All Sustainability, All the Time... The 10-Year Tax Abatement Has Got To Go!

In his June 17th speech to the Planning Commission, Mayor Nutter stated "We prefer to revitalize existing structures where possible and carefully integrate new development into our existing environment."

Last night, during his speech to the Urban Sustainability Forum at the Academy of Natural Sciences, Mark Alan Hughes addressed the topic of "sustainability." As is practice among planning types, he prefaced his talk by reciting the various truisms of the green movement including the oft-repeated phrase, "the greenest building is the one that is already built."

It's one of those bumper-sticker slogans that the City's green guru repeats in just about all of his media appearances. Despite Dr. Hughes' affinity for the phrase and his boss's apparent commitment to the revitalization of existing structures, it's a bit curious Dr. Hughes never ever addresses Philadelphia's Tear-Down-Old-Buildings Tax Credit.

Err, I mean the "10-Year Tax Abatement."

Despite this apparent preference of the new mayoral administration, why isn't anyone questioning whether it makes any sense, especially in the whole sustainability context, to subsidize the tearing down existing structures?

Aside from the very questionable equities of a very poor City subsidizing the construction of million dollar condos, why do we subsidize the dirty and decidedly not green business of tearing down old homes?

In my humble opinion, any serious appraisal of Philadelphia's sustainability priorities must include a reappraisal of the 10-year Tax Abatement. It's just not sustainable. It's the antithesis of "green." It's anathema to the commitment to meet our present needs without constraining the ability of future generations to meet their needs, which by the way is Dr. Hughes' definition of sustainability.

As then Candidate Nutter wrote in his Plan for Better Housing Now, "One of Philadelphia’s advantages among large U.S. cities is our large stock of historic, high-density, and well-located housing." As some other candidate for some fictional office wrote, "instead of locally-crafted wrought iron and copper sheathing, we install built-in-somewhere-else, pre-fab garage doors."

To which, nearly two years later, I'd like to add that by shipping in all that pre-fab crap we also increase our collective carbon footprint by several orders of magnitude. Not to mention, all of that old growth pine that that turn-of-the-century Philadelphians used as studs gets gutted and tossed in the local landfill - or worse - shipped to some Lou DeNaples landfill somewhere up in Scranton courtesy of some no-bid NTI contract.

Now I'm not saying that Philadelphia should not provide tax incentives for construction projects. I'm just saying that we should only provide tax incentives for sustainable construction projects.

Fortunately the U.S. Green Building Council has already provided us a handy, dandy metric for measuring the right kind of sustainable construction projects - LEED.

I'd rather not get into all the details because, after all, this is just a blog. And to be perfectly honest, I doubt I have anything resembling a complete understanding of how LEED works. But boiled down to basics, I propose rejiggering the whole abatement thing. Quit handing out tax breaks to any old developer who tears down classic structures only to replace them with generic boxes. Instead, tie the abatement to LEED rating. An abatement premised on LEED certification could continue to incentivize new construction while also preserving the existing housing stock that creates the sense of place that defines Philadelphia. The basic structure would look something like this:

Platinum buildings would receive a 100% abatement.
Gold buildings would receive a 75% abatement.
Silver would get a 50% abatement.
Certified would get a 25% abatement.
All the other guys, no soup for you.

In addition to favoring the retention of our "greenest buildings," an abatement premised on LEED rating could also impact local employment. As I understand it (I may be wrong), a building's final LEED score roughly approximates the overall carbon footprint of associated with the construction and subsequent operation of the building. Because locally-crafted products don't incur the same carbon costs some pre-fab product built-on the other side of the planet, a LEED-based abatement would give builders a reason to choose local products made by Philadelphians. In other words, having a tax abatement based upon LEED score would be a damn fine way to get around that whole constitutional issue associated with local preferences. If Philadelphia is ever going to be really sustainable in not just the "green" kinda way, we really need to get back into that whole locally-made-products business.

Look, I'm not wedded to LEED. I just use it here as as an example of how eligibility for a new 10-Year Tax Abatement could be premised. We could surely tie a new abatement to other factors like affordability. Whatever Philadelphia ends up doing, Philadelphia will never be a truly sustainable city until the present 10-Year Tax Abatement is abolished.

The hardest thing to do is to doubt your own success. And arguably, the 10-year Tax Abatement is the most successful City policy of the last 25 years. And despite all that, it needs to go.

If Mayor Nutter really wants to accomplish his goal of making Philadelphia the greenest city in America, the 10-Year Tax Abatement has got to go.

The Nonprofit Problem

John S. Carter and the Independence Seaport Museum is just another one of those Philadelphia stories that will be forgotten in a couple of months, if not weeks.*

Resulting from an FBI probe of none other than Vince Fumo, the Seaport Museum filed a lawsuit in Massachusetts state court against its former president, John S. Carter. The lawsuit alleges that John S. Carter, the former President of the Independence Seaport Museum, embezzled from the museum $2.4M. I suspect the suit will settle quietly out of court and this story will disappear into the mists of the Mayoral election and the checkered history of anything to do with Penn’s Landing.

Here’s a few facts from two of the articles, one that ran in last Tuesday’s Inquirer and the other from today’s.

• John S. Carter was paid $301,000 a year to serve as President of the Seaport Museaum.

• John S. Carter lived in a 5,000-square-foot Society Hill townhouse.

• The Seaport Museum paid $1.6M to purchase the townhouse.

• With the proceeds of his $300K per year salary, John S. Carter bought a 3,000 square-foot Cape Cod vacation home that is adjacent to the fairways of the Oyster Harbor Club.

• He paid $615,000 for the Cape Cod vacation home.

• The Cape Cod vacation home is currently on the market for $2.2M and will likely net John S. Carter a tidy little profit.

• In 1992, John S. Carter purchased a “turbo-charged Saab” with money provided by the Seaport Museum.

• John S. Carter charged $594,000 to three museum credit cards.

• The Seaport Museum spent over $500,000 to purchase and maintain a fleet of yachts that John S. Carter

• The Seaport Museum has received millions of dollars in funds from the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.

• Vince Fumo is a member of the museum’s board of directors.

• Although “out of the reach of most potential customers,” Vince Fumo was one of the few who chartered boats from the Seaport Museum’s fleet of yachts.

