechanisms in place to protect low-income folks from sharp increases in their tax bills.

Or maybe Philadelphia Forward is just trying to help people get their tax bills lowered.

This gives us a chance to review one of the actual policy differences between Al Taubenberger and Michael Nutter.

Click "Continue Reading" for details.

Last week, I wrote about WHYY's Joel Rose's trip to a "Nutter House Party" and the candidate's use of this magical thing called the internet to communicate with several such parties at once.

If you're like me, which is to say you don't get invited to a lot of parties, and you missed this one, you can watch the video of Nutter's webchat from that night.

On the front page of the site, we featured a story by Catherine Lucey about Councilman Wilson Goode Jr.'s new bill to provide incentives to businesses for hiring ex-cons. The fun part of this story is that the bill was actually authored by Michael Nutter and became a major part of his primary campaign.

...The legislation awards $10,000 in tax credits to employers who hire ex-offenders, and provides support services and career training to ex- prisoners.

Nutter put forth the idea for the program — named the Philadelphia Re-Entry Employment Program or "PREP" — during the primary election campaign in May. Shortly after he won, he asked Goode if he would consider introducing the bill.

I wonder if the name of the program is an homage to Nutter's high school alma mater?

The bill seems to cover everything - education and housing for ex-offenders and, just to be sure that they're not getting it all for free, the program participants will pay 5% of their wages back to the city. (Hmmm... I'm paying 4% of my wages to the city and I ain't never been to jail.)

There's some universal praise towards the end of the article which leaves us hoping that Nutter enjoys such a good working relationship with City Council and government watchdog groups when he actually is the mayor.

Speaking of government watchdog groups (see end of previous post), Zack Stalberg at the Committee of Seventy makes a pretty fair point about what otherwise seems to be a worthwhile project by lame-duck City Councilwoman Carol Campbell.

Seems that Campbell decided that the city's Basic Systems Home Repair Program, which provides money to very low income individuals and families so they can perform repairs to their homes, wasn't serving her district well enough. So she took action:

Campbell created her district's own program to help people make structural, electrical and plumbing repairs so they can stay in their houses. District residents no longer have to apply to the citywide program, with its waiting list 3,400 names long, including 375 from the Fourth District. They can go straight to Campbell's program, which has less stringent income standards.
...
Campbell's program uses $1.3 million in Neighborhood Transformation Initiative funding - normally reserved for buying, boarding up and demolishing vacant buildings in the districts.

Stalberg's criticism:

"The basic rules should be the same from district to district, and each of the district Council people should be aware of what the ground rules are," Stalberg said. "If it's kind of an underground program that's benefiting Councilwoman Campbell's constituents more than others, it smells wrong."

Now, Campbell answers the criticism by saying "she would not be involved in creating the list," nor will she be choosing the contractors who perform the work. But really, the problem, as pointed out by Stalberg, is less about what goes on within her district than what happens across all of the districts. It's a problem that a lot of people have with government at the local, state and federal levels.

Why should the residents of one council district be entitled to greater access to "city" resources than those of any other council district? Afterall, it's not like the "4th District" collects its own taxes then distributes that money back into the district.

On the other hand, if residents of a council district go to the trouble of choosing someone (set aside, for a moment, the fact that Campbell was chosen by ward leaders and not re-elected by the voters) because they perceive some talent and creativity in that person, why should that person be prohibited from doing everything she can to help our the folks who put her there?

And here's where we get into the real problem. City Council members (and, to some extent, the City Democratic Party) have put constituent services above and beyond their other roles as legislators. (Here's where I actually defend them.) They do this because, in many cases, "the city" has failed to deliver these services. Campbell's reappropriation of NTI funds to make up for an inefficient city program is one example. The city program has a waiting list of over 3000 people. She and Councilwoman Tasco and Councilman Savage, who also enacted similar plans, just want to get folks who live in their districts onto a shorter list.

If this is such a worthwhile program, which it seems to be, the next mayor will have to make sure that (a) people know about it and (b) they get service faster so they're not on a waiting list while their roof caves in or need a city councilperson to get them the help they need.

(Daily News coverage is here.)

Both Attytood and Philadelphia Will Do have already commented about Commissioner Johnson's clarion call for 10,000 black men to hit the streets and deter crime, but I figured I'd start a thread here too, especially since a mayoral candidate's name appears in the story:

Democratic mayoral candidate Michael Nutter, who is the favorite to win the November election to succeed Street, said he supported any effort to reduce crime.

"I think any effort to organize and rally the community to fight crime, especially black men, is important and should be actively supported," Nutter said. "We need black men in the community to not only stand up and take action in the neighborhoods, but also to reach out to many of the young black men who are involved in violence and help them turn their lives around."

And to answer Attytood's question:

Johnson said the training and patrols will be offered citywide and open to anyone, but he believes there's a special need for African-American men in Philadelphia to get involved.

The Kick-Off is October 21st at the Liacouras Center.

Don't get me wrong, I think it's a good thing that the Governor and the Mayor were able to step up and provide more money for the School District.

But what's this about the Governor's idea to create a new position, school district managing director, and filling that job with his budget secretary, Michael Masch? According to the Inquirer:

The district used to have a managing director, but several years ago split that job between a chief financial officer and chief operations officer.

Those positions are currently filled by interim appointments. Would those positions both be cut and their separate responsibilities be combined in a managing director? Or would the managing director be created to oversee two positions that perform the jobs that the managing director once had by itself?

OK, casinos. The very word is like chum to sharks. I know.

And I certainly don't mean to pander to those who oppose casinos. But I think something is going on that's worth noting.

The AP just moved a report on a Gaming Control Board meeting this afternoon that was disrupted by anti-casino advocates, one wearing the aforementioned shirt while others quoted the Pennsylvania constitution (really).

It's a story that seems to imply there's been a shift in momentum toward Philadelphia's anti-casino forces, which have been, frankly, stimied everywhere except the court of public opinion.

It's headlined "Casino protesters force early end to state gaming board meeting" and it discusses the casinos' "unlikely ally," City Council. Hmm.

Not to mention that the story starts off this way:

Anti-casino activists disrupted a state gaming board meeting on Wednesday and forced an early adjournment, signaling that the bitter grass roots battle against two city slots parlors is far from over.

Like I said, I am NOT PANDERING TO THE CASINO FIGHTERS. I just think the slight shift in tone toward the casino battle being "far from over" is, well, interesting.

If you'd like to watch for yourself, here's the video...say hi to the Daily News' Chris Brennan. And don't miss the part where the anti-casino activists compare former Gaming Control Board Chair Tad Decker to George Bush.

How often have we heard stories about friends or neighbors (or strangers) who got some sort of preferential treatment from some city official or another? Most of the time the story comes to light if it involves a major scandal - say, a tax assessor accepting a bribe and then lowering someone's property tax assessment - but often it's just a matter of "I have this friend in at L&I who said he can help out."

