Group M
Moderators: Harris Sokoloff and Chris Satullo
Total points: 56

Group Description:
This was a large overflow group that met in the gymnasium because of the robust turnout. The mix among the 100-plus people seemed to be about 30 percent African American, 70 percent white; most were middle-age, but there was a fair sprinkling of folks in their 20s or 30s. Mount Airy and Germantown seemed to be the neighborhoods most strongly represented. Mostly, the group tackled the appointed task with seriousness, leavened with some humor. Disagreements were expressed civilly, with some very strong and articulate debates over some points. Because of the size of the group, people had to wait for handheld microphones to get to them before they said their piece - so that slowed progress a bit. Three or four individuals used their moment with the mic to launch into angry soliloquies, but that was the exception, not the norm. The group was so large that specific vote totals were not recorded; we estimated majorities based on show of hands.

Low Hanging Fruit:
Total points: 22
• No. 20 Eagles: 4 points
o This took about 10 seconds. By acclamation.
• No. 3 DROP: 4 points
o Easily got 75 percent.
o One city employee spoke in favor of this program as a method of bringing back talented people whose experience might come in handy, but the clinching argument was, “In this economy, this is the kind of thing you have to cut first before you start taking away people’s jobs.”
• No. 16 Vehicle Fleet: 6 points
o Closer call on 75 percent.
o This item triggered longer conversations. Several citizens had anecdotes of seeing city workers in city cars doing things during work hours that could not possibly have been work-related. Much nodding of heads around those anecdotes.
o The idea that city workers got to drive city cars home seemed to enrage many people. When one woman objected that people like inspectors and social workers needed cars to make site visits, others argued that it would still be cheaper to have them use their own vehicles and get reimbursed for mileage. The idea of having city workers rely on Philly Car Share earned loud applause.
• No. 15 Streets - Revenue Option A - Fee for business trash pickup: 2 points
o Passed easily.
o Annual cost struck most as reasonable. Might be an incentive for businesses to recycle more. A couple of people, on the other hand, worried this would be one more thing making the city seem less hospitable to small business.
• No. 23 Real Estate Transfer tax increase: 2 points
o Passed easily.
o Pro: This is a very small increase that will barely be felt in these large transactions.
o Con: This isn’t wise, and it certainly isn’t “Low Hanging Fruit” in a housing market that is this bad.
• No. 17 Amusement tax and No. 21 Parking tax passed easily by acclamation. 2 plus 2 = 4 points.

The only proposed “Low Hanging Fruit” that was voted down was No. 1 - Administrative, after long discussion. Group didn’t get back to this one during shared pain.
o Pros: City government has lots of inefficiencies. Nutter hired a lot of very high-dollar deputies.
o Cons: Things like the Revenue Department and Film Office are actually net producers of revenue. Cutting them is pennywise, pound foolish.
o The general sentiment was to save in this area through pay cuts, benefit freezes and furloughs for employees, rather than layoffs.

No Way, No Hows
Total points taken off the table: 98
• No. 18 and 19 BPT; Gross Receipts and Net Income: 4 points
o The sense of the group was that small business would be the economic salvation of Philadelphia, so it would be foolhardy to increase the tax burden.
o One man argued strongly that suburban businesses that do some business in Philly evade the gross receipts tax, and the city should go strongly after them.
• No. 7 Housing: 7 points
o No debate, unanimous.
• No. 14 Recreation: 5 points
o After several emotional speeches against any cuts in recreation, the vote was nearly unanimous.
• No. 13 Health centers: 7 points
o Unanimity about not closing centers. Much debate on whether it was reasonable to expect people to pay co-pays and for OTC drugs.
o Co-pay debate broke down mostly along racial lines.
• No. 6 Free Library: 3 points
o No cuts at all. Nearly unanimous
• No. 11 Police: 52 points
o No cuts at any level. Little need for discussion. Nearly unanimous.
• No. 5 Fire: 20 points
o No cuts, but a much closer vote than police.
o Two people spoke strongly in favor of some cuts:

 “The department has some fat in it. The city has many fewer people than it used to. We can live with some less coverage.”
 “Don’t get me wrong. I respect firefighters a lot. I used to work in the department. But that’s how I know a lot of what they do all day is sit around. They go to maybe three fires a week. We could definitely close several houses, no problem.”
o But remarks by an EMS Fire Department employee carried the day: “Philly is a very large city. It’s all about reaction time and distance traveled. If the fire is at your house, you might not find it so easy to live with that less coverage.”

Shared Pain
Total points: 34
• No. 12 Prisons: 10 points
o Group’s narrow decision was that closing a prison was OK, but not cuts in job training, education and reentry services. That was valued as 10 points off the table.
o Long discussion on this topic. People were horrified at the idea of a cut in reentry services: “We’ve got all these people coming out to no jobs, no hope. This would ensure they end up back in prison.” People were aware of problems in the reentry program under Nutter appointee, and they wanted assurances services would be delivered in a “smart, effective way.”
o The majority concluded that reducing population by letting nonviolent offenders work off their time through community service, perhaps learning some job skills along the way, was worth the risk that some of those released might commit a new crime.
• No. 24 Sales tax: 6 points
o Close vote.
o Pro: This was proposed by firefighter who had just spoken to defend the fire department. “Folks, if we want these services, and we do, we’ve got to pay for it somehow.”
o Another said: “This is way for all to share the pain, and it’s not that much pain.”
o Con: “The people buying the big ticket items will just buy elsewhere, like Delaware.”
• No. 13 Public health, revenue option: 1 point
o Group came back to this and approved co-pay narrowly as a “Shared Pain.”
• No. 25 and No. 27 Wage Tax - After long discussion, the group voted narrowly to increase both resident and commuter rates by .1 percent. 12 + 5 = 17 points.
o There was a fair amount of support for increasing the wage tax even more, if that hike were repealed once the economy turned around.
o There was some support for the Cohen bill idea, of exempting first x of income to protect the working poor, with a higher overall rate. But that was not what was specifically voted on. In general, people favored the idea of a progressive wage tax and were surprised to know it was not legal under the state constitution.
• No. 4 Fairmount Park was proposed as a shared pain item, but roundly rejected.

Items Never Discussed
Streets (including trash fee); Law, Courts, L&I, Real estate tax.

Memorable Quotes
• “The gross receipts tax drives small business people crazy, so it would be crazy to increase it.”
• “I just figured out the key to this whole thing: We’re damned if we do, and we’re damned if we don’t.”
• “I can’t believe I’m about to say this, because I nearly grew up in Fairmount Park and I go there almost every weekend, but I’m looking at how few points we have up on the board and all the stuff we need to protect, so I’m saying put the park up for “Shared Pain.” If I’ve got to, I’d trade tree pruning for beds for homeless people.”
• “No, I need Fairmount Park. If I become jobless and homeless, at least I can go there and pitch a tent and live.”

Fresh Ideas
• Make sure city gets BPT revenue it’s owed by suburban businesses.
• Raise revenue for recreation by creating a sliding scale fee for families to join rec centers, and enjoy some special benefits.
• Have Nutter convene a financial-sector task force to work with banks to free up credit for small businesses in the city.