• Vince Fumo paid for at least one of the $22,000 trips.

• Vince Fumo paid the $22,000 only after he got wind of the FBI’s investigation of whether he received improper gifts from the Seaport Museum.

With the tidy little profit earned from the sale of the Cape Cod residence, seems to me Carter should have no problem coming up with the cash needed to settle this little bit of nastiness.

With Carter's $300,000 a year salary and all those millions allocated by Fumo to the coffers of the Seaport Museum, seems to me those funds would have gone a long way to putting a few more cops on the street or maybe giving a deserved pay raise to "the legion of underpaid attorneys in the Philadelphia DA's office.

For several months now, I’ve been trying to put together a post on Philadelphia's non-profit problem and Carter finally got me off my lazy ass to do only slightly more than running my mouth at some bar over some beer. That said, I'm just going to dip my toe into one tiny part of the nonprofit problem, the case of nonprofits that receive City tax dollars. And just because the Seaport Museum is a Fumo issue doesn't mean that the Nonprofit Problem is a Fumo related-issue. It's much bigger than Fumo. It's how business is done in Philadelphia. And it's the single biggest obstacle to good government facing Philadelphia.

Because of the alleged problem of overcoming the bureaucratic inertia imposed by Philadelphia’s vast system of patronage, many of the important functions of local government have been delegated to Philadelphia's non-profits. How many groups are organized to address the homeless problem? And what exactly does the PIDC do other than provide Mayors with plumb BoD positions to where they may appoint their contributorssupporters? And what politician worth his salt isn't operating a half dozen or so of some sort of CDC charged with organizing some semi-annual, glorified block party?

Suffice to say, there are a lot of mom & pop nonprofits operating out of storefronts and home offices. $5K here, $50K there, and the $$$s add up.

Not only do a myriad of nonprofits receive direct city expenditures, they also receive tax appropriations. For example, I understand that the city allows businesses to provide "economic development grants" to non-profits. My understanding is businesses provide a big pile of cash to some .org and, in exchange, the business gets a giant tax write off. Anecdotal evidence suggests that that little, if any, of this money ever goes into economic development.

Even in a completely legit nonprofit, money allocated to their budgets is not spent dollar for dollar on addressing the issue the group is meant to address. Some percentage of every dollar is allocated to paying its overhead costs. Admittedly, in the case of the Seaport Museum, its “overhead” was a little higher than most. Even assuming John S. Carter is alone in his propensity to take a little off the top, a little consolidation would likely go a long way to reducing overhead and ensuring our public and private contributions go a bit further.

Seems to me a little oversight would also benefit the City. How many other John S. Carters are out there? How many former political operatives turned nonprofits directors have received sweet severance packages? How many former political operatives, who worked for pennies for some pol, took sweet gigs at some nonprofit that gets some sweet grant only to see that sweet grant get gobbled up by that same sweet severance package?

How many wives, girlfriends, sons or daughters got the same deal?

Here's a hint, it's not just Vince Fumo who runs his political machine in this manner.

Without any method of peering into the finances of the myriad of nonprofit organizations operating in Philadelphia, the question is unanswerable.

Why not condition the receipt of public funds upon each group providing an annual financial plan to the City that could be made public in a central clearinghouse maintained on the City’s website?

Detractors of such oversight may argue that the creation of such plans would impose too heavy a burden on groups already stretched thin by meager budgets. I would counter that if a group is unable to create such a plan, it probably is not qualified to address whatever issue the City has tasked it with.

Apparently, I am not alone in my suspicion that this city has a few too many non-profits for its own good.

Addressing citizen feedback gathered at many of the Inquirer’s forum’s held as a part of its Great Expectations: Citizen Voices on Philadelphia's Future project, Chris Satullo wrote:

“Many cited the city's huge and varied nonprofit sector as a strength. True, others replied, but there's such a thing as having too many little groups working the same problems; it's confusing and wasteful."

As I see it, the "confusing and wasteful" thing isn't an externality of having too many little groups. The confusing and wasteful is the whole point of why we have too many little groups. The whole thing is designed to be confusing and wasteful. Philadelphia's nonprofit sector is our Tammany Hall. Can't give $100K to your guy, give $100K to your guy's pet nonprofit that has just happened to hire a new executive director who may or may not be your guy's side piece.

Even if a pol is too principled to shake down donors, the system still works. Say you're a pol in a pinch for cash. You can steer a few grants to your pet nonprofit who has just happened to hire your former campaign's spokesperson who a couple months later decides to part ways as the beneficiary of a six-figure severance payment. Philadelphia's nonprofit sector pretty much provides Philadelphia's political class an infinite opportunity to steer public dollars to their personal piggy banks.

This all happens. Yet, aside from hushed comments over some late night drink, nobody seems to talk about it.

Yeah, I know there are laws against all of it. But, it's not like the Feds have shown anything more than a sporadic interest in prosecuting such shenanigans. I mean, it's not like the local AUSAs don't have their own political aspirations that may or may not involve obtaining the support of one of the many kings of Philly's many fiefdoms... or the USA himself did or did not find himself where he is without a little gravity assist from the handful of political luminaries that sit atop Philadelphia's web of "nonprofits."

A couple weeks back, the Committee of 70 issued an Ethics Agenda and asked the mayoral candidates to commit to it. The Agenda made no mention of nonprofits.

As the troubles at the Seaport Museum demonstrate, there is no oversight of the multitude of nonprofits that are supported by the City by either direct or indirect payments. If the 'ethics' issue is to be addressed, light must be shone upon this rather sizable black hole in the City’s budget. As it does with campaigns and PACs, the City should require nonprofits that receive City funds to file annual reports accounting for their expenditures.

While such a requirement would be a step in the right direction, it would in no way cure Philadelphia of its larger Nonprofit Problem wherein politicians routinely use the nonprofit space as a means to circumvent campaign limits or to simply enrich themselves and their cronies. That's a whole bigger ball of wax.

In other news, if anyone has seen the Comcast guy that was supposed to show up a my house this weekend, let me know. It's only a month or so till pitchers and catchers report.

*And then repeated ad infinitum with different names.

Am I alone on this?

