Check out this article in the DN.
Green is trying to roll-back an agreement Mayor Street made with casino developers to allow them a property tax abatement in exchange for an investment in infrastructure--water pipes and stuff. Green says: 
I can't see a public policy rationale for providing casinos a tax abatement.
I leave it to someone else to get into the meat of this matter (and it is an intriguing one: it was my memory that Street himself had originally not wanted abatements for casinos either, and somewhere along the way he changed his mind, but Green's point is solid).
But what is UP with Bill Green? Remember last week when he proposed eliminating DROP for elected officials. And the Inky reported this:
[Councilwoman and Majority Leader] Tasco said she liked Green and tried to "help" him Thursday with a resolution that dulled the sting from Green's DROP bill. She called for hearings to examine the larger impact of DROP before considering his action. Some saw that as putting Green in his place.
When you're new, there are a lot of nuances that you're not familiar with, and sometimes it's a wise move to get the lay of the land, get a feel for your colleagues, and get some history of the Council," Tasco said. "So what happened yesterday certainly was not an effort to spank him, but to help him understand that he should get the lay of the land first.
That's a nice way of saying she doesn't really like him.
The Inky already wrote an article in the 1/28/08 Inky article about zany Councilman Green, and how his colleagues are not cazy about him, so I am not so much writing about that.
It's more like I am wondering why this image--this notion of what Green would be like--didn't seem to get communicated during the campaign. I had no idea he would be like quite like this as a Councilman (and it doesn't hurt that he comes to every Liberty City meeting even though the election is over--Councilman Kenney never did that ;). He seems pretty cool so far.
Was I just out of it? Did anyone expect..all this...from him?
PS- Councilman Green, if you are reading this...
Councilman, maybe you could join your colleague, Councilman Goode, and help get us, the public, a copy of BPT tax returns so we can see who is paying what? Check out this post for more details on that: click here.
Well, it is the image that he presented of himself
Well, it is the image that he presented of himself
and we (the progressives) didn't listen
sure, he got Johnny Doc's machine to elect him in May, but he's been shooting straight from the hip every time I've heard him speak.
He didn't advertise it much, but he spent a lot of time out of Philadelphia, and when he came back, he could obviously see so many glaring problems, that he decided to run.
I'd see him at P4C meetings quietly talking to anyone who'd listen, but never got the attention that other progressive darlings got. If you go back to his campaign literature, he was talking about good government, business and property tax reform, environmental issues, etc,
You go, BG IV.
I agree to a point. But,
I agree to a point. But, there were also a lot of good candidates who said the same thing- many with a track record we could see. It is not like we were choosing between a bunch of crappy candidates, you know?
That said, I agree: so far, so good.
this was my point
I'm not saying I though Green would be crap, but lots of candidates said stuff like this, including some incumbents. All that stuff gets pretty rhetorical after a while, I am surprised that green has jumped into all this stuff so quickly.
And, while this stuff is cool just cause it is shaking stuff up, does not make him--for me at least--THE progressive hero. You'd have to get pretty active in raising wages, increasing access to healthcare, come up with ways to deal with crime that are effective and less punitive, than more AND improve SEPTA to take on that kind of mantle.
So far, Green is just kina proving he is not about status quo--a good beginning, but obviously not the end.
common sense
agreed. maybe not progressive hero, but common sense hero so far.
Did I expect it? Yes.
From what I gathered about Bill Green from our discussions @ Drinking Liberally, these actions he's taken since his election to City Council don't surprise me in the least. His family has been working for the benefit of the City for generations, + he's following in their footsteps.
-Z
He was to busy winning . . .
Maybe that was the reason many progressives didn't pay attention to him. There were some very good "progressive" candidates (like Irv) and some not so good candidates. Obviously, I am being a bit sarcastic.
I met Bill Green two times on the campaign trail. He seemed like a real nice guy who ran a hell of a campaign and knew a lot about the issues. Some of his backers, potentially, made him a hard pill for progressives to swallow. Other folks focused on his living away for so long. That never bothered me. Once a Philadelphian, always a Philadelphian.
In hindsight, maybe progressives should have paid more attention. If I were making a joke, I might say something like, he might not have won if we did!!
I am working to elect Larry Farnese to the General Assembly. Unless otherwise expressly stated, this and every comment or blog I post on YPP and any action I take hereon is solely attributable to me and not Farnese or Friends of Farnese
Bill's the real deal
Bill's only surprising people who didn't pay attention during the campaign or unfairly wrote him off because (1) he's a son of a former mayor, (2) he enjoyed the support of the trades or (3) he entered the race relatively late.
I got to know Bill pretty well last Spring and I found him and his wife to be thoughtful, engaging and genuinely intersted in making real and dramatic changes in the city. I knew he'd make noise early. I think I even read somewhere that his father gave him that exact advice: Don't tread lightly. Be bold. Make change.
Bill's efforts to prevent elected public servants from taking advantage of the DROP program is courageous, especially given the ease with which several electeds avail themselves to the piggy bank while the rest of the city government faces a pension crisis.
And Bill's take on the ten year tax abatement for casino developers is spot on. The infrastructure improvements that Sugarhouse and Foxwoods have pledged to make are basic improvements that are desperately needed if the surrounding communities are to deal with such massive developments and the subsequent pressures of these developments on roads, water systems, electrical grids, polution, etc. The people of Philadelphia need not hand over bags of money to these guys in exchange for things that should be expected of them. After all, the bags of money will come once they open.