Bob Stone, a professor at Cal State Long Beach, writes about this in a column for Management Insights. It seems that more often than not, public officials or civil service employees have biases like any other human, and those biases affect their decision making:

Everybody has biases: we love some people, we dislike some, we like some schools, we admire people in some occupations. We recognize these biases.

But we also make assumptions, almost unconsciously, that hijack our impartiality.

The public official, he writes, is expected (and required) to put these biases aside:

Impartial judgment is part of the deal for public servants. Americans count on it. There's no room for bias in tax assessment, zoning decisions, policing, judging, or contract awards.

But, as he says, "many factors conspire to rob us of our chance at true impartiality."

Of course, this doesn't excuse such behavior, but it does remind us that in a city government with over 20,000 human employees, it's going to take a long time and a lot work to make sure they all have the ability to recognizes their biases and the methods to deal with it.

Stories like this fascinate me, not so much because of the policies being discussed, but because of the political minutia that has to be taken into consideration any time an elected official makes an announcement.

In this case, as pointed out by Governing.com's blog, The 13th Floor:

...Washington, D.C.'s Adrian Fenty has joined the ranks of the rail-riding pols -- well, temporarily:

This happens so often. An elected official wants to make a statement about gas prices so he or she arrives at the press conference in a hybrid car only to be excoriated by labor unions who complain about the foreign car. A mayor encourages everyone to ride public transportation but then travels everywhere in a veritable motorcade of large, tinted-window, SUVs. The media has a field day with the contradiction and gives very little coverage to the substance of what was said.

I don't have much of a point other than to say that it will be interesting to watch the next mayor, who so far has avoided these lapses of common sense, to see if he can keep it up.

Off topic.

Attytood (who, by the way, gave us a great shout out yesterday), posted about Stephen Colbert's reference to a recent Stu Bykofsky article about needing another 9/11 or something.

I have little comment except to say that I think it's AWESOME that Comedy Central makes it possible to embed clips from its shows:

As Colbert would say, moving on...

Tonight, Young Involved Philadelphia, UrbanPhilly.com and local businessperson Blaine Stoddart co-sponsored a forum with mayoral candidates Michael Nutter and Al Taubenberger.

Good for them, too. All the right things were said to the gathered group of about 100 young professionals by the two, who gave statements but did not take questions. Taubenberger told the group, "You really are the furnace that drives the engine of economic development," and added, "What we really need in this city is to have you fully engaged." Nutter talked about public safety, education and economic development.

Ok, that's good too. But what's starting to get a leeetle wearing is the constant back-slapping between these two. I realize the race is lopsided, but has it actually been conceded?

Nutter seemed to make a mention of this concern, discussing the difference in tenor (no kidding) of the primary and the general elections. "Al Taubenberger and I are trying to change the nature of politics here in Philadephia," he said. "We're not vying as contestants on American Gladiators."

Sure, but maybe we can have a little less Philadelphia Glad-handing and a little more debate over issues where the two do diverge, such as stop and frisk. The city has a serious choice to make about its next leader, after all.

We pause to recognize the outstanding work of the Institute for the Study of Civic Values and Ed Schwartz, its executive director (and a former City Councilman). Today, they will gather with 400 fellow travellers to talk about setting a neighborhood-focused agenda for the years to come.

Neighborhood organizing is arduous work, and Schwartz wrote the book -- literally. And he's not a guy who rests much, so tomorrow's agenda has an ambitious agenda that features the current mayor (who will "lay out the neighborhood priorities of his administration through the end of the year") as well as one of the two guys who will be the next mayor (who will "outline their neighborhood priorities for the next four years.")

It also features former mayoral candidate Dwight Evans, speaking (for what has to be one of the first times since the primary excitement finally wrapped up) on how to work with Harrisburg.

And it features a special panel on the environment by several panelists who are part of our Next Mayor Community Network.

Events start at 8:30 at the Convention Center. PhillyBlocks 2007 event information can be found here.

Let's stay on this neighborhood theme with which Wendy started the day - at the stroke of midnight.

In today's Daily News, Dan Geringer has more information about today's PhillyBlocks Conference 2007. It appearas to be another star-studded affair:

PhillyBlocks Conference 2007 will see grassroots neighborhood people brainstorming with Mayor Street, mayoral candidates Michael Nutter and Al Taubenberger, state Rep. Dwight Evans, interim school district CEO Tom Brady and an all-star cast of social-service leaders to make Philadelphia the "Next Great City" by addressing its critical problems.

Maybe they'll discuss ways to address people's fears of gentrification, a subject that gets about 2300 very passionate words in today's Philadelphia Tribune. Where some see gentrification, and the accompanying rise in property values, as the positive result of attempts to clean up, redevelop and secure once run-down or transitional neighborhoods, some long-time residents only see a tax bill which may force them from their homes. (Not to mention all those whipper snappers who want to plant those godforsaken trees.)

It seems to have actually gotten to the point where those residents are seeking to take action to prevent gentrification in much the same way as inner-ring suburban residents sometimes try to keep lower income city folk out of their neighborhoods:

For Elliott and the others gathered in the South Philadelphia community center, gentrification wasn’t an abstract socioeconomic problem. They’ve felt its pinch.

In South Philadelphia, a rising tide of property values and rents in Center City has put more pressure on residents as people priced out of Center City move south, forcing up values, and taxes, there.

The article makes several good points about the possible ill effects of rising property values on renters and homeowners with low or fixed incomes. Here's yet another one of those issues that makes me glad I'm not in the next mayor's shoes. This one's especially tough since it's a case of something happening that's theoretically positive for the city as a whole but intensely bad for many individuals. Individuals like Ronald Elliot:

He was faced with the loss of his home on South 22nd Street for $1,000 in back taxes he was unable to pay.

“They’re giving away so much money they are doing anything to draw in money from anywhere,” he said.

In a conversation with Brett Mandel a couple days ago, he mention that in the issue of Full Value Assessment or property, there's going to be some winners and some losers. He agreed that their are some policies that can be enacted to soften the blow of Full Value Assessment but that really only changes, a little, who wins and who loses. The same is true for the closely related issues of 10-year tax abatement, gentrification and rising property values. Check out the Tribune article, it's filled with plenty of insightful stories of people who represent the "losers."

PGW.

What did you think I was going to say? Pat's vs. Geno's?

Anyway, the big news is that, thanks to the Pennsylvania Utilities Commission, those of us who are customers of the city-owned gas company are going to be spared large rate hikes this winter in favor of slightly smaller rate hikes. (DN, Inky, WHYY News)

So this is good, right? Not so, according to a Daily News editorial that anticipated this decision a couple days ago:

Despite the improvements in its management, collections and operations, the company, with its huge population of low-income ratepayers, has few options for stabilizing its operations.

