Our citizens are not buying the argument that because Philadelphia has more libraries per resident than cities of comparable size we should downsize and bring our city in line with "the norm." Instead, we're proud of the fact that we are leading in providing branch libraries for our residents.

Also, when we learned that most of these other cities had libraries in all their elementary schools, the argument was further weakened.

But to what extent is the argument true? Yes, Philadephia does have more libraries per resident than most cities of comparable size, but the difference is not that great. My husband did some research and I think the results are worth sharing. I’ve done this as attachment to keep tables in alignment.

Check out these excerpts from a Committee of 70 press release today:

PHILADELPHIA – January 6, 2008 – The Committee of Seventy today announced its support for Mayor Nutter’s appeal of Common Pleas Court Judge Idee Fox’s decision barring him from closing 11 branches of the Free Library of Philadelphia without the approval of City Council.

...

The organization was instrumental in drafting the 1951 Charter that purposely created a strong mayor form of government for Philadelphia. “We firmly believe that this is the best model for this city and that the erosion of this principle can lead to chaos,” Stalberg said.

Stalberg added that, while the Charter places some very specific limitations on a mayor’s power to cut the budget – for instance, City Council’s budget can’t be slashed – it does not restrict his or her ability to close library branches or swimming pools.

“Some people may not like the Mayor’s choices or how they’ve been communicated,” Stalberg said. “But the Charter unquestionably gives him the right and obligation to act.”

OK, so leaving aside long-term Charter arguments, isn't there in fact a law on the books that requires the Mayor to seek Council approval before closing pubic facilities? Is 70 really implying that it's ok for the Mayor to ignore laws he does not like?

Um, that seems kind of like a crazy thing for a watchdog group to be saying.

Who is the Committee of 70 anyway? Although the 70 board is large, its members are almost entirely made up of representatives from corporations or large private law firms. According to their website:

A small Executive Committee oversees the management and policy decisions of the Committee of Seventy. Several very prominent business and community leaders will soon join the Executive Committee in order to show their commitment to clean government and to improve funding and results.

Well listen up prominent business and civic leaders. It's very important that we have a group devoted to government oversight and accountability. But if that is 70's role, it's not cool to support the Mayor breaking the law.

It's possible the Mayor will win on appeal, but it's not like the Mayor took himself to court. He ignored the current law and only because he was called on out it are we where we are today. Seems to me like you guys might want to back away from this one or at least slap the Mayor on the wrists some before you issue a press release supporting his larger powers.

Perhaps more importantly, there are two hugely important transparency and ethics questions at hand that 70 has NOT addressed in the library debate and larger budget deficit issue:

1. We really have no idea how much trouble we're in. Council, the judiciary and the citizens of Philadelphia are all relying on budget projections for the current budget and the one to come that come from the Mayor only. If 70 really wants to be helpful, maybe you all could hire an auditor or work with Council, PICA or the Controller's office to get some independent analysis of the scope of the "crisis" we face.

2. Patronage and government waste still exist. Assuming there is some level of budget crisis--at the very least in next year's budget--shouldn't 70's focus be on trimming the fat in government? A thorough independent study of government waste would be super helpful. If 70 got started on one right now, I am sure they could come up with a plan to recover at least 10 or 20 million dollars for next year's budget from patronage jobs.

Speaking of patronage jobs...Zack I'd like to personally remind you of a meeting we had in 2006 where we went over a list of ideas to improve turnout and participation in municipal elections. I believe you said then that you would present some of those ideas to the City Commissioners and work to implement them. I can dig up the follow-up letter I sent to you afterwards, but either way, as much as I appreciate your role as a government watchdog, I hope to retain your leadership on election reform even more.

Last month, the Nutter administration submitted a $2.6 billion wish list to the Obama transition team. At the top of the money pile – ahead of new schools and a youth study center? The Market East/Foxwoods casino – coming in at a cool $167 million.

Just because there’s no plan in place doesn’t stop the City from putting it forth. After all, here was Terry Gillen’s reason for including the Market East casino project:

"We just want to make sure the opportunity for funding doesn't go away just because the project's not ready to be defined," said Terry Gillen, executive director of the Redevelopment Authority and senior adviser to the mayor.

Well, it’s not just Philadelphians who aren’t sold on that kind of logic. Earlier this week, the national press, including the Washington Post and CNBC, took notice of this line item after GOP leaders flagged it as one of the top examples of a stimulus package that was anything but pork barrel politics as usual:

Watch CNBC’s video here.

My favorite line?

"The mayors are calling a lot of their projects shovel ready. The question might be asked is what it is that they’re actually shoveling."

