The City and DC 47, the city's white collar public employee union, have made a one-year deal.

There is a signing bonus of $1100, no permanent pay raise, and no increase in the city's contribution to the health and welfare fund.

DC 47 has agreed to study the cost of benefits and see if any savings can be achieved. Remember, pension and health care benefits were probably the most important item in the negotiations, and it looks like both sides have ended at a stalemate there.

Again, it's only one year deal, so, like most things in this year's city budget, this is another fight deferred till next year when the city's economic picture is more fully drawn.

From PhillyClout, we get a little more details on the reaction and what this means:

Scott today said: "while we do not embrace this contract, we accept this contract." She later said that the membership want a percentage raise and that they were originally looking for a two-year contract.

The health care committee has caused wide-spread speculation that Nutter may use the next year to push for a consolidation of the four union health-care plans into one city-run program. Former mayors John Street and Ed Rendell also tried to pull that off in their first union negotiations but failed. The unions, while agreeing to participate in the committee, oppose consolidating health care plans.

From the Inky today:

SEPTA to offer more buses, late-night trains

After decades of cuts, SEPTA will announce today a $10 million project aimed at easing overcrowding and improving daily service. The first of the 65 upgrades will begin Aug. 25, and all of the changes are to be made by Nov. 3.

The changes will include bigger buses on busy Route 14 along Roosevelt Boulevard between Northeast Philadelphia and Bucks County, more frequent service on Route 23 between Chestnut Hill and South Philadelphia, and after-midnight trains on the R5 Paoli/Thorndale, R6 Norristown, and R7 Trenton Regional Rail lines.

Sounds pretty good.

So I was reading the University City Review this morning (a paper whose style is reminiscent of our counterpart, "Old Philly Politics" AKA the Public Record, in that finding print articles online can be a challenge). In fact, the paper doesn't have a link to the article I wanted to comment on, but apparently it was covered in other outlets...a month ago (my bad for being out of it). Here's what KYW had to say about Deputy Mayor Cutler's plan to raise parking meter rates in September:

Mayor Nutter's point person on transportation says she's likely to recommend an increase in parking meter rates as part of a larger effort to ease congestion. [Says Rina Cutler:] "You will drive around the block six times trying to find one of those dollar-an-hour spaces. So those on-street spaces really need to be more competitive with off-street parking rates, in order to get some of those folks off the streets and into garages."

Traffic congestion in Center City is a growing problem. But wouldn't the most environmentally sustainable, and the best planning practice, be to discourage people from driving into Center City at all? Driving (forgive the pun) folks toward garages and away from off-street parking seems like a stop-gap meausre.

Inga Saffron, the design critic for the Inky, agrees:

The real consequence of increased car use in Philadelphia has to do with the destructive force of parking garages on the city fabric. Garages require big chunks of land that Center City can't afford to sacrifice. Consider the Jefferson Garage on Chestnut Street as Exhibit A. That hunger for land to build garages is wrecking the walkability of Center City, making its neighborhoods less attractive and less livable, and destroying the architecture that gives the city its character.

If the goal is to reduce congestion in Center City, you have to make the cost of any parking high enough to make everyone think more critically about driving. Here's an opinion piece by Noel Weyrich from June's Inky:

The Parking Authority runs an 850-space garage at 10th and Filbert Streets that seems hell-bent on making traffic congestion worse. One hour of parking in this garage costs $9 (a powerful incentive for drivers to go meter-cruising), but the all-day early-bird special is just $11 - cheaper than a round-trip regional-rail ticket to Levittown, Yardley or Langhorne.

This garage even offers a "Crazy Eights" special - $8 if you're in before 8 a.m. and out before 8 p.m. Crazy is right. The Parking Authority is bribing drivers to bring their cars downtown, while a few blocks to the north, the Port Authority plans to spend $660,000 studying just why congestion is so bad around the Ben Franklin Bridge off-ramps.

