whoops, spoke too soon: http://www.philly.com/philly/news/br.../55084127.html
House approval of the measure appears likely but not guaranteed. State Rep. Mark Cohen of Philadelphia, the Democratic caucus chairman in the House, said this afternoon that he had serious doubts about provisions in the bill, which mandates that the city freeze pension benefits for current employees and reduce the cost of its pension program for new employees by 20 percent. "I don't think it's a very good bill, and I hope the bill would change before it passes," Cohen said.
whoops, spoke too soon: State Senate approves city aid | Philadelphia Inquirer | 08/26/2009
House approval of the measure appears likely but not guaranteed. State Rep. Mark Cohen of Philadelphia, the Democratic caucus chairman in the House, said this afternoon that he had serious doubts about provisions in the bill, which mandates that the city freeze pension benefits for current employees and reduce the cost of its pension program for new employees by 20 percent. "I don't think it's a very good bill, and I hope the bill would change before it passes," Cohen said.
he's usually an opponent to change. let's hope he stops holding philadelphia hostage
__________________
"It has shown me that everything is illuminated in the light of the past"
Jonathan Safran Foer
whoops, spoke too soon: State Senate approves city aid | Philadelphia Inquirer | 08/26/2009
House approval of the measure appears likely but not guaranteed. State Rep. Mark Cohen of Philadelphia, the Democratic caucus chairman in the House, said this afternoon that he had serious doubts about provisions in the bill, which mandates that the city freeze pension benefits for current employees and reduce the cost of its pension program for new employees by 20 percent. "I don't think it's a very good bill, and I hope the bill would change before it passes," Cohen said.
Quote:
Originally Posted by eldondre
he's usually an opponent to change. let's hope he stops holding philadelphia hostage
Fine. Plan "C", here we come. And then lay it all at his feet.
__________________ Go Sam's Army!
I said it before and I'll say it again...Raider.Adam for mayor!
My guess is that Nutter will do everything in his power to ensure that the House passes the bill exactly as the Senate did, and that Rendell will back him up on it. The question is, how many Representatives are Rendell or Nutter men? And of those who aren't, do any have the power to throw a monkey wrench into the works?
Last edited by billy ross; 08-26-2009 at 07:19 PM.
Rendell wasn't the unions best friend when he was mayor, now he no longer needs them for anything. he's indicated support for the bill. I think the question wil be can the unions control the house?
The suburban democrats don't give an F about the City unions. The building trades people mostly live in New Jersey [stupid move by them, I suppose], and there aren't a lot of City union people in DelCo. Even if Dwight and Babette Josephs can quash the measure---all it will do is drive Philadelphia right into Plan C, and I'm sure the Guv can put the screws to both of them to convince them it's not in their best interests to throw this measure in the trash can.
The bill actually covers ALL Pennsylvania municipal pension plans, not just Philadelphia's. So Harrisburg not only pissed off Philly's unions, but I am sure Pittsburgh is equally up in arms with furious e-mails buzzing around about the new arbitration restrictions and increased mayoral powers that were inserted into the bill.
The bill actually covers ALL Pennsylvania municipal pension plans, not just Philadelphia's. So Harrisburg not only pissed off Philly's unions, but I am sure Pittsburgh is equally up in arms with furious e-mails buzzing around about the new arbitration restrictions and increased mayoral powers that were inserted into the bill.
I think that's where the problems will lie. I don't think there would be much opposition if the bill was limited to Philadelphia. When you start changing the rules for pension plans of other municipalities, people are going to start taking an interest in the bill...and not just Pittsburgh.
What an asinine statement. So when the state spends tax money in the city....it's giving money to the city, but when it gets tax revenue from the city's residents and businesses, it's not getting it from the city? Philadelphia is the state's biggest economic engine, without the Pittsburgh and Philadelphia metropolitan regions, the state would probably be the economic equivalent of a Mississipi.....yet all we hear is how Harrisburg is somehow bailing us out and how Philly is a fiscall black hole. Spare me. If anything, the wealth redistribution flows from the urbanized areas to the sparsely populated counties in the T.
You're confusing the city, a geographic area, with the city, a legal entity that governs the geographic area. (For the sake of clarity, we can call the latter "City Hall."
Your gripe about the state (the legal entity) "meddling" in the city's business isn't an objection to state laws applying in the geographic area; it's about the state telling "City Hall" what to do.
And, as you yourself say, Philadelphia itself is not the economic engine; the Philadelphia region is.
Well, what the Senate bill really says in redacted form is this:
You cannot have Bob Brady fly in from Washington and turn up at the Crowne Plaza hotel at 18th and Market like in the bad old days and convince City Hall to ink a deal to boost pension obligations further out to get the unions to shut up.
