Group 9
Moderators: Josh Warner and Susanne Iannece
Total points: 73

Group Description:
Group 9 had 15 people to begin with, but that number shrank to 12 people toward the end of the process. The group was fairly diverse; there was a good range of ages, with five males and 10 females. Most participants came from the northwestern part of the city - Mount Airy, Germantown, etc. - but there were a few from other neighborhoods in the Northeast and south. We had one suburbanite.
There were several former city workers in the group. Overall, the energy level was fairly high, and after the initial explanation of the process and group members’ questions, the deliberation began with good energy and drive. The group was pretty cohesive and definitely had a progressive outlook, which helped them move through the “Low Hanging Fruit” and “Shared Pain” sections efficiently. Although there were no outright “heated” exchanges, there were points of contention (mainly around “Shared Pain” type tax or fee increases vs. low-income persons ability to pay), where the group as a whole realized the trade-offs inherent in the exercise. Although the process was commented on in the beginning of the group work, it was never directly challenged or rejected by any group member.
The “Gut Wrenchers” bucket was never reached with this group, and no dissenting work sheets were filled out.

Low-Hanging Fruit
Total points: 24
• #3 DROP Program: 4 points
o This passed unanimously in the group after discussion about its abuse by elected officials, and then clarification by Julie, our city representative, on what the program is and its cost/benefit.
o There was outrage expressed that elected officials have abused this program.
o Unanimous passage - 15/15
• #16 Vehicle Fleet: 6 points
o Group discussion again centered on abuse of a privilege, and it was generally understood that this was the sedan fleet up for the cut, not emergency vehicles. Generally, the group wanted selective reductions of the vehicle fleet, to spare emergency and service vehicles
o Good deliberation and agreement on the use of hybrid vehicles. Philly Car Share / ZipCar is a good idea
o One member warned of the up-front costs associated with purchasing new cars.
o Unanimous passage - 15/15
• #20 Eagles: 4 points
o Not much discussion, as this was a quick vote.
o No ‘cons’ mentioned.
o Unanimous passage - 15/15
• #17 Amusement: 2 points
o Not much discussion on this one.
o One dissenting opinion regarding the already high price of movie tickets.
o 14/15 voted in favor.
• #21 Parking: 2 points
o Discussion that this was a small increase and only for parking structures.
o There was some dissent regarding how tourism and that Center City shopping may decline with increased prices. The need for increased spending (shopping/tourism wise) was common ground in the group, and the idea of a shuttle service from the suburbs to the city was explored.
o 14/15 voted in favor.
• #23 Real Estate Transfer Tax: 2 points
o Overall, the group was very pro-revenue growth, and generally supportive of the tax-increase options on the work sheet.
o Discussion involved that the transfer tax is split by buyer and seller, that the increase is relatively minor, that most people sell only every 10 years or so, and that “we have to close this gap somehow.”
o There was some dissent, mainly that it would discourage people from selling, and that the tax-increase amount would impact the typical family.
o Midway through the deliberation, the PILOTs issue was brought up. Some discussion followed, but the group was not outraged on the subject.
o 14/15 voted in favor.
• #15b Streets, 1st revenue option (commercial collections): 2 points
o Little discussion on this, such that the vote came quickly.
o 15/15 voted in favor.
• #25 Wage Tax/Resident: 1 point
o After clarification on the Resident vs. Commuter Wage Tax difference, discussion centered on how the increase was very minor and how we all have to chip in somehow.
o Vote came fairly quickly, with 13/14 voting in favor.
• #26 Wage Tax/Commuter: 1 point
o There was unanimous consent for this, with 14/14 voting in favor.
• Mentioned as Low Hanging Fruit but not passing the 75% threshold vote were:
o #12b Prisons - 20% cut
o #10 Licenses and Inspections - 30% cut
 Although this never made it onto any lists, the deliberation centered on the need for inspections; i.e., the function of L&I is essential, but the quality of service and the efficiency factor is known to be lacking. The entire group agreed that at least a department-wide overhaul was needed.