In 2006, the Planning Commission issued a new Center City Parking Policy. The document restated the commission's decades-old position that parking rates should discourage rush-hour congestion and meter-cruising, and that the Parking Authority, as a public agency, should take the lead and set an example for the parking industry.

Unfortunately, Cutler has been saying just the opposite to the press. Here's what Fox29 reports:

If you need to come downtown for a short period of time, to drop something off, to pick something up, you have a shot at finding an open meter space," said Rina Cutler, deputy mayor for transportation. "So the idea is to make those metered spots look less tempting and garages more financially appealing...I will ask the parking authority, whose garages are in the public realm, to lower their short-term rates as part of this and see if we can actually prove it's a viable alternative," Cutler said.

If we really want to reduce traffic congestion, it's clear both street and garage parking must be discouraged. In fact, driving into town at all must be discouraged. That said, for both practical political purposes and common sense it doesn't seem quite right to make it so hard to park in Center City if the alternatives, I'm thinking here mostly of SEPTA but bike and car sharing too, are not vastly improved.

From expanded service (more trains, buses and trolleys per hour) to better service (see this Septawatch piece on buying regional rail tickets here), there's a lot that could be done to make riding SEPTA a more useful public service and a more pleasant experience.

On this point, Cutler has been outspoken:

Improved SEPTA operations and a more cooperative relationship between the city and transit agency will boost economic development and tourism in Philadelphia, Cutler said in an interview.

"If we can successfully have a vibrant, clean, safe and efficient transit system, that starts to address a lot of things in the city," said Cutler, a former transit official in Boston and San Francisco and the deputy secretary of administration for the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation. "Joe Casey's success and SEPTA's success ensures the mayor's success."

That's good. But back to meters: In addition to not really getting to the heart of the matter, a policy to raise meter rates without addressing garages will also line the pockets of garage owners (I might add, even for our "publicly" owned garages too...see what Brady reported here). As such, umm, there is cause to be concerned about corruption and bribes when you connect parking and government...remember this?

Again, Inga Saffron agrees. Funnily enough, in February of 07, she blasted mayoral candidate Fattah's congestion pricing plan. She basically said that the Congressman's plans to reduce congestion wouldn't go anywhere unless he tackled garages. And that she didn't think he had the political courage to do so:

This is just an observation, and a cynical one at that, but one reason that a politician like Chaka Fattah might prefer a congestion tax over a parking-garage moratorium is because the tax would be borne by scattered individuals, many of whom don't vote in the city and don't make campaign contributions. On the other hand, parking operators and condo developers are a prime source for campaign contributions. As John Street might say, that's how it works in Philadelphia. So, don't expect a parking moratorium any time soon

Is that still how it works in Philadelphia?

Hopefully Cutler's calls for an improved SEPTA--an effort hopefully bolstered by a democratic president and gas price-driven infusion of capital cash to transit systems next year for massive expansion--should be heeded. She (and presumably Mayor Nutter too) should cool her heels, however, on an attempt to jack up meter rates without comparable garage rate hikes. I hope Council members, who will have the final say, agree.

So I should preface this by saying that for those of us who actually do or have done voter registration and electoral work in the city, there are in fact some very helpful staff over at City Hall and on Deleware Ave. One of them I would even go so far as to say, is the author of this letter published in the Daily News today:

Letters: WHO OWES WHO WHAT ON ELECTION INFO, Philadelphia Daily News

ONCE again, the Daily News editorial board ("It's the Democracy, Dudes," Aug. 4) delves into the pointless and mundane issue of Internet election results.

First, some of those who want this info for free are opportunists who will repackage it and resell it to candidates who are too lazy to do the research themselves, and don't want to deal with the ward leader electoral process.

Don't take cheap shots at the city commissioners while charging taxpayers tens of thousands of dollars to run voting ads in your paper for the benefit of the citizens. Yet you want the election results distributed free. Run the election ads free, as a public service for the benefit of the city taxpayers who otherwise would foot the bill.

Second, do the media truly believe that the lives of Philadelphians are so dreary that they have nothing better to do but sit at a computer on election night for hours to view election results?