We hope the PUC does not adopt this recommendation.

The PUC followed through with the $25 million increase, keeping PGW from being able to retire any of that debt and probably makes it need to take on more debt.

So what did the chairman of the PUC suggest that the city do with PGW after denying a rate increase that would help make the gas company more attractive to a potential buyer:

The chairman of the state Public Utility Commission said yesterday that the real cure for the debt-ridden, city-owned Philadelphia Gas Works is to sell it.

"This is a classic case of a company that needs to be acquired in order to work out its financial and operational problems," said Chairman Wendell F. Holland. "That's the big picture and until that happens, PGW will remain Philadelphia's number one energy issue."

What kind of organization would pay the amount of money the city would require for such an baggage-ridden, underperfoming, unpredictable product?

Republican mayoral candidate Al Taubenberger said today that campaigning has been good for his waistline, reports Catherine Lucey.

He told the crowd at the PhillyBlocks Conference at the Convention Center that he’s lost 15 pounds since the race began.

“My goal is to lose some more weight and win the election,” he said.

More from the neighborhoods conference, thanks again to Catherine Lucey: Michael Nutter says he wants to help Philly weather the sub-prime real estate crises.

The Democratic mayoral candidate said today at the PhillyBlocks conference that he wants to meet with Philadelphia banking CEOs to talk about how the city can help people keep their houses.

“It’s not in the city’s interest to have thousands of people thrown out of their homes,” Nutter said. “If we bring our bankers together, I know they care about Philadelphia and don’t want tragic results.”

Nutter said he needed more information before he could say what form a solution might take.

Over the past year the US has seen a sharp rise in foreclosures on sub-prime mortgages – loans given to people with weak credit histories. The crisis peaked this summer, threatening the overall economy.

Michael Nutter won two endorsements this weekend -- one from a group who endorsed another candidate in the primary.

On Friday, Nutter picked up the endorsement of the Philadelphia Council of Clergy (after first picking up trash on the 2900 block of Cumberland Street).

And then, on Sunday, Teamsters Joint Council 53 endorsed Nutter too. That would be the union that represents 60,000 union members in the city and surrounding areas -- and endorsed Bob Brady (natch, he snapped up most of the union endorsements) in the primary.

But hey, Brady's not gonna hold a grudge over the primary. As you can see, the Congressman had a blast with Nutter at his Annual Community Picnic Sept. 8.

Final point: You'll recall that Nutter has already won the endorsement of the the Fraternal Order of Police.

What a difference a primary victory makes.

I remember one of the things brought up after Michael Nutter announced his candidacy for mayor back on July 22, 2006 was that there were very few elected officials present for the event. In fact, I believe the only one was State Rep. Kathy Manderino. (Unfortunately I didn't archive that story so if anyone can find it from 7/22's Daily News or 7/23's Inquirer, please do.)

Well, Manderino is back for this "Women for Nutter" event and she's not the only one. Councilwoman Marion Tasco (a former Evans supporter, I believe) gave this glowing quote for the release:

“it is critical for us to continue to provide support to Michael Nutter as a way to ensure his success on November 6th.”

Like I said, what a difference a primary win makes.

I really want the next commercial to have the same voice over guy saying, "first base, Al Taubenberger... second base, Al Taubenberger... third base Al Taubenberger..."

Enjoy.

Your comments are most welcomed.

Via Philebrity, it looks like Michael Nutter finally raised the ire of a group of folks who aren't afraid of being stopped and frisked:

Anti-Casino Moms!

The Mothers Against Sugarhouse takes issue with former PGCB chairman Tad Decker's fundraiser on behalf of the Democratic nominee:

For Nutter to endorse and attend this fundraiser is beyond shocking. I encourage all moms to write him letters voicing your disappointment that he is willing to accept campaign contributions from someone with such questionable ethical standards, and who is responsible for imposing this casino on our neighborhoods in such gross violation of our democratic rights.

Hopefully they don't use the dreaded wooden spoon on him like my mom used when my brother and I got out of line.

Michael Nutter didn't wow the anti-casino moms, but he was the ladies' choice at a Women for Nutter fund-raiser Monday night. About 300 women packed the event at the Moore College of Art tonight, reports Catherine Lucey. And the gals paid for the proximity to Nutter: tickets ranged in price from $125 to (gulp) $1,000.

(Side note: What's the money for? Based on the one-time-aired-as-far-as-we-can-tell commercial from Al Taubenberger, any ad war is just gonna be ... lopsided.)

Nutter's political director, Terry Gillen, opened the event with a shout-out to Nutter's almost-entirely-female staff. "We did decide we'd have a male candidate," she said. "Isn't he doing a great job?" Big cheers.

Another crowd-pleaser was Nutter's wife, Lisa, who noted the crowd was big enough to start "our own sorority: Alpha Kappa Nutter."

The man himself tailored his stump-speech comments to the crowd, stressing anti-domestic-violence efforts, inclusion in city work and boards and his abortion-rights views. And he nodded to the fact that the honeymoon with these women -- and the honeymoon with every other voter in Philadelphia -- is now.

If he wins, of course.

If he wins, he said, "January 7 will be a wonderful day of celebration," Nutter said. "And on the 8th, we're going to be very busy."

Catherine Lucey has an important story in today's Daily News, where she reveals that top Philly Republicans are a little baffled by the campaign being run by Republican candidate Al Taubenberger.

That would include Michael Meehan, general counsel of the city GOP, who admitted he's sent newspaper clippings to Taubenberger to try to elicit some sort of agenda-clarifying public reaction from the candidate. "I don’t know what to say,” Meehan said.

Let's be clear: No one is expecting Taubenberger to morph into Sam Katz (who also expressed in Catherine's story a desire to hear more from Taubenberger).

And, while a few clearly argued policy papers would be helpful, that's not really what this election needs.

We need the two candidates to stop getting along so well.

Sounds cynical, but it's true. Taubenberger could play a vital role in this election merely by needling Nutter into more discussion of his policies. For example, Taubenberger says he has questions on stop and frisk. So do others in the city.

Throw 'em down, Al.

Not to mention that Taubenberger does represent a part of the city that claims it is eternally ignored. He can speak up for the people of the Northeast, airing their real problems and concerns (as opposed to giving them shout-outs).

Changing the tenor of the campaign is not something that Nutter can do. If Nutter turned on Taubenberger, who has far less money, party strength, experience and momentum, he would just seem mean.

So it's up to Taubenberger. Here's what you do, Al:

Acknowledge that you have questions for the Democratic candidate that you want to ask. Announce that you plan to ask them, starting with the next debate (hey, The Next Mayor project will be having one, that would be the perfect time).