"Because they're there. They are child killers and somebody has got to put a stop to their activities. Sure, I would rather that someone else did it, but we can't wait for others to stop them. It's our responsibility and our obligation to save the children, so we're doing what we can."

After totaling 406 murders in 2006, this quote could have been uttered Monday morning by some activist intent on turning the tide in 2007. Instead, it was offered by Muhammad Kenyatta way back in 1974 and is quoted by Sean Patrick Griffin on page 189 of his book Black Brothers Inc.

In my opinion which I've offered up before, the book is a must read. The book was published in the fall of 2005 and tells the story of the evolution of a vicious criminal syndicate into an instrument of political extortion. As Griffin puts it on page 317, it is the story of "the victimization of Philadelphia taxpayers in general and black underclass in particular, all under the guise of aiding the most in need."

The book takes its name from a community group that was operated out of a storefront at 1443 South Street and was founded by members of Philadelphia’s “Black Mafia.” The group was used as a front to collect federal "War on Poverty" grants to finance the extortion of neighborhood residents and business. As explained by Griffin on page 160, "The group successfully manipulated their extensive extortion racket into a public relations coup." While providing the book its name, the community group provides only a small role in the vast expanse of the book.

Anyone who plans to attend Michael Nutter’s Thursday showing of “the Shame of the City” at the Prince Theater will leave the viewing with an intense knot in their stomach. You’ll feel sold out by Bob Brady’s cruelly flippant approach to politics. But Tigre Hill's movie is a mere shot of espresso compared to Griffin's 12-coffee brunch.

Anyone serious about Philadelphia becoming the Next Great American city will find Black Brothers Inc. an indispensable reference in our quixotic endeavor.

“The Shame of the City” provides a few fleeting references to Shamsud-din Ali and explains that he, and not Republican dirty tricks, was the reason Mayor Street’s offices were bugged in the midst of the 2003 mayoral election. Black Brothers Inc. breaks it all out in meticulously footnoted chapters.

As Griffin lays out on pages 252-53 of his book, Shamsud-din Ali was convicted of murder in 1970 and spent three years in Holmesburg. He was released after an appeals court ordered a new trial on the basis that police had employed a suggestive pre-trial indentification procedure. Ultimately, the quality of the state's evidence was rendered moot as the new trial never happened as a result of the refusal of the chief witness to testify for fear of her life and the safety of her family.

In addition to providing a detailed background to one of the principal protagonist in the Tigre Hill’s movie, the book also catalogues the connections of Philadelphia’s criminal underworld to the obvious figures - the likes of Jeremiah Shabazz, Mayor Street, and Jannie Blackwell - and the non-obvious - Governor Rendell, DA Lynn Abraham, Cecil B. Moore, Muhammad Ali, Robert N.C. Nix, Jr., Judge Paul Dandridge, and Tom Foglietta.

He tracks the threads of a dark and horrifying period in Philadelphia’s history to Philadelphia’s present. Griffin sheds light on why Philadelphia is what it is today. Why for example we will have casinos built on the Delaware instead of at sensible locales like the Sports Complex or Navy Yard (page 302). Or why one might question why J. Whyatt Mondesire called for the Nation of Islam to guard the Pearl Theater when Temple University already has the largest private police force in the city?

On page 278, the book tells the story of the likes of Eugene Hearn who managed to lead the double life of founder of the Southwest Center City Civic Association and heroin kingpin. On pages 315 and 286 respectively, Griffin notes members of the Black Mafia ended up as paid City Council staffer and on the campaign staff of a candidate for District Attorney.

Aside from the nuggets of political gossip interlaced throughout its text, the book’s far greater purpose is cataloging the brutally inhumane exploits of the criminal syndicate known as the “Black Mafia.”

The group ruled much of Philadelphia throughout the 60s and 70s through a reign of literal terror. Eerily similar to the who-a-rat? "Stop Snitching" campaign, they killed with impunity knowing killing the mother of any witness would prevent prosecution. Let’s just say Osama bin Bogeyman ain’t got nothing on these cats.

Take the scene at Dubrow's Furniture at 419 South Street on January 4, 1971. Seven men "robbed" the store. The twenty-five employees, one owner and two handymen were rounded up, pistol whipped, shot and bound with tape and electrical cord. Not satisfied, the gang members doused their victims with gasoline. Seven fires were lit and one employee was set ablaze. In exchange for "1,803 in cash, some jewelry and credit cards," in addition to being bound and beaten, one employee was left dead, two others shot and one burned. Frank Rizzo, then Philly's Police Commissioner stated: "I have seen many crimes in my long police career, but this is the most vicious one I have ever come across." As noted by Griffin on page 62, the timing and brutality of the robbery suggested that the motivation was not theft but payback for "the store's management had refused to pay protection money and may have been targeted for their non-compliance."

The Dubrow robbery was only exceeded in brutality by an attack orchestrated by eight Black Mafia members against members of a Muslim sect in Washington D.C. Of the seven family members killed, four were infants. A nine-day old infant was drowned in a basement sink. The three other infants were "placed in a tub, and shook violently, convulsing, as their assassins held them under the water, assuring they would not breathe again." (page 102). Only two family members who were at home during the attack survived - one of whom was left blind and paralyzed, the other miraculously survived being shot point blank, three times in the head.

And these are just two of the vast and innumerable catalog of horrors.

The book suggests that the Black Mafia’s success at witness intimidation was ended by the proliferation of simple technology – the video camera. As explained by Griffin on page 64, "The group's success at victim and witness intimidation became irrelevant at trial when they faced literally hundreds of quality photos taken throughout the robbery."

After reading the book and coming to terms with the immense scope of extortion imposed upon Philadelphia’s businesses, I pondered whether Center City’s rise should be correlated to the break up of the city’s criminal syndicate. Confronted by the scene at Dubrow’s furniture, who can credibly argue that city business fled to the suburbs because of such frivolities as the BPT or the wage tax?

Maybe Tigre Hill’s video camera will prove to be equally adept at ending the complicity of our elected leaders. Maybe if our elected leaders are forced to end the indulgence of criminal enterprises, Philadelphia’s status of Next Great City could be solidified.