The media, candidates, political opportunists and maybe some political junkies would be the only ones viewing these results. Most normal people watch the late news or wait until the next morning and read the paper over coffee, or on their way to work, to find out what happened on election night.

Third, is this issue really a distraction for the failures of city government, while children are dying at the hands of DHS? The school system produces illiterates. Murder and mayhem run rampant. Drugs flow in and out of the city like a sieve. Vacant buildings burn. Potholes appear and expand. Section 8 housing still destroys neighborhoods.

Scam artists scam and swindle. Foreclosures leave families on the street. Gas and food prices increase. Utilities shake us down for more of our money. Oh, and let us not forget Mayor Nutter, wanting to institute a new fee for trash pickup. Is that why we pay some of the highest taxes in the country already, just for basic services? Yet, everyone believes that Internet access to election results is a top priority.

Once upon a time, intelligent, hardworking reporters, politicians, and consultants knew where and how they could access election results, campaign expense reports and any other public documents in our inventory.

Timothy Dowling, Philadelphia

Editor's note: Mr. Dowling works in the city commissioners' office, but these are his personal opinions.

Even nice guys can be wrong...and more than wrong, I think this letter shows how skewed the culture of the City Commissioner's office is. Whether you think it is dreary, or dorky, every citizen--even those who are not "reporters, politicians, and consultants"-- deserve access to public records. It'd be one thing if the Commissioner's office did not already have a system in place to offer access to election results, but it does, and the city is excluding (or charging) some, and not other members of the public; therein lies the problem.

I can't wait for these election results to be made public.

More importantly, I hope this is a wake-up call to Mayor Nutter, who has publicly supported the public's access to voting records, and to Council that we need:

a) much more scrutiny on the current Commissioner's office, especially in this critical election year to make sure that all staff there are focused on making voting as easy as possible and are being as creative as possible to do so and

b) that it is well past time to change the City Charter to disband the Commissioner's office altogether and replace it with an administrative department helmed by an appointed chief (similar to the OIG) with only civil-service staff.

After all, Mr Dowling is correct to name the failure city government when it comes to DHS,the schools and violence. (although Section 8? Really Tim?) But 30% and below municipal voter turnout won't solve these problems. Local turnout is a tough nut to crack of course, but it's not helped by an elections staff that seems opposed to doing anything differently, or more openly than it has in the past.

And of course the City Commissioner's office, as chartered, is charged with working to increase turnout. Is that a distraction too Mr. Dowling? I think figuring out how to use the office you work for to elect leaders who can solve the problems you mention and reverse the failure rate of government is pretty on point.

Dan and I both traded emails with Christine Knapp of PennFuture yesterday in response to the interview she did for "It's Our Money." Christine is full of fun facts. Here are some more tips and info on recycling topics:

First and foremost...

The City Controller said if we recycled 35% [of current waste], we'd save $17 million a year!

Remember, some cities like Berkeley have goals of 70%, so our goal can be upped at some point too, which means we'd generate more revenue.

How much does the city get?

Each material stream had its own price tag attached to it. Paper was, and still is, the most lucrative. But plastics and metals are in high demand now too. But now that the city is single stream, there is just one price for our “co-mingled” stream...it’s actually $35 [a ton]. Last quarter it was $38 (they re-evaluate the price quarterly depending on market demand). It’s a safe bet that we’re making more money on recyclables now than in 2005. It’s also safe to say that the cost of landfill tipping fees will keep going up, making it more and more lucrative to recycle.

If you want to figure out how much your household recycles, audit your own waste!

Put your garbage bag on a scale before you put it out and same for your recycling bin and then figure out what your diversion percentage is.

Why the airport is a problem:

Each of the vendors does their own waste contracting, so there are a zillion different collections going on and some recycle, some don't. There is actually a green airport task force working on issues with the airport and they've made some really good progress on recycling, but I don't have new numbers yet.