We know you are a genuinely nice guy, so the advance notice would give us time to get used to the new, tougher Taubenberger. It would also get you a little press and show your GOP bosses that you can listen to criticism.

And it might turn this general election into a real election, instead of a genial cakewalk for Nutter.

The Pennsylvania Intergovernmental Cooperation Authority seems a little miffed that people on both sides of the casino issue have been misusing their statements on gaming from their anaylsis of the city's latest five-year plan.

In a memo emailed today, PICA clarifies:

Many of the reports about the PICA staff’s analysis of gaming have been misleading. Not only do the reports fail to mention that PICA staff said that gaming would produce immediate tangible benefits for Philadelphia, including $70 million in gaming fees, $12 million in payments in lieu of taxes and further reductions in wage tax rates, but they also make it appear that the staff report said that gaming will create a multi-hundred million dollar deficit in the City’s budget. The report was not intended to say that. If PICA staff believed that gaming would create deficits of that size, staff could not have recommended approval of the five-year plan to the PICA Board. Instead, the report was highlighting that the inclusion of the benefits of gaming in the five-year plan, without any of the costs, creates a financial risk for the City.
[snip]
While the staff report said that there would be costs to having casinos in Philadelphia, it did not quantify the size of the risk. The report did quote academics who had written reports about gaming. Before discussing the academics’ analyses, however, the report noted that there are a wide range of views as to the costs and benefits of gaming and that it is difficult to accurately quantify them. The report was not intended to be an endorsement of the views of those academics. It was, however, pointing out that those views existed and that it is unlikely that the City’s projections of zero costs will turn out be accurate. If next year’s five year plan continues to project casino-related revenues, it should also include casino-related obligations. (emphasis mine)

So basically, PICA is saying that if anti-casino activists want an endorsement of the claim that the costs of the casinos will far outweigh the benefits to taxpayers, don't look to PICA for it. But there also throwing a little water on pro-casino folks who look at the five-year plan and claim that casinos will be a windfall for Philly taxpayers. PICA reminds us all that while we don't know what the costs of casino will be, it's pretty clear that they'll be greater than zero.

The whole statement, as a .pdf, is here.

I've uploaded a whole raft (look it up) of 91 FM news reports from the past several days. Links to them - as well as a whole bunch of interesting stories from local print sources - are available in our headlines archive.

You can also check out the radio stories (available as .mp3's) here:

After 24 years of delays, lawsuits and activism, public access television is finally coming to Philadelphia. Mayor John Street announced on Wednesday a deal with Comcast cable company to fund five separate stations that will broadcast from a city-owned building in North Philadelphia. WHYY's Susan Phillips has Street's announcement and some samplings of public access shows and reactions from public access advocates. (2 separate stories)

As City Council reconvenes tomorrow, they will discuss legislation that will require all the city's tour guides to be trained and licensed. It is an attempt to protect the integrity of the city's 10 billion tourism industry. WHYY's Peter Crimmins reports.

Crews are knocking down more buildings to make way for the Convention Center expansion. But some preservationists are reminding Convention Center officials of a promise they made three years ago - one they're thinking of breaking. WHYY's Elizabeth Fiedler reports.

Why are Philadelphia's schools violent? In part, it's because they're disorganized. That's the message sent by the School Reform Commission yesterday when it introduced a new system for improving school safety. WHYY's Bill Hangley has more.

After a three month break, Philadelphia City Council begins its fall session today. On the agenda for the next several months will be casino construction, Convention Center expansion, and several ballot initiatives. This will also be the final session with lame-duck Mayor John Street. WHYY's Susan Phillips reports.

SEPTA is once again seeking to raise fares - just months after another round of fare hikes and an influx of 150 million dollars in state funding. WHYY's Joel Rose reports.

Yesterday, NPR's All Things Considered ran a story by WHYY's Joel Rose about Police Commissioner Sylvester Johnson's plan to recruit 10,000 volunteers to patrol the city's streets. Johnson's plan is drawing mixed reaction. Johnson wants the men to become part-time peacekeepers. But some anti-crime activists worry he's underestimating the difficulty and danger of putting volunteers on the city's toughest streets. Here's the radio feature piece.

Speaking of Johnson and his all-volunteer army of peacekeepers, he'll be on Radio Times with Marty Moss-Coane tomorrow at 11 AM to discuss the idea. Here's the promo copy:

Police Commissioner Sylvester Johnson has put out a call for 10,000 men to patrol Philadelphia neighborhoods in an effort to create a safe environment. Will it work or is it just a band-aid solution to a much more complex issue? We talk with Police Commissioner SYLVESTER JOHNSON and activists ARCHYE LEACOCK of the Institute for the Development of African-American Youth and BILAL QAYYUM of Men United for a Better Philadelphia.

I'll have more about it tomorrow including all the links you'll need to listen to it live on the internet or download the podcast after it's done.

Like I said yesterday, Sylvester Johnson will be among Marty's guests on Radio Times today at 11 am.

You've got several options to listen:

(1) Tune into 91 FM at 11 am.
(2) If you have Comcast Digital Cable, turn to Channel 242 (WHYY's Wider Horizons channel) to watch the show at 11 am.
(3) Check out the many options for listening live on the internet.

(4) Or, if you miss it, you can download a podcast of the show. Just right click on this link (or, for Mac users, Control-Click) after 12 pm and choose "Save Target As" to download the .mp3. The link won't work until after the show is over!

And, of course, you can call in with a question at 1-888-477-9499.

Feel free to use this thread for comments before, during and after the show.

Wanna see a candidate for mayor this weekend? Yes?

I weep for you.

Just kidding.

Nutter's public schedule for the weekend (including an appearance on Al' turf - the German-American Steuben Parade).

Taubenberger at a German-American Steuben Parade Banquet tonight.

(This isn't the first time that Taubenberger has gone to an event at Cannstatter Volksfest-Verein. I get the feeling he's kind of like Norm from Cheers at that place.

Big events coming up on Monday, too. We'll be at the Greater Philadelphia Cultural Alliance's Annual meeting where the candidates will talk about the impact of the cultural sector on the economy of the region. I have a copy of the report that will be released on Monday (don't you wish you were in my place? Answer: no, you don't) and all I can say is that it looks like that impact is big. Really big.

Anyway, Wendy will have more about that on thenextmayor.com on Monday and I'll be shooting video of the event which I hope to post on Monday night.

Have a good weekend, folks. Go celebrate your German heritage!

Today, we're focusing on the arts economy in Philly, because the Greater Philadelphia Cultural Alliance is debuting a new report that shows cultural organizations and their audiences spend an estimated -- gulp -- $1.3 billion each year, mostly locally.

This is part of the Philadelphia cultural commuity's well-planned effort to catch the attention of City Hall, as represented by the next guy to run it. Arts groups would like to see an Office of Arts and Culture restored to Philly goverment, and a whole lot more attention paid to their efforts generally. Both major party candidates will attend a cultural alliance event tonight to pay their respects.