Tax abatements, for the umpteenth time, were put in place to encourage growth in the city's residential housing market. The abatements were initially conceived to off set the way-too-high labor costs of building homes in the city and to give young families a reason to stay in Philadelphia.
Those of us who have had to deal with the prospect of casinos in our neighborhoods for the last 3 years; and those of us who have given thousands of hours protesting, educating, mobilizing, canvassing, petitioning, lobbying, strategizing and brain storming around the casino issue do not see how any tax abatement is warranted in this regard. After all, casinos are anything BUT reasons to stay in Philadelphia.
Unless the BRT can't find those files either, the tax breaks for casinos should be revoked immediately. It's what I'd do if I worked in Council Chambers and I am very grateful for Bill's courage on this issue.
I think the rumblings of some of the smaller-minded, status quo members of council is just them seeing, er.....green.
****I support Joe Vignola, Independent Democrat for Pennsylvania State Senate in the first district and am proud to make it happen. My opinion, however, is my own and does not reflect the opinion of Joe Vignola or his campaign****
Aren't there potential legal problems here, Vern?
Can the city revoke these tax breaks without risking a court challenge that might call the whole tax abatement program into question? My understanding is that the city's legal right to enact the tax abatement has never been vetted by the courts. Do we want to tempt fate now?
I say this as someone who thinks that the tax abatement has done a lot of good but needs to be reduced to some extent in center city and kept outside center city.
What exactly is Bill Green doing on casinos
besides generating publicity for himself?
That is not clear to me at all. And while I try to give everyone the benefit of the doubt I’m a little dubious about whether his casino legislative proposal is a step in the right direction—that is against the Delaware Waterfront casinos—or not.
If casinos come to the waterfront, sure it would be best if they not get a tax break from the city.
But focusing on the tax break is, at best, a distraction from the critical effort of finding new sites for the casinos.
At worst, for city council to pull the casinos’ tax abatement would be to implicitly admit that the casinos will wind up on the currently proposed sites. Council has never approved those sites. It should not do so for moral, political, and potentially legal reasons.
I have to admit I’m a little suspicious because I heard Green speak a few times during the campaign and his views of the casinos seemed to change depending upon the part of the city he was speaking in. And I remember that Green’s most important supporters in his race for council, besides his father who is largely responsible for him raising so much money, were John Dougherty (and the building trades) and Ed Rendell
We know were Rendell stands on casinos on the Delaware waterfront. .
Dougherty has at times appeared to be an opponent of casinos on the waterfront, or at least near his own neighborhood of Pennsport. But he is now running for State Senate with the support of the building trades, who are adamantly pro-casino.
Given these alliances, we need to be very careful before we start touting Bill Green as the great white hope for the anti-casino movement.
No great white hope, but .....
Well, first things first -- I don't think Green is the great white hope in re-locating casinos. But it will take an army to get there and we will need every warrior we can get.
As for the abatement, there is ALWAYS a potential for a legal challenge. I know from experience that some people will sue for anything (and often abuse the process) just for the hell of it. So, yes, there is a potential for a court challenge if we rescind that deal.
But let's remeber something very important. A material difference here is that absent a "special arrangement" with the Street administration, these developers would not be eligible for an abatement. This deal was struck outside the confines of the tax abatement program, and therefore the deal skirts the law itself. That distinction makes if far less ripe for a successful legal challenge.
If casinos are going to sue the city, it's going to be for pulling their permits after they were issued, as the Mayor did. Now THAT'S an invitation for a legal battle. That being said, we would most certainly need to be concerned about the possibility, however remote.
As far as suspicion is concerned, everyone has a right to be suspicous of public people who seek elections and/or serve elected office. Yes, by getting the support of the trades and Rendell, I suppose you could see this as just a stunt. But I just don't know. Heck, Maria got support from Rendell and I bet she'd like to see these casinos moved. Had I been elected, I'd still fight the casinos despite support from the trades. Heck, look at my erstwhile opponent. His greatest supporter was the man who wrote the casino legislation -- Act 71, but that didn't stop him from standing up and doing the right thing for his constituents by joining our fight against these casinos.
Yes, you read that right. :>)
After 15 years in government and politics, I still believe most electeds will choose to do whats right even if, in doing so, it may hurt a special interest group that helped them get elected.
And I still believe elected officials who vote and act in the best interests of the public despite its impact on major donors STILL EXIST. Even here in this town. So, sure, if people change positions based on audiences, that's cause for a raised eyebrow. But I suggest we watch the freshman councilman and judge him on what he says and what he does in Council chambers...and not necessarily on who helped him get there.
****I support Joe Vignola, Independent Democrat for Pennsylvania State Senate in the first district and am proud to work to make it happen. My opinion, however, is my own and does not reflect the opinion of Joe Vignola or his campaign****
Bll Green
I did not vote for Green because I thought he was trading on his family name and financial resources and did not have a track record in Philly.
But he has been trying to get up to speed on local issues and concerns. He seems to be at every community meeting and event—e.g. Great Expectations, recent CLUW forum on working women.
What I found impressive about his participation in the Great Expectations break-out sessions was the lack of grandstanding. He was clearly there to listen and unlike most politicians not to call attention to himself.
So we’ll see.