Welcome Councilman. I hope you enjoy the site, Dan and Ray do a great job!

I, for one, am glad you are on board as I have considered you one of the best, if not the best Councilperson we have (Councilman Goode is another, despite a few disagreements (and I think he and Mark owe me dinner)). In particular, I was a big fan of the immigration issue, which in a previous post I cited to your report. Moreover, I am happy that more elected officials are reaching out via the internet and bloggosphere.

This is cool. And thanks for coming to talk.

OK, I will go first. We have talked, as you may have read, about the BPT tax cut. Every time a BPT cutter comes on, they give us platitudes for why we need to cut business taxes.

But, there has been very little actual proof that a City cutting corporate taxes actually sees meaningful economic benefits. And. of course, the Laffer Curve has been completely discredited.

As Mayor Bloomberg (as cited by Ben) said:

"Any company that makes a decision as to where they are going to be based on the tax rate is a company that won't be around very long. ... If you're down to that incremental margin, you don't have a business."

It strikes me that the real beneficiaries in all this are not small businesses, but instead big companies like Comcast, Cigna, and others.

You have talked briefly about revamping the zoning process. What about some alternate economic growth strategies then business tax cuts?

(And please, whatever you do, do not respond with the focus group honed "tax fairness.")

Hello Councilman,
Welcome to the blogosphere! You probably don't remember but we met very briefly during one of your lectures at Penn that featured special guest lecturer Neil Oxman. I'm currently working on a project for WHYY in partnership with The Daily News and Committee of Seventy called The Next Mayor. It's a project in which we're trying to flesh out and bring to light many of the important issues that don't always receive the most substantive discussion by the candidates. Since DanUA already posed the BPT question, I'll go with something else and draw on your expertise in the area of Zoning and Building codes.

Driven by feedback that we've gotten on thenextmayor.com, I've been doing a lot of research and putting a lot of thought into the issue of sustainability - including sustainable architecture, development, energy sources, etc. To that end, I recently attended one of the monthly Urban Sustainability Forums that are put on by Sustainable Philadelphia and saw a remarkable presentation by a number of developers about the kinds of building that are being done in New York and in Philadelphia and the surrounding suburbs.

One of the presenters, in answering a question about how we can speed up the implementation of sustainable principles in new development and rehabbing of existing structures, said that it is often local building codes and a lack of knowledge by city officials that prohibit them from using certain building materials or design features. The waterless urinal incident at the Comcast Tower is a well known example.

What can elected officials do, especially the next mayor, whoever that might be, to break the cycle in the city government of "doing things because we've always done them this way," change elements of the building code to encourage this kind of green development, encourage developers to incorporate sustainable designs and materials, and convince the building trades unions to get 100% behind a new way of doing things?

From what I learned at the Forum, this region is already doing very well compared to others in incorporating sustainable architecture into a number of building projects, but it almost seems to be doing it in spite of the city government, not because of it.

For reference, I'd point out just one quick example of how a city is encouraging green building. Click here to read about how San Francisco is changing their permitting process to expedite the approval of permits for projects that conform to LEED Gold standards.

Follow up question, any plans to throw your hat in the ring and run for mayor? (just kidding)

(And thanks to Dan UA for for letting me co-opt some blog space while my own seems to be experiencing post-phillies-missing-the-playoffs emotional and technical difficulties)

Thanks for coming onto Young Philly Politics and joining the discussion. I'm glad to see other commenters have raised important issues like tax fairness and immigration. I am curious about your perception of how the Philadelphia Democratic Party is reaching out to young people.

You are one of the youngest members of City Council. Do you feel like the party leadership is doing enough to develop the next generation of leadership? It seems that most of the party establishment would rather ignore potential leaders and hold onto power. What can young people do to break into the Democratic Party in Philadelphia and help revitalize the progressive movement?

---
htpp://benwaxman.com

I'd love to know your thoughts on the tax abatements. DiCicco and others have said that abatements really stimulate building and development, and more than pay for themselves (and there seems to be lots of data in support), but others say that for Center City and surrounds, at least, the market has become self-sustaining and no longer needs government subsidies to spur renovation and new construction. How do we determine the contribution of the abatements to the region's growth, and how can we shape or direct the current program so that it spurs development where none is occurring, rather than keeping high-end condos coming in already popular neighborhoods?

Thanks for your time,
acm

"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has."
— Margaret Mead

OK, here is one that is probably particularly apt for this site, for the progressive community, etc.