Now, all economic impact reports must be taken with a grain of salt. But I think the effort to increase the attention paid to Philly's arts community is a very important one, and not just because of the big numbers that will be flashed today. (Here's another: The arts return $158 million in taxes to the local economy.)

Fact is, Philly has something that very few places have: An arts scene that is big, exciting, non-exclusive and growing organically. Philadelphia can call itself home to both the Opera Company of Philadelphia and Space 1026. I can get tickets to the ballet that are cheap enough to take my daughter, who also enjoys making pottery with the Moore College gals when they come out for the annual FunDay on the Parkway. The live music scene is getting national attention, but I can still see the shows without mortgaging my house. I can wander through the Philadelphia Museum of Art when I feel a need to be overwhelmed, and yet a friend just drew caricatures in support of cruelty-free eating as part of the "Veggie Cabaret" in Philly Fringe.

I have lived other places, and they aren't like this. Charlotte, N.C. and San Jose, Calif. would hand over a headquarters or two to have just a taste of the arts offerings that we have here.

This is one thing that Philly does incredibly well, and City Hall should be in the business of encouraging the parts of our city that work.

Oh, is that argument too philosophical? How about this: Our arts scene gets us attention for the right reasons, in the right places.

Such as Paper magazine, which wrote us up in April. They said:

"...the Philadelphia art scene is booming. Everyone I met was in some sort of art collective (or two) and wearing cool, over-sized plastic glasses. Every artist/gallery person I met seemed unironically excited about making really cool and interesting art. There were hardly any jaded eye-rolls, and not a lot of too-cool-for-school-ness that I associate with the New York art scene. Everyone seemed to be rooting for everyone else. It was very heartening."

Now, we can talk about exactly what it is that City Hall could or should do for the arts. There are some easy ideas -- loan funds? tax breaks? -- and maybe they are important. But the most significant thing the city could do is simply prioritize and advertise its arts scene. Why is the Youth Study Center still sitting in the middle of the Parkway? Why aren't the arts used as a draw for economic development? (Lincoln Financial's CEO told me once that the arts scene was a major draw to the group that chose Philly for the company's new headquarters.)

I don't want to imply that all the members of the current administration are tone-deaf on the importance of art, because I know that's not true. But I also know that the arts are not front and center in the civic conversation of this city, and that's a missed opportunity, for the city's coffers and the city's souls.

The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, of all places, has a story about a recent report by the Urban Land Institute who says: "We drive too much." (Surprise!)

Since 1980, the number of vehicle miles traveled in the United States has increased at three times the rate of the population, the report says, primarily because of the vehicle-oriented way communities and commercial areas are designed and built.

The report projects that even with expected increases in miles per gallon produced by more efficient engines, vehicle emissions of carbon dioxide in 2030 will be 41 percent higher than they are today, far from the goal of reducing vehicle emissions to 1990 levels by that date.

And we all know the story of the Philadelphia region, most effectively told in this 2001 report by the Economy League of Greater Philadelphia, The Reinvestment Fund, and 10,000 Friends of Pennsylvania. Check out the maps on pages 56-59 to get a picture of it. Development in the region spreads out over the decades while within the region's core - the city - vacancy rates rise. To put it simply, folks aren't moving relocating from other regions to the outer suburbs of Philadelphia, they're coming from the center, and no one is replacing them. What we end up with is the exact situation references in the Post-Gazette article - more vehicle miles traveled, more air pollution, more congestion.

Why? That's why the report is over 100 pages. Philadelphia's taxes, poor schools, poor delivery of basic services and old housing stock has been outweighing the effects of the draw of urban living for empty-nesters and young professionals. Basically, for every one of me that's moved in Philly since 1990, a family of 4 has moved into my old, suburban neighborhood.

According to the Post-Gazette, anti-sprawl advocates have a solution - change Americans:

The report estimates that a compact development strategy would reduce vehicle miles traveled by 12 percent to 18 percent by 2050, and reduce carbon dioxide emissions from mobile sources 7 percent to 10 percent.

Although such a change would be a major shift from the sprawl that has dominated most urban and suburban development in the last half century, there are indications that a sizable segment of the public is ready to go in that direction, said Keith Bartholomew, an assistant professor of urban planning at the University of Utah and an author of the report.

In this region, the challenge goes even further to (1) convincing young people with families to stay in the city and (2) get folks to look inward, instead of outward, when they want a change of scenery from their inner-ring suburban homes. All of this depends on changing the perception of the city as a enclave for the very rich and a warehouse of the very poor.

It also depends on the rest of the region, and it's 353 municipalities, from depending on development and construction as a quick fix to get more tax revenue while ignoring the long-term expenses of that development (traffic, more schools, pollution, storm water management, etc.)

Sounds like a job for the next mayor.

Any suburbanites out there? What would it take for you to consider moving in to the city? Assuming you found yourself in a position to move, are you more likely to move into the city or out to the "ex-urbs?"

...but a successful experiment in municipal-level universal health care and promoting mass transit would be nice too.

One of the great things about our federal system of government is that the states serve as "laboratories" for policy changes that can then be copied by other states and, eventually, by the federal government. The same holds true on the municipal level. San Francisco is experimenting with health care and congestion pricing - that's right... Chaka Fattah's idea... it lives!. New York is also looking at congestion pricing and financial incentives to get low-income people and families "to act in their and society's long-term interests." Seattle is all about fighting global warming. Chicago has its green roofs. Philadelphia is experimenting with municipal wireless internet. Boston is studying how to harness pretension and turn it into a fuel source.

As long as our next mayor is open to copying the good stuff, with the proper adjustments made for several, uniquely Philadelphian factors, it doesn't matter who does it first.

Since my last post was sort of an homage to San Francisco's wunderkind mayor, Gavin Newsom, I feel it necessary to include this article, that basically says, while most of the citizens in San Francisco seem to like him, not many of the city's workers do. Some of their gripes seem pretty legitimate:

But many officials said the lack of an endorsement from city managers would likely have come in spite of the resignation requests. Their complaints range from an administration run by inexperienced staffers to the mayor not being accessible enough to department heads. And the one complaint echoed by many bureaucrats is that Newsom focuses too much on style and press releases and not on the nuts-and-bolts of governing the city.

"He's made a lot of great strides," one official said. "But it is very hard to know what it is he's truly trying to accomplish, other than ... I can't even call them initiatives because an initiative implies organization. The plans seem to change week to week."

Michael Nutter The next mayor may end up just as unpopular with Philadelphia's city workers or significant communities within the city - a point brought up in this Catherine Lucey story about another mayoral darling, Corey Booker, and his advice to Michael Nutter.

Given the "approval rating" of the city government,* is it possible that being unpopular with those workers may actually increase the next mayor's popularity among the rest of us?