What's up with recycling at hotels and restaurants:

Hotel and restaurants would also pay and provide for their own hauling. Many of them just don't have a recycling program and enforcement is so lax they can get away with it. Even if they get caught, the fine is $25 -not enough to scare them into compliance. The increase in recycling budget this year is partially going to hire more enforcement officers and the law dept is going to look to see if they can raise the fine.

What about composting?

There is no major composting game in town right now...for the time being, the city does provide free compost bins to anyone who takes a composting class.

On public recycling bins:

They [public trash cans] are very much abused (people put household trash in them, etc) so they really have to be emptied every day, maybe even several times a day in high traffic areas. Just think about what that kind of service [if you added recycling] would cost the city in terms of additional trucks and manpower. Of course much of that could be offset or covered by the $17 million previously mentioned, but it would be a tough sell right now in having to either raise taxes or eliminate some other program to pay for it.

A week ago, I was walking down 16th Street in downtown Denver. I was trying to stave off the minor panic attack I inevitably get at some point during travel outside of Philadelphia. I love going new places, don’t me wrong, but I always freak for a minute when I am somewhere really far away. There's something about ready access to cheesesteaks and people who know how to speak properly (what is this mysterious wah-tear that i am constantly being offered by servers?) that comforts me. Take it away and I feel like like a turtle that's swallowed a six-pack ring.

Anyway, there I am thousands of miles from home in a city located in a time zone that I’d bet ¾ of Philadelphians couldn’t even name. I am returning to my hotel from a pre-meeting trip to Denver’s Union Station (I like to check out trains in other cities) and I am blown away by the amount of new construction, apartments and lofts I see. I had a friend who lived in Denver once, and I’d always pictured it as one of those sprawling Western cities whose downtowns only contained hotels and office buildings. But no: all around me are thousands of units of housing.

This year, I have had a chance to travel a bit and I can confirm that urban living is popular everywhere. San Diego, LA, Portland, Seattle, Denver, Cincinnati, even Albany, NY; they all feature downtowns that are developing. Rapidly. I’d go so far as to say that American society is beginning to indicate a preference for urban living over suburban—a pretty big change for a country that practically invented suburbia.

After all, not as many middle-class people my age are getting married (or partnered for you PC straights) and bearing children in the same numbers as their parents. That means a whole lot of young people can forget the need for a good school district and a yard for the kids in favor of drinks at Tria. Not to mention the crowds of empty-nest baby boomers, who are living healthier and happier than their parents. They seem to figure, “why not live in the city now?” There is a lot more going on in Center City, after all, than in Newtown Square.

Yes, all of these suburbanites moving into the city sucks some. But, on the whole, it’s a great trend. A huge part of our current energy crisis isn’t just about the price of a barrel of oil, but it’s also about the fact that our country fundamentally realigned itself along car-reliant lines in the last century. Most Americans who live outside of cities have to own cars to do anything from work to school to shopping for food. And the fact that cities offer a contrast to that lifestyle, not to mention real opportunities for folks to get stuff done on foot or on SEPTA make them highly appealing.

So what does this all have to do with Philly?

Maybe other people have already caught onto this (especially those who travel more than I), but if there really is a cultural shift toward urban living, Philadelphia should ease up on all the incentives.

The Avenue of Arts was great and all, and maybe the ten-year tax abatement really did spur activity in Center City, but come on. If people are moving to downtown Denver of all places, it is obviously time for Philadelphia to end the ten-year tax abatement, or at least amend it.

There are two alternatives I would propose:

1. Offer a ten-year tax abatement to developers who pledge to renovate and rent properties at affordable rates. We have an affordable housing crisis in the city, and I‘d argue that what we need most is more affordable rental units.
2. Do something creative—maybe keep the property tax abatement, but charge those who get it a close-to-comparable fee for something like public transportation capital development (to build new light-rail or subway lines—think how great that would be for Fairmount and Strawberry Mansion or even NE Philly), or something to fund the School District.

In Mayor Nutter’s first year as Mayor, he managed to get a budget passed without causing too much pain. But that was really just the calm before the storm. Revenue projections are not great, there’s a recession brewing, and next year and the year after, we’re going to need more money in city coffers (and AFSCME DC 47 still doesn’t have a contract signed).

