City Councilman Frank DiCicco went off on the state legislature and Supreme Court Thursday in the wake of Wednesday's Supreme Court ruling that essentially removed City Council from any oversight of the Foxwoods Casino project.
"It was all about allowing a public process to continue, to allow the citizens of this city to be heard," said DiCicco, who scheduled four hearings on the Foxwoods proposal, which are now rendered meaningless because the city has almost leverage to demand changes in traffic plans and other aspects of the project. "And we have been denied that opportunity again, the same way we were denied to create laws that will to protect our citizens from illegal guns. This is consistent, it all fits in, we don’t matter in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. We are only here as a city to generate revenue, and I don’t know what else the other folks outside of the city limits care about."
DiCicco's rant had an additional political subtext, because he targeted state represenatives in the River Wards. One of them is Rep. Bill Keller, whose opponent in the April 22 primary is DiCicco's son, Christian.
DiCicco was singled out as "obstructionist"by Foxwoods and the other planned casino, SugarHouse. The Supreme Court agreed, saying that DiCicco's bill to give Foxwoods its zoning, introduced in January, was too late. Mayor Street has requested zoning for the site last May.
"I believe it’s the responsibility of an elected official to do the things that he or she needs to do to protect the people that he or she represents," DiCicco said. "If that was an obstructionist is, I gladly accept the title."
DiCicco said he would go foward with a hearing Friday, which will look at the casinos impat on the local economy, police and fired departments.
While DiCicco said he is still exploring legal strategies, Councilman Bill Green offered several. Green said the Supreme Court's decisions can be challenged, presumably in Federal Court, because the state law forbade any taking of property to build the casinos. Green said the elimination of city streets, even if they're only paper streets on a map, equates to an unconstitutional taking of property. " It calls into question the entirety of the decisions of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania in this regard," Green said.
Green also said agreements between both Foxwoods and SugarHouse casinos, in which the casinos agreed to pay the city of percentage of taxes that they are not obligated to pay under the city's 10-year tax abatement for new construction, are invalid. Any such agreements that last more than a year require City Council approval. Instead, they were worked out between the casinos and Mayor Street's law department, the Foxwoods agreement in the final days of his term.
Green wants to eliminate the tax abatement for casinos, saying two casinos licensed for a monopoly should not qualify.
Philly.com discussions are intended to be civil, friendly conversations. Please treat other participants with respect and in a way that you would want to be treated. You are responsible for what you say. And please, stay on topic.
These boards are monitored by Philly.com staff. We reserve the right at all times to remove any information or materials that are unlawful, threatening, abusive, libelous, defamatory, obscene, vulgar, pornographic, profane, indecent or otherwise objectionable to us in our sole discretion and to disclose any information necessary to satisfy the law, regulation, or government request. Personal attacks, especially on other board participants, are not permitted. We reserve the right to permanently block any user who violates these terms and conditions.