But more seriously, Nutter’s delineation of $167 million for the casino is troubling because it’s the first time a ballpark number has been put on the potential cost of the Market East location.

OK, folks, let's see if I can get your attention. I think it may be that we should have cuts in Philadelphia taxes.

No, I haven't gone all Brett Mandel on you. I'm not for tax cuts at any price, nor do I see them as the best tool for moving, shall we say, Philadelphia Forward. If cuts in Philadelphia taxes mean the slightest decrease in City services, or cuts in benefits for City workers, I remain against them. But Philadelphia, compared to other cities and counties in the State is overtaxed . . . by a lot. That's not only wrong from the standpoint of economic policy, it's just plain unfair. And tax equity should be a value that's high on the list of anyone calling themselves progressive.

Seth Williams, the man, the myth, the legend, and the next District Attorney of our city will be opening his campaign office today. I am going to head over there, and if you want a chance to meet Seth, here is a great chance.

Details: 1500 Sansom, 4th Floor, doors open at 5:30, Seth speaks at 6:30. Be there.

This is great, courageous stuff:

The decision to close these eleven branch libraries is more than a response to a financial crisis; it changes the very foundation of our City. Two of the libraries scheduled to close, Haddinton and Holmesburg, will result in a reversion of the property back to the original grantor because of deed restrictions. No one questions the economic crisis which has rocked both the City and the Nation. However, we are a Nation of hope. A "crisis" evokes something temporary. Defendants argued there were more than enough libraries in Philadelphia. "Philadelphia has more libraries than any other city in the country." Our library system is more than a century old yet in three short months an economic crisis results in permanently closing eleven branches. This court does not envy the Mayor and the tough decisions he has had to make in this financial crisis. Yet, as this court is bound to follow the law, so is the Mayor. The permanent closing of neighborhood branch libraries is changing the very structure of the Free Library of Philadelphia and not just responding to a "financial crisis."

The whole order is posted below the break.

On November 4th, Philadelphians said "yes we can" and helped elect Barack Obama. After eight years of everything feeling like it was on the wrong track, we literally danced in the streets when Obama was elected because we thought things would be made right. And there are fairly limitless possibilities post-inauguration. So why then does Mayor Michael Nutter continue to say "no we can't?"

Here is the latest: In the aftermath of a lawsuit against the city over the closure of 11 branch libraries, Mayor Nutter is now threatening to reduce hours at all branches in the system.

Seriously.

Let's review the backstory: Two days after the election, the Mayor announced a mid-year budget crisis. Despite economic trouble that had been brewing for months, the budget he wrote and that Council passed earlier that year was apparently too high. And so the Mayor called for layoffs and service cuts--including library closures, less funds for CCP, firehouse cuts, a halt to business tax reductions, and more. Neither our local print or news media was able to report the scope of the crisis in real dollars or when the so-called crisis would reach a critical point that actually required cuts to prevent financial insolvency.

Many in City Hall found it hard to believe that cuts were required in November or December, less than a quarter of the way through the budget year. But according to the Mayor, the crisis was so severe that about a $100 million had to be cut immediately.

Most cuts did not require Council approval and were made immediately. 50+ Free Library employees were given permanent layoffs notices in early December (some have already stopped working and some still have a week or two left). And library branch closures were announced at 11 branches and eventually December 31st was said to be their last day. Only after all this were town hall meetings called.

Proposed library branch closures were prevented at the eleventh hour with a citizen's lawsuit. The suit cited a provision of the City Charter which prevents the Mayor from permanently closing public facilities without the approval of Council. For now library branches slated to be closed will remain open. But as Marc Stier reported on this blog, ""rolling closures" may now be in store. That means random branches close at random times during the week to save money.

Come on Mayor.

You control a multi-billion dollar budget. The library closures you proposed represent an $8 million annual cost. And your own budget director has said that he now expects a $40 million surplus this year. What gives? The idea of rolling branch closures makes it hard to think you are not being somewhat vindictive.

But the thing is the folks who supported a lawsuit and who fought to keep library branches open are not your political enemies. They are not a part of the old guard that has kept Philadelphia "corrupt and contented." They are not greedy corporate interests.

The people who support libraries, and that you are fighting right now, are your own citizens. They are many of the same people who enthusiastically supported your campaign.

Mayor, it's time to call a truce.

Instead of fighting on library branch closures, you should probably focus your energy on crafting a budget for next year that trims fat. You should also think about cutting corporate tax loopholes and figure out other ways you can generate new revenue. You should keep asking the state and feds for help.

Most importantly, you need to be more clear about priorities in next year's budget. We want our city budget to guarantee basic services but also make investments in the city's future. We want our budget to help us grow the tax base by educating more Philadelphians at CCP. We want more affordable housing and property tax paying homeowners. We want our citizens to go to the library, use a computer and get a job. We want new jobs and business in the city. Investment should be the watchword in next year's budget.