Aside from having a different understanding of what permitted Center City's renaissance, the book left me with a deep feeling of emptiness. I could not make sense of either the criminal depravity or the proximity of Philadelphia’s political leaders to its perpetrators. As Griffin writes on page 139, "To anyone in the areas being exploited by the Black Mafia, it was not possible to believe police had no knowledge of what was going on." For me, I could not comprehend how anyone in the City could have forgotten, let alone stand in front of television cameras and announce the bug was the result of Republican dirty tricks.

As I read through the book and came across killings that took place in bars or street corners I have come to know, I had the sense I had slipped through the looking glass. Why is there so little media coverage? When Stop-Snitchin t-shirts are decried by our editorial pages, why doesn't Will Bunch or one of those other fancy writers write some expose connecting the present to the past? I tend to get wrapped up in my own little world, and have learned to question myself. I wondered "am I alone on this?" Maybe there's some long thread on Phillyblog I just have not yet come across. But why does it seem everyone in the reform or prgoressive movements has absolutely no conception of the deep waters that must be navigated?

The catalog of horrors should give pause to any Philadelphian familiar with not just 2006’s murder tally, but also the poverty that plagues many of our fellow residents. On pages 141-42, Griffin quotes from Francis Ianni's "Black Mafia: Ethnic Succession in Organized Crime" who writes: "Poverty and powerlessness are at the root of both community acceptance of organized crime and the recruitment into its networks. Conditions of poverty also nurture desires for the services organized criminal organizations provide."

Like Muhammad Kenyatta's words, these words too may be as easily applied to the circumstance of 2007. How close is our city from giving birth to another Black Mafia? How thin is Center City's veneer? How deep is the dark pool that lies beneath?

Osama Bin Boogeyman and the "Philadelphia Blogger"

The 2006 elections are over. Bloggers have feasted on the spoils.

Philly For Change sent its supporters out to the suburbs and got Congressmen elected. Yet the margin of Casey's victory means that their efforts will be ignored. Philadelphia will be ignored. Philadelphia will be forgotten.

Philadelphia has no Osama Bin Boogeyman.

The reform movement could care less about Philadelphia. Just take a look at the Philadelphia Independent Media Center's Homepage. On most days, none of the stories are local. Just take a look at this screen shot of their what the Philly IMC labels "Local Blogs and Community Groups."

From my random samplescreenshot of Philly IMC's local blogroll, we see a post by Marc Lamont Hill discussing Saddam Hussein's death sentence. Eschaton, an avowed supporter of Drinking Liberally at Tangiers, features a blurb about a "conservative nutjob" who sent white powder to prominent liberal figures. Young Philly Politics features a post about State Rep. Rick Taylor, a dude from the suburbs. Despite the name of the blog, 99% of YPP's posts have absolutely nothing to do with Philadelphia. Suburban Guerilla featues a post about Senior Bush taking control from Junior Bush. I don't know why peeps waste their time in the suburbs.

Where is the "local"?

These blogs are not about Philadelphia.

They have no interest in local issues.

Their stories have nothing to do with Philadelphia's community.

No one would consider USA Today a local newspaper simply because it is published in... wherever the hell it happens to be published. No one should consider these blogs "local" simply because their writers happen to live in our region.

Philadelphia stands at a cross roads in its history.

The barbarians are at our gates and our walls are quite literally crumbling. We cannot afford another Street Adminstration. We cannot afford to pay another 8 years of corruption taxes.

These so-called local bloggers write more about Connecticut and Ned Lamont than they do about Bob Brady. These bloggers need to turn their focus to Philadelphia. They need to stand up and be counted.

The Monday after the most important work of art in Philadelphia's history is sold to a bunch of corporate trust funders, all these people can do is write about what it going on elsewhere.

Osama Bin LadenBoogeyman does not matter to Philadelphia. The average Philadelphian is more likely to be gunned down by some random bullet outside City Hall than blown to smithereens by some al Qaeda liquid bomb. Statistically speaking, Osama Bin Laden is the boogeyman. Yet, these fellas can't stop talking about the boogeymanOsama.

Where is the outcry about Jefferson selling "Gross Clinic" to some museum in Arkansas?!?!? After all, this story is tailor made for the blogosphere. Just look at the protagonists.

Thomas Jefferson, the prototypical local "Bad Corporate Citizen," is selling a cultural treasure to Wal-Mart, the prototypical multi-national "Bad Corporate Citizen."

The bloggers should be eating this shit up.

But aside from the Illadelph and some art blogger in San Francisco (!), peeps don't seem to give a shit. In fact, our local "blogger of record" seems more amused by the idea of building a Guggenheim BilbaoDelaware than the ramifications of the sale on Philadelphia's cultural history.

But who can blame Blinq? At least he has the decency to focus on the occasional local issue whereas folks like Dick Polman and Will Bunch spend all their time on the fancy national issues. I mean, if you are seriously concerned about making newspapers relevant to their readers and saving the jobs of your boyz in the newsroom, maybe you ought to start with the content you generate.

I don't mean to be callous. But as far as Philadelphia is concerned, withdrawing our troops from Iraq does not matter more than fixing our public schools. Over 400 Philadelphians will die this year because our City cares more about making a few peeps in the proverbial smoke-filled rooms rich than doing something about educating our children.

But Philly's got no Osama Bin Boogeyman so no one will even notice.

If you want to call yourself a "Philadelphia blogger," stand up and be counted.

Forget Stephen Colbert and the Daily Show. Turn your lenses to our City. Focus on our issues. Focus on the issues that actually affect our lives.

Absolutely Not.

It was announced today that Thomas Jefferson University has agreed to sell Eakin's masterwork, "The Gross Clinic," for $68M to a Wal-Mart heiress who plans to move it to Bentonville, Arkansas.

This on the day that that hag writes that load of nonsense. Like a punch in the gut.

She must eat at Geno's.

As quoted by the NYTimes:

Anne d’Harnoncourt, director of the Philadelphia Museum of Art, said she would immediately explore the possibility, perhaps in tandem with the Pennsylvania Academy of Fine Art. “It’s a painting that really belongs in Philadelphia — his presence still resonates here,” she said of Eakins’s masterwork. “There may be a way we could band together to make it happen.”

After all, the Art Museum is on Eakin's Oval.