We need money not just to meet basic needs, but we also need to have some capital on hand to be able to invest in the city’s future. If we want to keep new people coming here, and if we want to have the resources on hand (like a fully-funded CCP) to raise the wages of those who already do, we need money.

And when it’s clear that people want to live here, in Center City at least, easing up on the tax-abatement seems like an easy way to start.

(If the solutions I offer chafe some, no sweat, but remember, in a city where 2/3 of our citizens live in functional poverty, we gotta do something to fund basic city services and figure out a long-term plan to lift people into higher-wage jobs. So, if you don't like my solutions, offer some that address these core issues.)

"Chinese millionaires turned away" was an eye-catching headline this morning. Here's the basic summary from the Inky:

Close to 150 Chinese millionaires want to help Philadelphia expand its Convention Center, but the center's board wants no part of their cash.

...

For the Chinese, the money represents a legal way to expedite access to U.S. "green cards" for permanent residency. Adhering to the requirements of a nearly 20-year-old federal immigration program, they have each plunked down $500,000 in an escrow account at a U.S. bank.

For the state, that money - $73.5 million - could be a cheap way for the Convention Center to borrow funds to cover some of the expansion's construction costs, which are projected to surge over the $700 million budgeted. (Under the loan program, the money would be repaid, over five years, at a remarkably low interest rate of 2.5 percent.)

Read the whole article here.

What do you think? Xenophobia? Larger back story? Real economic concern? What?

I got an email today from Women's Way reminding me about something one of their grantees had done:

Last month, PathWays PA released the 2008 Self-Sufficiency Standard for Pennsylvania which measures how much money a family needs to earn in order to meet their basic needs without public or private assistance. The report found that a family of four (two adults, one preschooler and one school age child) must make $53,611 annually to sustain itself, and a family of two (one parent and one preschooler) needs to take in $36,208 a year. Both minimum earning standards far exceed the Federal Poverty Level.

Now those are the dollar figures for a statewide average. But digging deeper you find that a single parent in Philadelphia with a preschooler and a school-age kid needs to earn $48,528 a year just to make it. (You can look at data in even more depth here.)

Anyone want to venture a guess on current Philadelphia median wages? (Hint: they are way below $48 k).

This is very useful data, but also depressing. Luckily for City Council members looking to take initiative on their own, or looking for things to discuss to with state legislators, Pathways does include some useful recommendations:

STRATEGIES TO CLOSE THE GAP

There are two basic approaches for individuals to close the income gap: reduce costs or raise incomes. The first approach, modeled and discussed in the previous section, reduces costs through subsidies and supports, such as child support, food stamps, and child care assistance. Strategies for the second approach, raising incomes, are detailed below. Note, however, that reducing costs and raising incomes are not mutually exclusive, but can and should be used sequentially or in tandem. Some parents may, for instance, receive education and training leading to new jobs, yet continue to have their incomes supplemented by work supports until their wages reach the self-sufficiency level. Whatever choices they make, parents should be able to choose the path to self-sufficiency that best safeguards their families’ well-being and allows them to balance work, education, and family responsibilities.

I just got back from a two-week trip to the west coast. I am a totally Philly nativist, but man is it cool out there. They have a different way of doing things. In fact, do you know the first thing I did when I got off the plane in the Portland, OR airport? I dropped my magazines in a recycle bin. Crazy, huh?

That's why I am not as excited as the Inky is in this article in today's paper:

City leaders cut the ribbon on a new solar-powered trash receptacle yesterday and then, appropriately, threw the ribbon away.

The ribbon-cutting in Center City came during the unveiling of the BigBelly, a trash receptacle and compactor that can store four times the volume of ordinary litter baskets and cut fuel use and greenhouse emissions from trash collection by 80 percent.

Don't me wrong, this is very cool. And last week's announcement that the entire city is going single-stream is even cooler. And certainly a huge improvement over the otherwise slow pace with which Philadelphia has tackled recycling.