*Mental note: next time I have a chance to suggest a poll question, ask about approval rating of city workers and/or City Council.

I'm heading out soon to get some footage from the Greater Philadelphia Cultural Alliance's annual meeting, at which Michael Nutter and Al Taubenberger will discuss the ramifications of recently released report about the economic impact of the region's cultural sector. (Wendy blogged about it early this morning.)

A review of the Inky coverage of the report gives us some advanced insight into what each of them might say.

Nutter:
In Philadelphia, Michael Nutter, the Democratic mayoral candidate, said reopening the city's arts and culture office represented "a first step" in the process of tapping economic energies latent in the arts community.

"The arts are too important to the city and the region" to be ignored, he said.

Taubenberger:
Al Taubenberger, Nutter's Republican opponent, said he also recognized the economic importance of the region's arts organizations. In an e-mail message, Taubenberger proposed increasing the culture fund to $10 million, which organizations could use for operations but not for "creative endeavors."

"We should help cover their fixed costs so they can spend time and energy coming up with new ideas that will bring more people to the city," he said. "Should there be a regional mechanism to support the arts? Good idea. But first we have to take care of ourselves."

So judging from the quotes, Nutter seems a little more inclined to seek out the cooperation of elected officials in the surrounding counties. Taubenberger's priority is "tak[ing] care of ourselves." That's ok, to Al, regionalism probably means getting Mayfair and Fox Chase to understand that they're in the same city. He'll come around eventually.

So what do those suburban elected officials have to say? Let's check in with future-governor Josh Shapiro:

The issue of regional funding is largely at the talking stage. The idea was bandied about in the early 1990s, but ran aground when city and suburban officials failed to come up with a mutually acceptable framework.

What might make this possible, Shapiro said, is a change in attitudes that has occurred over the last decade: Elected officials and candidates now are increasingly looking at regionalism with favor, he said.

Check back later tonight for video.

As promised:

Comment away if you please.

After Democratic candidate Michael Nutter attended the Greater Philadephia Cultural Alliance's annual meeting, he kept the arts theme going. He spoke to an overflow crowd at Inter-Act Theatre Company, which convened a group to discuss the challenges facing Philadelphia in the next 20 years.

InterAct is celebrating its 20th year, and to celebrate the next 20 the company is commissioning four new plays, which will continue InterAct's emphasis on social issues. I moderated the panel (and that was a very cool invitation, and a thoroughly enjoyable experience, so thank you, InterAct).

On it was Nutter, Mural Arts powerhouse Jane Golden, Philadelphia Foundation president Andrew Swinney, Inquirer editor Bill Marimow and Dr. Salman Akhtar, noted professor of psychiatry at Jefferson Medical College, and frequent analyst (and I do mean analyst) of the psychiatric messages in InterAct plays.

Now, this blog is about the mayor's race, and we are focused on the arts right now, so let me tell you first what Nutter said about arts (it's based on his arts plan):

He supports the re-creation of the city's Office of Arts and Culture.

He supports increasing city funding of arts and cultural institutions.

He supports additional support for businesses related to arts culture throughout the region, such as tax breaks on the Business Privilege Tax in the city and on property tax in the suburbs.

Oh, and he rapped the beginning of "Rapper's Delight" when asked if he felt hip-hop culture encouraged violence. (He wasn't bad. He didn't force it, so imagine The Sugarhill Gang in Nutter's voice, but it was smooth and clearly often rehearsed.) Nutter didn't blame hip-hop for the city's troubles, but he did say that violent visual images in videos and video games probably didn't help.

But the conversation was far more wide-ranging than just the arts, dwelling instead on what this generation of Philadelphians will leave to the following generations, and expressing a real concern that young people in the city are being abandoned.

The most meaningful part of the program for me was when, prompted by an audience member's question, both Dr. Akhtar and Andrew Swinney made the passionate point that young people had no hope. Therefore, they often give in to fleeting desires, because it was the only substitute for real hope they had. Then Jane Golden drew the connection between real hope and real opportunity -- that is, jobs.

It really is all about the jobs.

Hey, are we talking arts? Al Taubenberger likes the arts too! In fact, we've been notified that he will attend the Wilma Theater’s presentation of Amadeus tonight.

He also plans to go to a business-card swap at the Greater Northeast Philadelphia Chamber of Commerce, his old stomping grounds, and kick off the “Aging Revolution” during the "visionary's reception" at Wesley Enhanced Living, which is a retirement home company. Busy, busy, this running-for-mayor keeps you.

Mark McDonald reports a recent development in the brewing controversy over Philly's property taxes in today's Daily News. Though I am sure you've been following this brouhaha closely, we'll just take a minute to offer a simple backgrounder on the issue.

1) The thing about Philadelphia property taxes (as with property taxes in a lot of places) is that they aren't based on real "market values." They are based on some other number that's usually a lot less than what your house would acutally sell for.

2) This leads to one thing: Poor folks get gypped.

3 That's because houses that are worth little usually have market values on their tax bills that are closer to what the house would actually fetch in a sale. Expensive houses usually have values that are much lower than what the house would sell for. Expensive stuff appreciates, after all.

4) But that means poor folks are actually paying a higher tax rate than rich folks.

5) To protest, Philadelphia Forward wants everyone to appeal their tax bills. The tax crusaders also are mulling a lawsuit, as Mark reported today.

6) This problem would go away if the city moved to that "full vaulation" thing that people don't completely understand (it means what it sounds like: basing your tax bill on the full value of your house). But lots of tax bills could go up, in that case.

7) Michael Nutter says he supports a "fair and accurate citywide property reassessment," though he also supports a homestead exemption, which you should support too if you live in Philly now. It could cap your tax bill to prevent it from skyrocketing.

See, isn't that simple?

Phil Goldsmith's column in today's Daily News is spot on about the role that Al Taubenberger should be playing in an election that he is very unlikely to win:

But is it asking too much for him to put up a decent Web site (see Al's at mayoral2007.com) and have a couple of volunteers post some position papers with a GOP twist, like touting the value of more school choice or the need to outsource businesslike functions of city government or rein in the labor unions?

Wendy and I have been talking a lot about the Taubenberger campaign and what Taubenberger can do, given the realities of his situation, to bring value to this election. My frustrations with him are a little closer to what Goldsmith talks about in today's column than what the city's GOP told Catherine Lucey a little while back. He doesn't have to attack Nutter or portray Nutter as some sort of "insider" who will be "more of the same." Heck, the media is doing that for him by essentially creating controversy with substance-lacking stories about Nutter's continued fundraising.