John Street wants to create a legacy. This would be it. Manage to pull this off and it sure would be harder to remember him for the bug.

Dougherty's got $83M sitting in his slush fund. Maybe if he sold a few properties instead of giving them away pay off political favors...

There's that surplus. Create that "rainy day fund." The value of the work is bound to appreciate.

Philadelphia Against Santorum needs something to do. You raised $150K in a year. And that was just to beat some schmo named Santorum. You think we could get that in time to add that to whatever the Art Museum, PAFA and the City can come up with to pay of Jeff? Are you up for it? Because it's doable. We can get this done.

It's like the Dream Garden by Maxfield Parish, the Tiffany's glass mosaic that Steve Wynn tried to buy out of the lobby of the Curtis Publishing Building a couple years back.

We rallied to save the Love statue. We can rally to save Eakins.

This is our cultural heritage. We cannot let it be bought.

If we sell it, we are selling are Philadelphia's future. Would we allow the Liberty Bell to be bought? Would we allow some Wal-Mart heiress to ship the Liberty Bell to Bentonville, Arkansas? This is no different.

Philadelphia is the home of the first hospital, founded by no less than Ben Franklin and is now one of the pre-eminent centers of medicine in the U.S., if not the world. That rich medical tradition that is captured by this painting. A rich history of medicine that will be plundered by the sale of this art.

We buy this and we would be investing in our city's cultural capital.

Michael Nutter for Mayor of Philadelphia

I had seen the advanced word of Mr. Nutter's attendance at Philadelphia Forward's showing of Tigre Hill's "The Shame of A City" over on the Next Mayor Blog. So I had kept my eyes open once I got there. When the lights came on, he was standing in the back of the room.

Maybe about two hours later - after the Carl Singley and Agent Welch's Q&A, and after the wonkish crew had retired to Tir na Og for a few drinks, and after I had several long conversations that contemplated, among other topics, whether Osama Bin Boogeyman is hiding under someone's bed in Missouri or within a small child's closet in Toledo - I introduced myself to Mr. Nutter and told him I was impressed by the fact that he had spent so much time at the event. I told him that it had been my experience that most politicians make an appearance, shake every last hand and then make like Batman and disappear out the closest door.

After he confirmed that my comment was not laced with some insinuation, some sort of backhanded compliment, we both laughed at the stereotype. I then asked him to answer a question inspired by how most people describe him to me.

In preface, I explained to Mr. Nutter, peeps like to tell me "Nutter is one of two or three candidates who will actually do something good for this city." I then asked him "Can you tell me who else they are talking about?"

Mr. Nutter did have an answer to my question. At first, he laughed and stepped away for a second to collect his thoughts. He acknowledged that the question was a good one, and then gave me his answer.*

I've been trying to answer this precise question myself for a couple months. Nutter and who else? I've been reading the Saidel book lately and was pretty set on the idea that he was one of the other "1 or 2" candidates. Then I saw "Shame of A City."

Every citizen of Philadelphia must see this movie. The movie captures the brazen corruption of our city's elected leaders. Philly politics is a dirty dirty business populated by dozens more thugs than decent people. As I watched Johnny Doc's henchman harass Sam Katz, a deep knot formed in the pit of my stomach.

These guys are criminals. They hold our city hostage.

The next election needs to be about keeping the criminals out of City Hall.

We need to go after the rot.

The scum who stood behind John Street in the last election are no different than George Bush.

They are corrupt.

They have perverted our government to serve the interests of a small minority.

Halliburton is no different than the Parking Authority or the airport or PGW. George Bush doesn't care about working people. John Street and every person who stood with him in the last election do not care about working people.

They have no respect for the electorate.

They care about hijacking our city.

They care about contracts.

They believe they are entitled to use City hall as their personal piggy bank.

The next election needs to be about one thing - You're either for corruption or you’re against it.

We must take back our city. And we cannot let the machine steal another election.

Seven months after the last election the hammer dropped. Despite all the accusations of Republican dirty tricks, the indictments of key Street administration officials were filed. In the denouement of the movie, Bob Brady callously admits that the Democrats invented the idea of Republican dirty tricks and played the race card to get Street re-elected. I don't remember the quote exactly, but Brady says something along the lines like "I couldn't believe the city bought that pile of shit."

"We need to pick leaders who are as good as we are." Those are not my words, but I am happy to use them here.

Two of the current candidates for mayor, Saidel and Fattah, played a central role in perpetrating the shame that infect's Tigre Hill's movie. After watching Saidel jumping around on the stage of some church affecting an "urban" drawl, I am convinced he is not as good as we are. Neither is Chaka Fattah who blatantly lied to Philadelphia when he went along with Bob Brady and merrily played the race card.

Having seen the movie the day after the election, I immediately regretted casting my vote for Fattah. I won't make that mistake in the mayoral primaries.

If I had to vote today, I would vote for Nutter.

He attended the screening of Shame of the City and stopped by the bar afterwards. I don't know when he showed up but when the lights went on at the end of the movie he was standing in the back.

After watching him listen to the speakers and then listen to even more speakers at Tir na Og, I was amazed at two of his characteristics. First, he listens. Second, he has a great sense of humor. I left incredibly impressed by him.

Every single politician I have ever met seems to suffer from some advanced and peculiar form of ADD. They are not happy unless they are shaking some new hand or on the way to the next event where hands are waiting to be shaken. And when they do get trapped with no hands left to shake, they'll fidget constantly like a smoker struggling to adapt to a smoke free bar. That or make like Batman and disappear out the closest aforementioned door.

Mr. Nutter wasn't like that at all.

He looked fascinated by Carl Singley and Agent Welch's Q&A. And in the bar afterwards, he actually listened and responded with some thoughtful and often humorous answer.

And after spending the last couple of days thinking about the pay-to-play culture that created the environment that gave life to the characters that have shamed our city, I realized what a powerful statement Mr. Nutter made when he resigned from City Council and immediately declared his candidacy. He unilaterally held himself to a higher standard and implicitly condemned all those who have their hands in the pay-to-play cookie jar.

Philadelphia election laws are a mess. What follows is the sense my puny little mind has been able to make of them. If someone knows better, feel free to correct me.