We just came off the selection process for the "elections" that will choose three council members. As with most political decisions made by the City machine, the general criteria for what it takes to be assisted, chosen, whatever, is service to the party. For potential judges that means doing pro bono work for the party, for others it means doing a number of other things. But, to me, it seems a little strange, as a very proud Democrat, that we are choosing based on service to a party, and not service to our City.

For example, one of our regular contributors is an organizer for PUP, and generally works his ass off to get the minimum wage raised, and other good stuff. (BradyDale, this! is! your! life!) In any case, lets say hyopthetically, he continues this path for another ten years, and decides he wants to enter Philadelphia politics. He would likely not get anywhere with most established people in the City, because he has not done his "party service." But is Philadelphia, full of Democrats, made better by this attitude? To me, I would take Brady and his agigtating for poor Philadelphians any day over Dan Savage or Carol Campbell.

It seems like many people act like the Party is more important than... us; then an average Philadelphian. Your thoughts?

Jimmy Kenney!!!!

It is an honor and a privilege.

I don't even know where to start, to be honest.
I hope you don't get addicted like Wil.
City council may just shut down completely...

How did you get into politics in the first place, anyway?

And why do you still do it?

When people are in power they want to hold onto it. They feel that they have rightfully earned that power. In a Democracy you have to take power from people through elections.

The current party structure is from an era of retail politics. This is when neighborhood elected party people were expected to deliver finite city resources and patronage jobs. In many neighborhoods its still the same and not inherently wrong. You are able to deliver these services and jobs by winning elections and showing neighborhood electoral strength so that those in power would pay attention and take you into consideration when decisions were being made.

Everything changes. Some of the very same people who are being criticized by some younger activists were not too long ago, considered progressive activists themselves. Because they were African-American, women or both, they had to figuratively break in the door of Democratic Headquarters by filing for commiteeperson, running for ward leader and eventually attaining positions in city council and the state legislature. These good people view their ascent very differently from the people being critical of them today.

There are many good caring people in the party who care deeply about their neighborhoods and their future. I have been around these folks for a long time and I know of their dedication.

Along comes the younger generation. They have their own life experience. They are impatient for change. In many ways, they want to be in power. Make the decisions and provide the direction and vision. That's a good thing. How do you do it?

Join the party. Run for party office. Change it from the inside. Get involved in a civc assoc.. Get active. Change it from the outside. In order to change it in a democracy, you must win elections. You must convince your neighbors that your view of the world is correct.

I believe that there is room for both. There is a sign on the door of party headquarters that says, " All Welcome". In order to test that assertion, you need to step inside and see.

Thanks for taking time out of a no-doubt-very-busy day to take our questions.

To add onto Dan's question: you say some of our current Democratic representatives started when "neighborhood elected party people were expected to deliver finite city resources and patronage jobs."

I wonder if you consider this practice something worth remedying, and if so what do you think city government can and should do?

It's very fair to say that dwindling resources account for a lot of what ails the city and a lot of the problems that reformers complain about. And as resources dwindle, the opportunities to practice patronage dwindle.

I also agree that those who show an ability to get out the vote in their neighborhood deserve favor from the party.

But I guess I'm asking if you think there's any need for institutional reform in city government. The recent council elections, the way important contracts and jobs (like seats on the judicial bench) are awarded certainly bothers a lot of people. Some might say these practices discourage the very same good young people we need to be encouraging.

By the way, I don't know if you're a Phillies fan but, even though we didn't make the playoffs, Jamie Moyer proves that 40 is not so old.

All in all I'd say this conversation went ok. The Councilman was very accomodating, despite the fact that some of the questions were bitter and hostile.

I have met Jim Kenney several times. He is a very open and honest person and he a champion of many of the progressive causes supported by the writers and readers on YPP. To tear into him due to his support of the BPT - without discussing his other policies - is unfair. We are not talking about massive revenue losses here - the issue is more about tax reform and less about huge cuts.

Jim Kenney has lived in Philadelphia for his entire life. He knows the voters very well and had the highest vote total of all the at-large council members in the last city-wide election. There are many passionate posters here who are quick to blame every member of the Council and the administration for every problem in this city. But Jim Kenney has seen and heard it all before, and he has the experience and the knowledge necessary to make the right decsions for this city and its residents.

The point here is: don't make the perfect the enemy of the good. This city will never be perfect, but Jim Kenney is very, very good.