At the very least, he could be offering traditional, moderate-Republican ideas of governing like the ones outlined by Goldsmith. Sam Katz talked about school choice and vouchers in 1999. Public schools with Democratic mayors have been experimenting with it for years so there is evidence that can be used on both sides of the debate. But as long as John Dougherty, lifelong Democrat, - not Al Taubenberger - is the only one talking about those vouchers, we won't even get to see that debate.

In 1991, Ed Rendell ran a campaign that tip-toed around privatization of city services, preferring to call it "introducing competition" while Republican Joe Egan opposed it with his soundbite answer of not "balancing the budget on the backs of the workers." The roles were reversed and the issue often reduced to those bites, but at least it was brought up in the campaign.

And, of course, there's the union issue. Taubenberger's not going to get their backing anyway so with contracts with all four major unions expiring this summer, he could be talking about the city's long-term fiscal health and telling us about the concessions that everyone - unions, management, and residents - are going to have to make to right the ship. He might not have a fierce and smart negotiator like Tom Cronin to deal with anymore but those negotiations aren't going to be a cakewalk.

I read the letters to the editor in the Daily News and Inquirer every day, trying to get a sense of what the most engaged (and outraged) citizens have to say about the city's government, the media and life in general. I never expected that a famed counter-terrorism agent would get so worked up about a radio station format change:

Every now and then, a story reminds you that the people we list every day as the victims of the current, unrelenting murder wave in Philadelphia are sons and daughters and beloved by someone.

This story is one of those.

Daren is not more important because he's the son of the city's consumer advocate. But he is important as a reminder that we are maiming and losing too many young people.

Lance, Lisa and Daren, we hardly know what to say. We grieve with you.

If today's Inquirer story about last night's meeting between Michael Nutter and the Guardian Civic League is any indication, governing may prove to be a lot more difficult than Nutter's current campaign experience (and possibly more difficult than his primary campaign experience):

He was handed a thick report that alleged racist practices within the police force and contained recommendations for addressing the problem that the league said were compiled several years ago.

"It's a black and white world," Nutter said.

First of all, I don't know why he's dancing around the Sylvester Johnson issue or why anyone in the Guardian Civic League thinks that Sylvester Johnson could possibly continue as commissioner after Nutter gets sworn in. Johnson has already been pretty candid about his plans to retire. He's even been talking about how he plans on keeping active in the community after he's out of uniform.

Nutter's metaphor is a little off in this case since he's basically saying that Donovan McNabb, after he announces his retirement, will have to fight for his job in training camp the next year.

I'm also confused about what the one officer meant by "a black and white issue." It seems to refer to the choice of the next police commissioner. Will Nutter's hand be forced such that the first thing he has to consider when choosing the next police commissioner is the color of that person's skin? What if, after an exhaustive search both internally and externally, Nutter and his team of advisers determine their best candidate for the job and he or she happens to be white? This is an extremely difficult post to write because I understand why it's important, in a city that his predominantly black and in a city where a large part of the black population continues to struggle, for persons of color to be in charge of parts of the government that need to be especially sensitive to that community.

Perhaps if the search for the next police commissioner includes constant dialogue and input from groups like the Guardian Civic League, neighborhood groups, the NAACP, the FOP, police advisory panels and such, they can all reach a consensus choice who happens also to be best person for the job.

What's more disturbing are these continued references to racist practices within the police department. I don't know what they're referring to and I'd love to get a look at the report that they handed to Nutter. They could be cases of high-ranking officers of one race treating subordinates of a different race differently than subordinates of their own race or peers harrassing peers of a different race. If some cops can't look at each other without seeing skin color, what hopes do we have that they'll be able to be fair and equitable in their treatment of the citizens whom they're supposed to be policing. This is especially true when we're talking about a city in which a vast majority of the most violent crimes are happening in neighborhoods that are predominantly populated by persons of color.

Otherwise, Nutter seems to be saying the right things about several other issues - including the training necessary to enact the stop-and-frisk plan successfully and confronting municipal judges (who, he correctly points out, are paid by the city despite PA Supreme Court rulings that say they are to be paid for by the state) about lenient sentences.

I wish there had been more reaction quotes by the officers in this story to get an idea of how they responded to his answers and whether they think his ideas will work. I'll guess we'll get plenty of that soon enough when those ideas are put into policy.

If anyone is familiar with some the internal workings of the police department... the stuff that the public doesn't know... feel free to comment.

Ok... maybe it's not today's biggest news about a debate (congrats, Drexel, by the way), but the announcement of our first ever mayoral candidate forum webcast seems pretty big to me.

All you have to do, any time between now and the event itself on October 25th at 10 am, is: (1) go to this page, (2) click on the Register button, (3) fill out the form and (4) sit back and wait for an email that will give you details on how to do some easy checks to make sure your computer will be ready to access this historic event.

At the time of the event, you can simply log in using the first and last name that you provided on the registration form. So if you decide to register as Amanda Hugenkiss, you better remember that. Once you're logged in, you'll be able to watch the live event, submit questions to the events producers that we may pass along to the candidates AND participate in a live chat with other viewers during which you can make comments about what the candidates say. It's like being able to talk during the movie without getting popcorn thrown at you.

I almost forgot the most exciting part. We want you to co-star in the event with the candidates (and WHYY's Brenda Jorett). Earlier this week, the Inquirer had an editorial about the Next Great City initiative's plan to have user-generated YouTube video questions as part of their forum on October 15th.

Here we have a case of great minds thinking alike - or at least great minds stealing the same idea from CNN! We're also looking for folks to submit a home made video about their most important issue. Be creative about it! You wanna have an avatar that's "some sort of monster with the body of a walrus and the head... of... a sea lion" ask your question for you? Go ahead! Make a cartoon. Take the camera outside with you and get some footage that helps illustrate your question.

Go to our Mayoral Forum page for some guidelines about the video and all of the ways you can submit it. (The easiest being put it on YouTube and send us the link.)

Trust me... this won't be the last time you're going to hear about this event so get to work on that video and register to watch!

So it's Friday, right? And this general election has a pace that, occasionally, makes one a bit nostalgic for the pace of the primary.

So here's something that I got this summer that will make you smile fondly about the fun we all had this spring...

Check below the jump.

All the issues and politics you could want on a Friday afternoon. What should we start with? I say politics.

Clout does something that I couldn't do when he writes about this article from Tuesday's Philadelphia Tribune, in which Councilwoman Carol Campbell continues the tired "he's not black enough" tirade against Michael Nutter. In its infinite wisdom, Clout uses humor to defuse the incendiary rhetoric that Campbell throws out there (impressively, without directing that humor at Campbell herself) and decides to play on the word "cater" used by the Councilwoman.

I tried real hard to figure out a way to write about that article but couldn't figure out how to question what Campbell was saying in the most sensitive manner possible. She took Nutter to task for going after John Street with his early primary commercials, saying "I don't think black men should do that." In doing so, she conveniently ignored poll numbers that showed that one of the few things that white and black people have been united on has been Street's low approval rating and job performance.