As far as I can tell, before a candidate declares, a candidate may accept donations in any denomination. Apparently, it is not uncommon for candidates to receive checks in amounts of $50,000. A $50,000 donation comes with it a lot of expectations. It comes with expectations that when the city needs to conduct its next bond offering, your bank will handle the issuance.

However, once a candidate has officially declared his candidacy for city office, Philadelphia's ultra-lax election laws finally kick in.

Saidel is running for Mayor. He's even said so himself. And today, Saidel will be on some street corner or some subway platform today shaking hands. And he'll likely be standing next to a woman wearing a "Saidel for Mayor" t-shirt.

Despite his unequivocal conduct, he has not "declared" his intent to run for mayor.

Talk about an existential conundrum.

Saidel has done everything except officially declare his candidacy. I cannot think of any legitimate reason for why he and the other "potential" candidates have not declared. From my perspective, they sure looks like they are playing the pay-to-play game. And after seeing Saidel's complicity in "The Shame of the City," the only explanation for his failure to make it official is the next $50,000 contribution. At least that's the way my little mind sees it.

Despite all of the great ideas in "A New Urban Direction," I will not be able to bring myself to vote for Saidel. Since I saw the movie, I have a hard time even picking up his book.

In comparison and in addition to his humor and willingness to listen, Nutter has official announced his candidacy for mayor immediately upon his resignation from City Council. By doing so, he rejected Philadelphia's pay-to-play culture and unilaterally held himself to a higher ethical standard. He made it impossible for any entity to hand him a $50,000 check. Because of his rejection of Philadelphia's pay-to-play politics, I am supporting him in his race to become our next mayor.

If he's elected, I'm pretty darn sure Nutter will be good for Philadelphia (and not just a handful of cronies) and that's enough for me to forget about those 1 or 2 other guys, whomever they may be.

PFC and Philly Against Santorum are looking for new windmills to topple. I suggest they target City Hall and endorse a candidate now while their support still matters. When their armies of volunteers will make a difference. The primaries will be upon us in no time.

We need to make sure that our next mayor reverses the culture that created Tigre Hill's "the Shame of a City." We need a mayor who will be a role model for the city, who will challenge us to think big. And I believe that Michael Nutter is that guy. At the very least, I am pretty darn certain that among the current crop of candidates, he's the only dude who's not likely to embarrass us with more of the inveterate stupidity that pervades Philadelphia politics.

And for the time being, consider it official, Ruby Legs has withdrawn his candidacy for Mayor of Phillyville and thrown his support behind Mr. Nutter. Now if we could just do something about that whole Philadelphia Mayor's race...

*For the record, Nutter offered Dwight Evans as his answer. Hopefully, it doesn't get out that he's a closeted Red Sox fan!

The Miseducation of William Reed

Metro reported today that William Reed, the owner of Johnny Brenda's and the Standard Tap, is "disheartened" by the receipt of $1M by House of Blues. Omitted from the story is the fact that last summer HOB received $4M for the Packard Building project.

If $1M left William Reed disheartened, what end may befall him when he learns of the additional $4M? I fear he may end up on the wrong end of a bottle of Elmer T. Lee while he stumbles furtively along Girard Avenue searching for the last, long-lost rivulet of Cohocksink Creek to drown away the wailing dirge of the bahdb.

$4M is a material omission that not only renders the Metro story incomplete, it renders it misleading. Today is June 5th, 18 days since my post disclosing actual amount of cash waived under the nose of the HOB: $5,000,000. How could it be that I scooped the entire Philadelphia press by nearly three weeks and counting?

Why is it left to me, some hobbyist who looses his demons upon the keys of a tired iBook G4 connected to the unprotected wireless connection belonging to the funeral parlour next door, to inform the citizenry? Has the press truly become so irrelevant?

Last week I posited a series of why's in reference to "why give the House of Blues $5 million to come to Philadelphia?" Upon further rumination, a trip to the third stomach of the amygdala and a series of walks with good old Thome the rat terrier, I've arrived upon a decent answer - maybe HOB will provide a venue to compete against the Tweeter Center. Camden gets all the large shows at the Tweeter Center. If HOB was located in Center City, imagine all those concert goers pouring out on to the streets late Friday night? It would be like the swarm that emanates from Irving Plaza or Hammerstein Ballroom.

Despite that hypothetical justification, I still have no answer to my and, apparently with some editing, William Reed's retort:

“You have a local person fighting to put something on with the neighborhood backing them and you’re going to give a $1 million gift to a company from [another state]?” he said. “Philadelphia should be [supporting its own].”

I am in complete agreement with Mr. Reed's sentiment. But I would like to remindstate for the public record that Mr. Reed is exactly $4M short in his estimation of the amount of the gifttaxpayer largess received by House of Blues.

$4M is a significant number, completely material to any discussion of the subsidy received by the HOB to enter the Philadelphia market.

William Reed is a business owner who is himself attempting to build his own music venue. I am sure the availability of $5M large is something that would sure facilitate Mr. Reed's efforts. Yet, he apears to be completely unaware.

William Reed, the owner of the Standard Tap and Johnny Brenda's, should know of the existence of the Commonwealth Financing Authority. Considering his business plan is entirely dependent on the renovation of brownfield sites, how can Mr. Reed not be intimately familiar with the machinations of Business in Our Sites?

If he knew of these programs, Mr. Reed would have corrected Mr. Cornfield's question premised on the House of Blue's receipt of a mere $1M. Mr. Reed would have known that House of Blues had already received the benefit of the $2 million loan to and the $2 million grant received by the Redevelopment Authority of the City of Philadelphia on behalf of House of Blues' plan to redevelop the Packard Building.

$5M large.

To be absolutely clear, I do not fault Mr. Reed.

So who should we fault?

Should we blame Harrisburg for failing to properly educate business owners? Sure, our politicians our lazy. In a perfect world, they should have done a better job of alerting the likes of Mr. Reed of their intent to hand out bags of cash. To regurgitate a tired truism, we don't live in a perfect world. And our politicians keep a tight lid on the availability of such funds to insure their cronies are first in line. But we do live in a world with subsidies provided by the First Amendment meant to facilitate the existence of an informed citizenry.