You can have your 1% temporary Sales Tax, Michael Nutter... but you cannot agree to ANYTHING involving the City Pension Plan that raises obligations, and on top of that, you have to come up with some way to slash 25% of projected outlays from the fund.
You can accomplish this in only a few ways... fire a massive amount of workers and then do not allow any new hires into the pension plan and instead put them in a 401(k)
or...
You can cut the benefits to current retirees and/or future retirees by capping the payment structure, require more vesting by the employees before they become eligible, etc.
AFSCME and D33 are vehemently opposed to BOTH measures. They do not want one single penny of outlay in the pension fund to be reduced. Period.
They will not accept any other resolution.
So what Harrisburg is doing, if this passes, is basically block City Hall from cutting any deal with the unions that involves NOT changing the pension fund in its current format.
Thusly, it would evolve either into a showdown where City union workers strike, and then Nutter starts firing union workers until they give up or the union workers deal with it and move on, and there are no layoffs.
So you can see why the unions are screaming mad about this.
It is not a zero sum game. That is what the UAW thought, and look where it got them. The unions need the employer to be healthy in order for the unions themselves to be healthy. It is in the interest of the city unions for the city to thrive. Anything else and they cut their own throats. Whether they recognize that is another question, though. The best way for the city unions to maximize cash coming to their workers and to the unions themselves is to maximize the strength of the city's economy, which is the city's tax base, from which they ultimately get paid. Nutter understands this, and he is selling the unions on this idea. Whether they are smart enough to buy it, however, ... we'll see.
Last edited by billy ross; 08-26-2009 at 11:07 PM.
You're confusing the city, a geographic area, with the city, a legal entity that governs the geographic area. (For the sake of clarity, we can call the latter "City Hall."
Your gripe about the state (the legal entity) "meddling" in the city's business isn't an objection to state laws applying in the geographic area; it's about the state telling "City Hall" what to do.
And, as you yourself say, Philadelphia itself is not the economic engine; the Philadelphia region is.
Wow you're really twisting yourself up into knots there. What the hell is the state then? It's a geographic entity just like Philly, each is governed by it's own governing body. You need to get over your own cleverness.
And yes Philadelphia is the economic engine of the region and the state. Without Philadelphia, there is no "Philadelphia region". And even if you talk just about the city proper, it creates millions of dollars of tax revenue for the state. The fact that millions of dollars get spent here is only logical, if anything, we're getting shortchanged.
Wow you're really twisting yourself up into knots there. What the hell is the state then? It's a geographic entity just like Philly, each is governed by it's own governing body. You need to get over your own cleverness.
You have used the word "Philadelphia" to describe, as near as I can tell, City Hall and its institutions; the city's population and businesses; and the economy of Philadelphia and its neighboring counties. That inexactitude made conversation difficult. I wasn't trying to be clever; I was trying to come to terms in order make discussion possible.
So, on KYW this morning, I heard a reporter say that a house vote would not occur this week and might not occur even next week. Does anyone know how this would affect the implementation "Plan C"? Unless Nutter was just bluffing, I thought Aug. 31 was just a drop-dead date. Can Plan C be rescinded after Aug 31 if the legislation gets approved beforeafter then?
I suppose it's possible that this is just a posturing tactic by supporters of the municipal unions (a.k.a. opponents of the rest of us taxpayers). I also heard on the report that the unions were most adamantly opposed to the provision freezing benefits for current workers; but there was no mention of the other provisions. Is it possible that the unions are angling for a removal of the provision "freezing" current benefits, but will let the other changes stand? I can't imagine that's the case b/c it would mean changing the bill yet again and sending it back to the senate, no?
Last edited by PhillyRunner; 08-27-2009 at 09:15 AM.
Reason: Oops
So, on KYW this morning, I heard a reporter say that a house vote would not occur this week and might not occur even next week. Does anyone know how this would affect the implementation "Plan C"? Unless Nutter was just bluffing, I thought Aug. 31 was just a drop-dead date. Can Plan C be rescinded after Aug 31 if the legislation gets approved beforeafter then?
I suppose it's possible that this is just a posturing tactic by supporters of the municipal unions (a.k.a. opponents of the rest of us taxpayers). I also heard on the report that the unions were most adamantly opposed to the provision freezing benefits for current workers; but there was no mention of the other provisions. Is it possible that the unions are angling for a removal of the provision "freezing" current benefits, but will let the other changes stand? I can't imagine that's the case b/c it would mean changing the bill yet again and sending it back to the senate, no?
The unions are adamant that they get a pay raise too in the new contracts, so no idea what the hell they are thinking.
UAW and pilots only relented with concessions when their respective companies were doomed to bankruptcy, or were already IN bankruptcy.
Let me put some emphasis on this point so you'll understand union mentality a bit better:
Nobody in a union stops thinking about themselves until someone picks up the pot of gold and starts walking away with it... only THEN do they start wanting it back.