So stop fighting, and start talking about next year's budget. This time, maybe we can discuss not just at townhalls, but through blogs, emails, phone surveys, editorial pages. Basically any way you can think of to connect with Philadelphians. Together, maybe we can come up with a budget we all believe in.

In the meantime, we'll continue to do what we can to organize the people of Philadelphia to forgo our wage tax reduction or talk about other tax options. We are willing to pitch in if we have to. No one wants cuts.

But you have to layoff on libraries. If the issue is one of staffing, well, unlayoff staff. After all you have a surplus now. No matter how you solve it though, the road you are heading down now isn't good for you, it's not good for your citizens and it's not good for our future together.

The Nutter Administration stands at a crossroads. And so do we activists.

It is not because the judicial decision barring the administration from closing libraries is an existential threat to the necessary powers of the Mayor. That claim, as I’ll explain in another post is nonsense.

What is really at stake is whether, at this critical moment, the Nutter administration will decide to fix the broken political culture of our city or whether it will continue to work within it.

What we do as activists may help determine the result.

Tom Ferrick has a very, very smart take on the library fiasco at Its Our City. I would encourage everyone to read the piece.

No Blockquotes, just go read it.

Let's catch up:

First, Catherine Lucey reports that all 11 libraries scheduled to be shuttered are open today:

Well, PhillyClout just called all 11 branches and got through to librarians at every location who said that the libraries are operating on normal schedules today – and will continue to do so until they get word otherwise.

Common Pleas Judge Idee Fox ruled in favor of seven library patrons and three City Council members who sued Nutter last week, citing a 20-year-old ordinance requiring Council approval to close city buildings.

The city plans to appeal the judge’s ruling, but will wait until after a full written order from Fox, which is expected on Monday

As Catherine mentions, the City will appeal next week when they get the full ruling from Judge Fox. Michael Matza of the Inqy reported the same thing, and fleshed out Nutter's latest talking point, that the lawsuit has hurt the chance for the libraries to become 'knowledge centers.'

Beyond the ruling's impact on the balance of power between the city's executive and legislative branches, Nutter said yesterday, it hurts his efforts to get private funding to reopen some of the targeted branches as community based learning centers.

"This ruling runs the risk of significantly hampering our efforts to get the re-use plans in order," he said, "because it has now caused a chill in some of those discussions and created a tremendous amount of confusion with potential funders."

Among the options the administration is exploring is to have the funding channeled through nonprofit community-development corporations and other private sources.

Although few details have emerged about the idea to "repurpose" the targeted libraries as "knowledge centers," at least one proposal calls for the New Kensington Community Development Corporation, a nonprofit with offices on Frankford Ave., to take over the Fishtown Community Library as a "nascent model of the library of the future" under a long-term lease.

Let's deal with this piece by piece. First, the article mentions that NKCDC, a well regarded CDC, is going to run a "library of the future." Are they going to employ librarians? Do they have any expertise on running libraries?

Second, it goes unmentioned, but, who is most likely to be funding a library in Fishtown? Sugarhouse Casino, of course. Great.

Third, the mayor would have us believe that lawsuit is holding this all up, because he now has to get a vote from City Council. But the City Charter says that the city can only sell or lease city owned property with... approval of City Council. So the obstacle that has been put in front of him- a vote- is the same exact one that he already had. Surely he was planning on going to Council for a vote there, right?

Anyway, more great reporting on the issue from the Inquirer and Daily News:

Kia Gregory went to the Fumo branch in South Philly, and got reactions from patrons about the reprieve. (There are great photos, too.)

Jeff Shields on the ad-hoc coalition that sprouted up in defense of libraries. His basic thesis, that after Obama's election (and maybe Nutter's too), people expected more, and when they didn't get it they took that energy and organized, is a good one.

Jill Porter on the whole thing.

Happy new year, everybody.

So there are a lot of newly minted Michael Nutter haters out there. It's pretty hard to believe how crazy things have gotten in the past two months. Can anyone imagine a lawsuit against the city and Mayor Nutter at this time last year? No way.

The fight to prevent library cuts has been amazing and inspiring. But over the long-term, this anger at the Mayor is not productive, nor do I think it is permanent. The reality is that in Philadelphia's strong-Mayor system, not much can get done in opposition to the Mayor. Neither Mayor Nutter or Philadelphia's citizens can afford to let his administration be divided from the city. Remember how well that went with our last Mayor?

We need to get together.