The exact quote in which she uses the word "cater" goes like this: "he is going to need all the support he can get because it has to be believed especially among African Americans that he caters to Caucasians and not to African Americans.” (emphasis mine)

Is she saying "it has to be believed" because that's what she, some state representatives and a council member or two believe? How can he "cater" to anyone if he hasn't even been in office yet? It's unfortunate that Campbell, who does have some sort of following in her part of the city would lob such comments out there and in effect create a self-fulfilling prophesy. She says "it has to be believed" that "he caters to Causasians," that quote appears in print, it gets read and soon becomes fact, before the next administration gets to demonstrate its ability to make things better for everyone or anyone.

Anyway, good for Clout. Thanks for bringing that up (but enough with the Flavia fluff already).

From one West Philadelphia councilwoman to another, an interesting story by Mark McDonald about Councilwoman Blackwell and the Youth Study Center. It pretty much sums up why this city practically trips over itself to screw things up:

Blackwell has effectively used the power (not found in the City Charter) of "'councilmanic prerogative', the power of a district Council member to introduce or hold bills with a direct impact in his or her district." On the one hand, this tradition can be a good last line of defense to keep any one group or neighborhood from getting totally railroaded by a bad or unnecessary deal.

The problem is, in this case, it's not altogether clear that putting the Youth Study Center at its proposed West Philly site would be all that bad. The new facility would be secure, convenient to the El for families who are visiting their incarcerated relatives, more spacious and have the amenities necessary for dealing with youth in a positive, rehabilitative, non-Dickensian way. I'm sure she'd be able to get all kinds of design concessions, community access to the facility, etc. that would be far cheaper than the $10 million she's asking for.

By now, the mayor has figured out where to move the Center's current residents so that the Barnes move can get under way so, aside from the controversy in its East Falls location, the "holding up the Barnes" argument is kind of moot. But, his chief of staff still makes a good point when she says:

The mayor's position is that every time we go to do something, we can't have to buy our way out ... [S]ome things ought to stand alone and not be subject to a quid pro quo or a tradeoff. ... [Y]ou end up with important citywide issues becoming the sole prerogative of one member. In the long run that's not good for the city.

Moving on.

(edited to add) I was certain that I had seen somewhere before that the "community opposition" claimed by Blackwell wasn't as organized or strong as she would have us believe. A search turned up the story that McDonald refers to in today's article. Back in January, he wrote:

City officials are privately wide-eyed in disbelief. They point out that they hammered out a letter of understanding last February with a spate of West Philadelphia neighborhood groups.

Joyce Wilkerson, Street's chief of staff, said she was unaware of any remaining community opposition to the plan.

So it would seem that we essentially have a case of councilwoman creating "community opposition" so that she can hold the project hostage for $10 million.

Ok... no we're moving on...

City white collar union leader Tom Cronin gets in a couple parting jabs at Mayor Street, saying that Street welched on a promise to make pretty substantial increases to his union's health and welfare fund.

Cronin said Street had repeatedly promised that he would increase the per- capita benefit to the roughly 3,300 workers by 14 percent in fiscal 2007 and by 14 percent for fiscal 2008.

Instead, Cronin said the city administration has maintained the 2006 funding level and put off an agreement on health costs for the final two years of a contract that expires next June.

Mental note for the next mayor: don't promise anything. That way, you can't go back on it.

Finally, one more example of how politics can get in the way of resolving issues. Haile Johnston and his wife run a non-profit that has (sorry, I mean had) a contract with the city to "carry out the greening and maintenance part of Mayor Street's signature anti-blight program, the Neighborhood Transformation Initiative." Their group, East Park Revitalization Alliance, had such a contract to do work in Strawberry Mansion. According to the story, "the couple regularly went over and above their contract requirements by cleaning 250 to 275 vacant lots a month" when the contract only called for 200 per month.

But then Mr. Johnston made a serious error in judgement. He ran for City Council against Darrell Clarke. Buh-bye contract. Clarke claims he had nothing to do with it. The Mayor claims he had nothing to do with it. But now that contract is going to "Anthony Langford, president of the Friends of East Park and a longtime Democratic committeeman and political ally of Clarke's." Friends of East Park apparently has 4 employees but Langford doesn't see that as a problem.

So, to sum up. Non-profit gets city funding and performs above and beyond the terms of the contract. Non-profit's founder runs against a city councilperson. Contract is taken away and given to an ally of said city councilperson. Ally's group is practically non-existent and will need to hire people before it can even get to work. In the meantime, all of those 250-275 lots go untended. Blight continues.

Cue the rage.

...and it's not Michael Nutter.

That's right. According to this minutes-old press release, on Monday, Al T. will be endorsed by the senior Senator from Pennsylvania and the last moderate Republican, Arlen Specter. If it's anything like his endorsement of Sam Katz in 2003, Specter will probably run through the all of the election results since 1951 (which you can see on our timeline) and then pause when he gets to 1967 and say something like:

"Then James Tate won again in 1967 by only about 11,000 votes. I know this one well because he beat meeee." (say that in slow, Specter-voice)

Good work, Al. Please use the platform this event will give you to start talking about some real policy alternatives, maybe even non-partisan elections.

So Democratic candidate Michael Nutter was havin' some fun over the weekend, signing up volunteers at Lucky Strike Lanes, cleaning up in Port Richmond and getting down on the Parkway at the Campus Philly kickoff.

Enjoy it, Mike!

We've said it before, and I know that Nutter knows it, but this really IS his honeymoon. If you accept what seems inevitable -- that Nutter will win in a landslide in November -- and look ahead even to the months between the election and the inauguration, you see that things are going to get tough quickly.

Take the upcoming renegotiation of city union contracts.

Patrick Kerkstra of the Inquirer had a story Sunday that seems to indicate just how darn hard it's going to be. It was a profile of Cathy Scott, the tough 62-year-old woman who just took over leadership of the city's white-collar municpal union, the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees District Council 47.

Scott has 6,500 members, backbone and something she wants out of the city by the time the current deal expires in June, 2008:

Scott said yesterday that she'd be looking for a deal that would 1) maintain current health benefits, 2) grant an across-the-board wage increase so her members' income could keep pace with the rising price of city living, and 3) grant still-larger wage hikes for workers in some departments that DC 47 considers underpaid, such as recreation, health and the library.

Oh, okay!

Now, it's too early to say just how Nutter's going to handle the union negotiations. He's a savvy pol who knows he will have to give to get. But, as city budget watchdogs PICA have said over and over and over again, the city's current fiscal trends cannot continue. That means the unions, including DC 47, may have to sacrifice. And I am not sure they are are ready for that.

Should be an interesting spring for Nutt... I mean, for whichever of these two deserving candidates wins the mayoralty.