But we are in an environmental crisis. We need more. So why would the city invest ANY money in new on-street refuse receptacles that don't also include recycling bins? Can you imagine how much paper gets trashed at City Hall alone by subway and trolley riders every day? Do you know how many soda cans and water bottles line the streets and end up in trash cans just in Center City on an average day? And if you go to our airport's watse containers...I shudder to even think what you'd find...

Solar power compactors are great, but basic recycling collection in public spaces would be even better.

What else is there to talk about today except this:

Come to Philly for Change tonight, and celebrate! Details and RSVP here.

Ah, memories. Remember when Dems in Congress compromised with Rs earlier this year on unemployment? Instead of giving out extensions of unemployment benefits--bi-weekly payments that would actually help the jobless out for an additional 3 months--the Dems agreed to give away $600 checks to almost all tax-payers.

Real smart.

No checks have made it into my household yet, but when they do, I am thinking about giving mine away. It's very hard to imagine parting with $600. I have debt after all, and there's plenty of stuff I need, but...I didn't earn any of the money coming to me, and I don't need it or deserve it anywhere near as much as the 1/3 Philadelphians living in poverty.

What should I do with my $600?

I can spread it out and give it away to a few groups I like, or just pick one to have the most impact. Certainly PUP and ACORN and CLS who are all working directly with unemployed people and mortgage foreclosures are up there. Then there are larger political causes to fund, that might impact the balance of power for progressives in Harrisburg or DC. And there's a myriad of other causes that I support and would like to make a difference in.

Or I could keep some or all of it. I don't know about the rest of you, but there's a real temptation to keep the money, save it, or use it to pay down debt. Especially as a 29 yo, a part of me wants to save now, in the hopes of being able to be more financially secure in the future (and be able to help out my causes then). And I am lucky enough to have a pretty good job, but being able to pay my bills and eat every month without overdrawing my account is still a somewhat foreign concept.

What are other people doing with their checks and why? In the context of a totally unfair tax rebate, that our government has had to borrow to fund, shouldn't we take matters into our own hands somehow, and correct the mistake that the stimulus has been?

It's with joy for Rue, and sadness that my awesome co-chair at Liberty City has to step down, that I share an email I just sent to Liberty City members:

Dear Liberty City member,

You may have read about this in the Inquirer today, but Rue Landau, Liberty City co-chair, has been appointed the Executive Director of the Philadelphia Commission on Human Relations, by Mayor Nutter.

Because of this incredible opportunity, and the city’s ethics laws, Rue has stepped down as the female co-chair of Liberty City. Casey Cook, long-time Liberty City Board member, after a Board vote, has agreed to step in as the interim-chair.

Casey will help me and the board continue our process of expanding our leadership to represent the entire LGBT Philadelphia community—including more women, people of color, and trans folks.

Rue’s appointment is a real victory for Liberty City. Our group was founded in 1994 to make sure that LGBT Philadelphians have a voice in state and local government. The decision by Mayor Nutter to put Rue in charge of enforcing civil rights laws for all Philadelphians validates Liberty City's work. And is also recognition of Rue's amazing skill as an attorney and a leader for change.

Rue sent a goodbye message that she wanted to share:

This is a bittersweet moment for me. I am very excited to start my job at the PCHR. At the same time, it requires me to step down as Co-Chair of Liberty City, an organization that I love. I know you will all continue your amazing work to support out LGBT and LGBT-friendly candidates. Over the years, Liberty City has grown to be a strong force in the Democratic party. We have educated candidates and moved our issues into the forefront of every debate. I am very proud to have been a part of that effort. Keep up the incredible work!

With Rue Landau as a powerful new ally in city government, and with the commitment to grassroots change that each and every one of you brings to Liberty City, there’s no where to go but up for us!