Which brings me to the point of this little diatribe.

What of our journalists' obligation to create an informed citizenry? I can hardly blame Josh and the bootstrapped organization that is the Philadelphia Metro. But what of Andrew Cassel or even the likes of Flavia "McMakeMePuke" Colgan? What of Will Bunch and his plans to reinvent the newspaper? Are they not culpable for the Miseducation of William Reed? While chasing the bright lights of MSNBC and Fox News, have they not forgotten their obligation to the likes of William Reed?

Does not the blame lie at their collective feet?

To revisit the central protagonist in this story, the Business in Our Sites program provided $4M of the $5M received by HOB. As described by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania:

"A $300 million funding pool of grants and loans is available to public and private real estate developers for the acquisition and development of these sites. The program puts special emphasis on communities that lack the resources necessary to invest in site preparation and the renovation of brownfield sites in order to prevent urban sprawl. Business in Our Sites is a vital component of Governor Rendell’s economic stimulus package."

Why are Philadelphia business owners like Mr. Reed not aware of this money? Why does House of Blues take these funds by default?

Unlike my last series of "whys," these are purely rhetorical. House of Blues, instead of the likes of Mr. Reed, will renovate the Packard Building because our press has failed to inform the public.

Which brings me to my answer to the question posited by Above Average Jane, as for our part of the bargain, I posit yet another reason - to make journalism relevant to the likes of William Reed.

The Disneylandification of Center City Continues

In an announcement that will leave many heads a shaking, the former host of Eagles' Post-Game Live announced today Pennsylvania awarded (bribed) $1M to House of Blues to open a new location at 15th and Chestnut. Just what Philadelphia needs, another chain that will supplant Philadelphia's local culture. Next thing you know, someone will be telling us Tastykake is closing its doors! Damn, that happened last Thursday!

Is it me or does installing a House of Blues seem a bit counter intuitive when the goal is to promote tourism? I can't imagine a whole lot of people in Chicago saying to themselves, "Hey, I'm tired of going to House of Blues Chicago, let's go to Philadelphia and check out their House of Blues!" For that matter, I really don't see Philly drawing a lot on tourists from L.A., Cleveland, Orlando, San Diego, New Orleans, Myrtle Beach, Atlantic City, Las Vegas or Anaheim on the basis of a new HOB. (Yes - these are all places with their own HOBs)

Seems to me that a much better use of PA's tourism subsidy would be to fix up places that make Philly unique, places that make people say "hey, I've always wanted to go see Philly's Italian Market and eat an authentic Sarcone's hoagie." Kinda like how people travel to Seattle to see Pike's Place Market.

Instead of installing yet another sterilized, big box that is just going to supplant a locally-owned venue, PA should be promoting what makes PA special. Let's say give Ortlieb's a $1M grant to put in a jazz hall in the dilapidated brewery that lies steps from its fabled stage. Sure would be a better use of the historic building than the inevitable condo (yuppie habitrail) that will eventually despoil that land.

The cash comes from Pennsylvania's First Industries Fund that is meant to promote agriculture and tourism. The money is addition to $4M previously provided to the House of Blues to subsidize its development of Packard Building location. All told House of Blues will now receive a whopping $5M to open its Philadelphia location. $5M to bring "several hundred" low skilled, minimum wage jobs to Philadelphia. Just what the city needs.

On the positive side, if Rendell's so eager to hand out taxpayer cash for corporate boondogles, maybe I should hit them up for the Pherris Wheel I want to build in Logan Square.

File Under:

• Planning
• Politics

The 175th and the Philadelphia 5

Day two of the Great Philadelphia Casino hearings has come and gone. I did not make it to the hearings. But I did spend the evening pounding the streets of Queen Village on behalf of Anne Dicker, candidate for State Representative for the 175th District.

Knocking on doors with flyers in hand, I need only to mention the word "casinos" and all of a sudden ears perk up, doors open and people become willing to hear what I have to say on behalf of Candidate Dicker.

The 175th district runs along the Delaware River from Queen Village to Fishtown. Four of the five casino applicants have selected sites within this district. The 175th pretty much sits at epicenter.

Walking door to door speaking to the residents of Queen Village, and before that, Fishtown, their minds are filled with one issue and one issue only - the casinos. I  spoke to more than 50 residents and every last one of them is opposed to the casinos. Every last one of them believes that the casinos will hurt their neighborhood. And every last one of them believes that the only people who stand to benefit are the politicians and their cronies.

Anne Dicker is running as the independent Democrat, apart from Philadelphia machine politics, apart from the moneyed interests who stand to benefit from a few thousand one-armed bandits. "Neighborhoods First" is the first commandment of her campaign. The implication - the other candidates will put other interests first, and the interests of neighborhoods who will live in thee shadow of at least one casino second. And I'm sure you don't need to be a resident of the 175th to know what I mean by other.

As the only independent Democrat in the May 16th primary, she can sincerely make this promise. If she wins the primary, she will have no one to answer to except the neighborhoods themselves. What other candidate can make that pledge? What other Philadelphia politician does not stand to benefit if their backers secure one of Philadelphia's two casino licenses?

That question is rhetorical.

The five applicants are competing for Philadelphia's two casino licenses. Four of the applicants have selected sites in the 175th district. The fifth candidate is Donald Trump. He proposes to put his casino in East Falls (See Rendell, you do get what you want!). But considering Trump's dubious track record - last year he had to sell off most of his interest in his casinos in order to finance their emergence from Chapter 11 bankruptcy - I doubt he'll end up securing a license. So that leaves the 175th as the likely host of two casinos. I would say definite but this is Philadelphia and Philadelphia politicians have been known to do some pretty stupid things (see my sidebar for the anecdote on the Athletics).

At present, the Pennsylvania Gaming Board has posted all of the Local Impact Reports on its website. I'm currently in the process of digesting the hundreds of pages of each report. Motivated by my general frustration with the coverage of this issue and the apparent public frustration with their government's handling of this issue, I plan to update this entry on a regular basis with additional detail for each of the five applicants

Hopefully, at the very least, I'll be figure out which politicians that purport to represent us, the citizens of Philadelphia, have their hands in the proverbial cookie jar. At least we know one (Anne Dicker) who doesn't.