No Ways, No Hows
Total points taken off the table: 89 points
• #7 Housing: 7 points
o Our one group member with one of the homeless advocacy signs made an impassioned statement regarding why she though Housing should be a “No Way, No How,” ending with “How would each one of us feel facing a night of sleeping on the street?”
o After no dissenting opinions were offered, 15/15 voted in favor.
• #4 Fairmount Park: 2 points
o Park advocates mentioned all the health and social benefits of park space.
o One group member mentioned the irony of the mayor’s election proposal to increase park funding, but how now cuts for the park system are on the table.
o 10/14 voted in favor.
• #13 Public Health: 7 points
o There was good deliberation on this subject. Tensions arose between the need to close the budget gap and the need for restaurant inspections.
o One group member who worked in the restaurant business mentioned that in tough times, restaurants may be more inclined to cut corners.
o Another topic came up: that Health Centers provide help to many people, and unemployed people depend on them.
o Even the revenue option was soundly rejected by the group, as it could be a barrier to people seeking health services or preventative health services.
o Even having a questionnaire or extensive forms for people to fill out may be a barrier.
o 13/14 voted in favor.
• #8 Human Services: 19 points
o Discussion on this subject focused mainly on kids, and child protective services and mental health services.
o A good point was brought up that cuts in this field may increase the burden on police, courts, and especially prisons, as those suffering from mental-health issues are often jailed.
o 14/14 voted in favor.
• #11b Police (20% cut): 52 points
o Strong agreement that police were needed no matter what else is cut or sacrificed.
o One group member felt very strongly that it at least should be considered, as the point value was so high.
o There was a question and some deliberation involving the number of uniformed officers on active duty vs. desk positions.
o 12/14 voted in favor.
• #6 Free Library: 2 points
o Good deliberation was done by the group for this topic.
o It was agreed that libraries are needed, but it was mentioned that computers are more and more prevalent in households of all incomes.
o A strong dissent followed from that point in that computers really aren’t that prevalent in low-income households, and that sometimes libraries serve in a complimentary manner to churches and church groups.
o The group considered libraries a vital resource during tough economic times.
o 13/14 voted in favor.
• Mentioned as “No Way, No Hows” but not passing the 75% threshold vote were:
o #5 Fire - 20% cut

Shared Pain
Total points: 49
• #15c Streets (Pay as you Throw / Sanitation Service Fee): 13 points
o Deliberation on this subject ranged quite a bit, but the Sanitation division/aspect of the Streets Department was strongly supported.
o Many folks brought up the fact that once people are charged for trash pickup, illegal dumping may greatly increase - potentially in city parks.
o A tough tension/trade-off arose when the inability of low-income folks to pay this fee was brought up. The group also explored the concept that larger families would need to pay more, as they generate more trash.
o 9/14 voted in favor.
• #1a Administrative: 5 points
o Deliberation was very short on this topic, and no “why nots” or cons were offered by the group.
o 10/12 voted in favor.
• #1b Administrative (Recording Fees): 1 point
o No dissenting views here, and the point was viewed as a no brainer.
o The group did consider putting this in the “Low Hanging Fruit” bucket, but we had passed that point already.
o 12/12 voted in favor.
• #15a Streets (20% cut): 10 points
o See 15c, above, for the majority of the deliberation.
o Sanitation was again mentioned as a vital service, but upon looking at the impacts listed on the work sheet, the vote passed.
o 10/12 voted in favor.
• #22 Real Estate Tax: 5 points
o Again, the group was pretty progressive and willing to explore the revenue options, and again the burden on low-income families and householders was explored.
o After briefly discussing the need for fair revaluations and assessments, the vote passed.
o 8/12 voted in favor.
• #12a Prisons (10% cut): 10 points
o A good chunk of the deliberation came when Prisons was being considered for the “Low Hanging Fruit” bucket, namely that the group was worried about cutting job training and reentry services and wanted a breakdown of what kinds of offenders might be released.
o Some felt that there weren’t enough prisons, and as this was mentioned the group moved to a short discussion on prison alternatives, which was productive.
o Again, the link between police, courts, and prisons was explored.
o 9/12 voted in favor.
• #5 Fire Dept. (cut by 5%): 5 points
o Although Fire was considered for the “No Way, No How” bucket, it did not secure 75% of the vote during that time, and was tabled.
o The group was very sensitive to the Fire Department, given that cuts had already been offered or made, but felt a smaller cut was prudent given the need to fill the budget.
o 9/12 voted in favor.
• Mentioned as “Shared Pain” but not passing the 50% threshold vote were:
o #11 Police - 10% cut (People brought up the large point value.)