Yours truly,
Ray Murphy
Co-Chair

You can check out the Inky article for more info here. (I've included the pic from the article here: poor Rue has been doomed by the papers to be bathed in the green light of Woody's forever...at least the spikes of my hair (I think) help soften the look ;)

Last week, I went to jury duty for the first time in my life. My summons required me to show up at 8:15 AM, and join about 200-300 other people in a large room with auditorium-style chairs and small attached desks. After waiting a couple of hours (during which there was lots of cake and constant communication about the wait time--two things I'd never expect after a lifetime of riding SEPTA), I joined 40 other prospective jurors in a courtroom at the criminal justice center.

Each of us prospective jurors answered a written questionnaire while we were in the waiting room (questions like "are you more or less likely to believe the testimony of a police officer," or "have you ever been the victim of a crime"). In the courtroom, the judge actually went around to each juror, and asked each person to explain some of their answers.

The responses my fellow citizens gave to the judge were fascinating.

I always like environments that are exclusively Philadelphian. I mean, minus the few suburban-living city employees Seth may have missed while he was at the OIG, you pretty much have to live somewhere in the city to be at jury duty. Despite the fact that this city often feels very small, when you are in a room with that many other Philadelphians you don't know, you can't help but be reminded that it is in fact a very big city, with a lot of different kinds of people.

Yet in the courtroom, despite the neighborhood, race, gender, and class diversity of my fellow jurors, we all had something in common: every single person reported that they, or a family member, had been the victim of a crime (from burglary to rape to assault). And about half of the prospective jurors had a family member who had been convicted of a crime (from drug sales to murder, and again, to assault).

This is hardly shocking news, however, I thought it was worth repeating the idea that crime and violence in our city, while nothing new, is a problem that we all share.

And leaving aside the rhetoric and politicization of this issue, I wonder if my fellow Philadelphians have confidence that we're individually and governmentally doing our parts to get down to the roots of crime and violence in our city, and formulating responses that will make a real difference. For real.

RESOLUTION

Calling upon the Mayor to file lawsuits against mortgage lenders that have negatively impacted Philadelphia through foreclosures; and, if the Mayor fails to do so, authorizing Council to retain counsel to file lawsuits against these mortgage lenders.

WHEREAS, according to ACORN’s October 2007 “Foreclosure Exposure 2: The Cost to our Cities and Neighborhoods” report, 3,206 of the high-cost loans made in 2006 in the Philadelphia area are likely to go into foreclosure and the costs to all of the stakeholders involved will be more than $345 million; and

WHEREAS, these costs represent approximately $23 million to individual homeowners in foreclosure, $158 million to lenders and investors, $62 million to local government, and $107 million in lower home values of neighbors; and

WHEREAS, the ACORN report also states that studies have shown that foreclosures increase violent crime in neighborhoods, decrease property values in neighborhoods, and reduce city tax revenue, making it harder to provide good schools, police protection, code enforcement, and other services; and

WHEREAS, according to the USA Today newspaper, Cleveland, Baltimore, Buffalo, and Minneapolis have sued various mortgage lenders as a strategy to address the foreclosure crisis and to recoup lost city tax revenue, stop the strain on city services, and reclaim neighborhoods devastated by this crisis; and

WHEREAS, and in comparison to these cities, Philadelphia and its citizens are suffering from a mortgage foreclosure crisis and Council has passed Resolution Nos. 040100 and 080331 calling for moratoriums on Sheriff sales based on residential mortgage foreclosures; and

WHEREAS, it is the duty of this Body to protect the citizens and the neighborhoods of Philadelphia, and this Body has already gone on record to address this issue by unanimously passing the above-referenced resolutions and Bill No. 010715-A and holding hearings pursuant to Resolution No. 080095. Now, therefore be it

RESOLVED, BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA, that we hereby call on the Mayor to file lawsuits against predatory lenders that have negatively impacted Philadelphia; and, if the Mayor fails to do so, authorizing Council to retain counsel to file lawsuits against these mortgage lenders.

Introduced by:

Councilwoman Marian B. Tasco Councilwoman Maria Quinones Sanchez Councilman Curtis J. Jones, Jr.
May 22, 2008

This passed yesterday. The Mayor has not said whether he'd sign it.