So, click here and bookmark that page. Feel free to use it as your handy dandy Philadelphia Casino Cheat Sheet.

1. The TrumpStreet Casino &; Entertainment Center. The Donald plans to bring slots to the site of the former Budd Company factory. The casino would be located on Roberts Avenue between Henry Avenue and Fox Streets. I'm sure John Fox (and the overseers at Penn Charter for that matter - sure would bring a whole new twist to off campus privilege) will be roiling over in his grave knowing that his name is now better known for gambling than it is for pondering the principles of Quakerism under the old oak tree.

The first phase of the project, budgeted to run $350M, will consist of 3,000 slots, three movie theaters, and several restaurants - most notably a Chickie and Pete's. Among the other backers who stand to reap a windfall if TrumpStreet is granted is Pat Croce and Randal Pickett, the winner of last season's Apprentice.

The obvious problem with this project is Trump himself. His track record is at best "spotty." Spotty considering that prior to declaring bankruptcy in 2005, his casinos were so poorly run that they had fallen into considerable disrepair. The spottiest of all his properties likely was the Trump Plaza in A.C. There, the housekeepers were alotted a grand total 45 vacuum cleaners to clean the 904-room casino hotel. 45 vacuums were simply not enough. So rooms were vacuumed every other day (if at all). This is Trump's history and you know what they say about history repeating itself.

2. The Sugarhouse Casino. One of the three applicants to propose a site along the Delaware waterfront between the Ben Franklin Bridge and Girard Avenue. With no significant ties to the Philadelphia powers that be, Sugarhouse is being criticized as the outsider application - guess the peeps making this criticism must be firmly in the devil-you-know camp. The pincipal is Neil G. Blum, a billionaire real estate developer from Chicago. The rest of the partnership is filled out by Greg Carlin (CEO Sugarhouse), Midwest Gaming & Entertainment of Illinois, local developer Daniel Keating, attorney Richard Sprague, former State Supreme Court Justice William Lamb and auto magnet Robert Potamkin.

Of the five applications, this is definitely the slickest and to be honest, after my initial (and fairly superficial read), the most well thought out. After all, they do have a whole bunch of cool pictures.

Sugarhouse has already been recognized as a "preferred site" by Mayor Street's Gaming Task Force (the local phillyheads who are trying to horn in on what Harrisburg is trying to keep an exclusively state run affair). Like the other applicants, Sugarhouse proposes 3,000 slots, a theater and some restaurants. Interestingly and a possible plus for the neighborhood and the future development of the Delaware shoreline, Sugarhouse has promised to provide public access to the riverfront. Also of note, Sugarhouse plans to dock a riverboat casino at the site to provide a temporary casino while the main casino is being built. Guess these guys will also be in favor of deepening the Delaware shipping channel.

For those of you keeping your eye on the money, the initial build out is expected to run $450M.

3. Foxwoods Casino Philadelphia. Foxwoods intends to plop a casino down on Columbus Blvd (Delaware Avenue) between Tasker Avenue and Reed Street (across from the Home Depot. Like Trump, they plan to pinch their pennies and are coming in with on the low end with a $350M proposal. The fat cats behind this proposal are former-Phillie and current rib maven Gary Maddux, Ron Rubin, Ed Snider (Chairman, Comcast Spectacor), Melissa Silver (daughter of New Jersey Nets owner Lewis Katz), Quincy Jones, and Dawn Staley (Temple's Women's B-Ball coach). Filling out the list is (foot soldier) Spokeperson Maureen Garrity.

The map of the proposed site is shown below.



4. Planet Hollywood's Riverwalk Casino. What's the deal with so many applicants who have declared bankruptcy in the last few years? (Trump and Planet Hollywood) I need me some bankruptcy - maybe I'll snag a license too. Okay, enough editorializing. Back to business.

This proposed site is the former home of a city incinerator. The ownership group managed to snag a sweet deal on the property after Penn's Landing Corp., the current owner of the 11.5 acre site, voted two weeks prior to the due date for applications to lease the site to Planet Hollywood from now to the end of time (2089 if you are not Darren Daulton).

The backers of the Planet Hollywood reads like a veritable who's who in Philadelphia greasy palms. We start off with William R. Miller (local Political Soothsayer Extraordinaire) and Robert Earl (CEO Planet Hollywood). Next we move on the the truly fat cats: Ken Trujillo, Mayor Street's former city solicitor; Willie Johnson, known affectionatly as "a major campaign contributor for Street" now looking for the proverbial "big payback;" SEPTA board member Herman Wooden (hey, shouldn't running a dysfunctional public entity disqualify you from being granted the right to run another???); Philadelphia Parking Authority Chairman Joe Ashdale; the talk show host on WURD (900AM) Bill Anderson. As already noted by some of the Inquirrer coverage, this group has the race card as its central strategy.

Proposed cost: $380M.

5. Pinnacle Entertainment Casino. Not one to sit idly by, Pinnacle is a very busy body these days. In addition to seeking approval of their application to build a 3,000 slot casino off the Girard Avenue exit of I-95, Pinnacle is currently involved in a bidding war to acquire Aztar, the owner of the world famous Tropicana casinos. The proposed site consists of 27 acres in Fishtown, the former home of the Cramp Shipyard. The rights to this land was previously held by Harrah's Entertainment, but after G-Love got his hands on Chester Downs, Harrah's ditched Fishtown like a two dollar...

Like Sugarhouse, this project also has a lack of local ties (a good thing in my opinion as they will not already be habituated to Philadelphia government's standard practice of ignoring its citizenry). William Hundley, the president of Pinnacle, is the only insider my rather limited research has been able to uncover at this time.

Like every other applicant, these guys have their standard movie theatre, retail and restaurants. These guys do manage to out do the others with the promise of a 12-screen megaplex. Like Sugarhouse, these guys apparently have put a bit of thought into how to make the casino fit into the neighborhood (rather than how to pay off city politicians in order to ignore the neighborhood). They expect the casino to draw approximately 6.8 million visitors per year. In order to connect what will likely be a monolithic, windowless facade to its environs, Pinnacle has proposed an extensive outdoor space that includes an outdoor skating rink.

File Under:

• Politics
• Planning