Here is our reality: Philadelphia is losing population. Median wages have not gone up since the 60's. Our rate of poverty is higher than in other major cities--a quarter to a third of our citizens live in poverty, and many more struggle to keep afloat. We don't have as many college-educated citizens as we should. We don't have a cohesive economic development plan or strategy to grow the sectors with the most potential. And most importantly, we're a 21st century city with a government too aligned with a 20th century industrial economy.

There are a lot of silver-linings of course. We have excellent housing stock and relatively affordable houses and apartments. We are well-located to attract national businesses. We have strong neighborhoods. We have education and health care systems, plus pharmaceutical research companies, that could all stand at the center of a stronger local economy. We have some interesting new emerging leaders. And most of all, Philadelphia has a strong sense of self--enough so that we can and will all pull together at key moments.

But right now we need more leadership than we have. We need to be asked to pitch in together for a common goal.

The nature of that goal is perhaps a matter of debate. Maybe we should focus on green jobs. Or digital inclusion. The trick could be to focus on affordable housing and rental units. It could be city-wide clean-ups, more green space or major public transit expansion. It doesn't matter what exactly our common goal is, but we do need something bigger and clearer than what we have.

More budget cuts are likely in this coming year. But even in a bad economy the people of Philadelphia want the Mayor and Council to dream big, act bold and make an investment plan for our future. After all, more and more budget cuts are likely for each year our city's economy fails to respond to the new economy's demands. We're always going to be dealing with cuts unless we invest some serious cash now in a solution that moves us in a different direction.

That may very well mean raising taxes. And that is where you come in.

Despite all of the evidence of corruption, graft and favoritism in city government, the facer is that Council elections don't cost a whole lot to run. Which means that the perceptions and opinions of constituents--especially in district elections--matter a lot. And just about everybody on Council is scared to vote for a bill to raise taxes. Because they think it will effect their chances of reelection.

But we know that a lot of us would pay a little bit more if we knew that bought us better schools, more after school options, better small business services, cleaner streets, safer streets, new jobs or an improved SEPTA.

We need to let members of Council know that under the right conditions, we would pay more in taxes.

We'd forgo a wage tax decrease from casino revenue. We would also support a change in the property tax formula. We support closing business tax loopholes. And a lot of us think that very high wage earners should pay a bigger share than they do now.

If we did pay more in taxes, we'd certainly expect more in representation from our electeds than we have now. But I think that is a demand Council and the Mayor could meet.

So in the coming weeks, we need to let Council know that we have their backs on taxes. That's an easy new Year's resolution right?

As contentious as these last few months have been, we can move past them and on to a brighter future. But only if we speak up and if those we have elected listen, and demonstrate that they have the vision and the drive to take us to a better place.

Just so this doesn't get lost in the mix:

During Rob Dubow's testimony, he said that after their cuts, the City's projected 109 million dollar deficit has turned into a roughly 40 million dollar surplus. So if the City has to pay for libraries, they will... have a 36 million dollar surplus.

So, if the Mayor responds to this by slashing something else, or laying more people off, let's remember that as of right now, the Mayor can let this decision lie and listen to the will of the people, or, he can use it as an excuse to wreak havoc to show those petulant Philadelphians not to mess with him.

The people of Philadelphia do not want these cuts, and they are illegal. The City has a small surplus and can absorb these costs. When will the Mayor listen?

Here is the order from Judge Fox:

Order

The Metro's Reformer's Roundtable asked three questions this week, and I really liked the responses this network administrator Adam Lang gave. Here's my favorite, his answer to the first question:

What's the one thing you would have done differently in the city this year if you were in a position of power?

Adam Lang: I would have reorganized how Philadelphia handles vacant properties it seizes. Creating a land bank to allow land to be sold off at low rates to anyone prepared to use it. At the same time, removing Councilmembers' heavy handedness of the process. City Hall sitting on land is in the way of neighborhood regrowth.

The other questions were:

What's one of the biggest mistakes made in the city in 2008 and how can it be fixed in 2009?

What's the best thing that the city government did this year?

How would YPP folks answer these questions? It would be great to see your responses below.

Here's the statement the Coalition to Save the Libraries sent out to press just now.

Hope everyone can make it to the 3.30 PM celebration at Kingsessing Library tomorrow!

---

BREAKING NEWS: Judge Idee Fox rules against Mayor Nutter's decision to close branch libraries without the approval of City Council.

Contact: Katrina Clarke misskatrina@mac.com (215) 272-7091
Milena Velis milena.velis@gmail.com (215) 200-3876

The Coalition will sponsor a New Year's Eve celebration of the past, present and future of Philadelphia's libraries at the Kingsessing branch, 51st and Kingsessing, beginning at 3:30 pm, Wednesday, December 31st.