Quote:
Originally Posted by billy ross
It is not a zero sum game. That is what the UAW thought, and look where it got them. The unions need the employer to be healthy in order for the unions themselves to be healthy. It is in the interest of the city unions for the city to thrive. Anything else and they cut their own throats. Whether they recognize that is another question, though. The best way for the city unions to maximize cash coming to their workers and to the unions themselves is to maximize the strength of the city's economy, which is the city's tax base, from which they ultimately get paid. Nutter understands this, and he is selling the unions on this idea. Whether they are smart enough to buy it, however, ... we'll see.
It's Sep 1, actually. Next Tuesday. That's when the City has to formally send over the budget plan to PICA for approval.
If the City is given its tax increase, City Hall can immediately hold a vote to raise the tax 1 cent which changes all the underlying figures for revenue projection, so the PICA plan would have to be amended, and that would be moot to begin with since the City union contracts haven't been negotiated yet, and they will be stymied because the City is forced to take the pension plan off the negotiating table.
The real deadline is September 18 when the City of Philadelphia has to implement SOME sort of approved budget plan, and right now that is Plan C. So we really have until the middle of September to get something accomplished.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhillyRunner
So, on KYW this morning, I heard a reporter say that a house vote would not occur this week and might not occur even next week. Does anyone know how this would affect the implementation "Plan C"? Unless Nutter was just bluffing, I thought Aug. 31 was just a drop-dead date. Can Plan C be rescinded after Aug 31 if the legislation gets approved beforeafter then?
I suppose it's possible that this is just a posturing tactic by supporters of the municipal unions (a.k.a. opponents of the rest of us taxpayers). I also heard on the report that the unions were most adamantly opposed to the provision freezing benefits for current workers; but there was no mention of the other provisions. Is it possible that the unions are angling for a removal of the provision "freezing" current benefits, but will let the other changes stand? I can't imagine that's the case b/c it would mean changing the bill yet again and sending it back to the senate, no?
Wow you're really twisting yourself up into knots there. What the hell is the state then? It's a geographic entity just like Philly, each is governed by it's own governing body. You need to get over your own cleverness.
You are confused between what a sovereign entity is an what a jurisdiction is.
When people write "I hate the City!", they are talking about the local government at City Hall. Capital "C" in City refers to the sovereign body which governs Philadelphia.
When people write "I hate this city!", they are referring to Philadelphia proper, which includes the whole area, the people, places and things in it, as well as the local government.
Quote:
Originally Posted by romano
And yes Philadelphia is the economic engine of the region and the state. Without Philadelphia, there is no "Philadelphia region". And even if you talk just about the city proper, it creates millions of dollars of tax revenue for the state. The fact that millions of dollars get spent here is only logical, if anything, we're getting shortchanged.
Less than 15% of the total office space in the Delaware Valley is actually situated in Philadelphia. That means out of the white-collar workforce, which provides most of the payroll tax income within the Tri-State area, most of the DelVal workforce is located in the suburbs, not the city.
Considering the high population of ghetto hood rats and the 24% population living below the poverty line, which only Camden, Chester and Norristown can match---anybody with half a brain can deduce that Philadelphia is not the economic engine of the Delaware Valley and hasn't been for at least the previous 2 decades. The barycenter of income generation in the Delaware Valley looks like a halo which surrounds Philadelphia in an arc stretching from Wilmington through a a network of western PA suburbs like Chesterbrook and Wayne, then north of us in Horsham, NE to Trevose, and back to Cherry Hill to the East. Then you could plot a small dot in the center of the halo which would be Center City, and a very dim shade between the halo and that point which is the low-end retail, light manufacturing and port activity within the city.
While there are still a lot of jobs in the City, the largest employer within the City is the City itself, and then the School district.
Since Philadelphia is not a state or national capital, it seems surreal that the largest sources of employment to be found are in the machinations of the city itself.
To put it succinctly, Philadelphia is "A Welfare-Check" city.
While there are still a lot of jobs in the City, the largest employer within the City is the City itself, and then the School district.
Since Philadelphia is not a state or national capital, it seems surreal that the largest sources of employment to be found are in the machinations of the city itself.
The Federal Govt employs twice as many people in Phila than the municipal govt*. The city employs too many people, but a preponderance of government jobs in a regional hub like Philadelphia is not particularly unusual. Court, tax, postal functions and others are consolidated here.
15% of jobs for a 9 county metro are encompassing upwards of 5 million** people is still important. Considering the suburbs account for 85% of the regions population and a much larger share of land, its a matter of course that a plurality of jobs are located there. However, Center City continues to be the largest single job center in the region, even though job sprawl has increased dramatically over past decades. Whatever problems with the city's economy, and there are many, I still don't see our suburbs prospering as they have without the anchor of the downtown.
