Why planning is the best alternative to councilmanic prerogative in Philly

The Ready: R.I.P Councilmanic Prerogative

Every councilperson convicted of a crime in Philly since 1981 committed offenses related to councilmanic prerogative. There is, Philly 3.0's appointment manager says, another way: Planning

Feb. 02, 2020

Afterwards Councilmember Kenyatta Johnson was indicted this week, a lot of the follow-up analysis has rightly focused on the much-criticized practice of councilmanic prerogative—an unwritten tradition where members defer to District representatives on local matters.

Sean Collins Walsh points out that Johnson, who was indicted for an declared corruption of his zoning powers, was chosen past Council President Darrell Clarke to be the most powerful person on Council in charge of zoning as head of the Rules Commission. And Bobby Henon, who was indicted for offenses involving L&I, was given the chairmanship of the 50&I committee past Clarke.

This article is office of a content partnership with:

Jake Blumgart asked members of Quango whether they thought it was time to reevaluate the councilmanic prerogative tradition in light of Councilmember Johnson'due south indictment, but several members were undeterred, including Mark Squilla and Cherelle Parker.

Squilla unfortunately brings out the tired "unelected bureaucrat" straw-man, which elides the fact that the mayor—a democratically elected official who is elected by a much larger number of voters than anybody—presides over the Philadelphia Urban center Planning Committee, L&I, the Zoning Board, and other related boards and commissions.

"When yous have a bureaucrat making these decisions, they don't have to answer to everyone," said Councilmember Marking Squilla. "Who would you rather take representing you, someone you can vote for or against every four years, or someone over whom you have no say, and they can practice whatever they want?"

Philadelphia'due south commune councilmembers are rarely challenged in a meaningful mode in either master or general elections, notwithstanding. Neither Squilla nor Parker faced any existent competitor in reelection bids in 2019. Johnson won his last three elections squarely, despite challengers in the final two primaries.

The only district councilmember who did lose re-election last year was West Philadelphia incumbent Jannie Blackwell, who was defeated in part because of voter concern over her handling of land utilise bug .

New tertiary District Councilmember Jamie Gauthier, who is an urban planner past preparation, had a smart counter to this, as did At-Large Councilmember Helen Gym, who recently broke with prerogative norms to vote against the Drexel food truck ban at the terminate of the last term.

"When you have this tradition where you are well-nigh solely abdicating problems around state use and land disposition and zoning to ane person, I call back information technology's kind of ripe for misuse or even only the appearance of misuse," said Gauthier.

District members' opinions should be heavily weighted in such decisions, Gauthier said, considering they know their areas the all-time. But she said that the city needs a stronger cheque on councilmanic prerogative, especially when information technology comes to major decisions similar the city'southward plan for 4601 Market St. in her district. There, a major land deal was mysteriously held up for months past her predecessor—at the behest of a developer ally , it turned out.

"I think the administration has to provide a check on proving why these recommendations are made, particularly when you are dealing with donors or family members who might take connections with parties involved in projects," said Gauthier […]

"I practice recollect that the metropolis has ceded its authority to council, which isn't equipped to review every unmarried small matter that goes through a councilmanic commune," said Gym. "It is incumbent on the urban center to enact a set of rules that could balance out any concerns about overextension in whatever item area."

Everybody can point to an example where councilmanic prerogative has come in handy in a pinch, but it also has a tendency to identify members at the center of lots of deals they shouldn't exist a role of, illegal or not.

As of 2015, according to a Pew report, all six members of Quango bedevilled of a criminal offense since 1981 committed offenses related to councilmanic prerogative, so information technology'southward clear that it has a certain pull. (Johnson, if convicted, will be a 7th.)

Contra Councilmember Squilla, there are some great reasons to prefer that the Planning Commission should have the last word on land use legislation, past making their recommendations binding just like the Art Commission's are.

Here are four reasons why giving Planning a real veto would be an improvement for housing policy outcomes and politics—and wouldn't be equally bad for Councilmembers as some think.

1. Clubby norms mean things wouldn't be that different

On a few notable occasions in Mayor Kenney's first term (most recently with the Guild Loma bicycle lane feud) he's avoided taking actions that he had the power to do administratively, simply did non in gild to avert crossing the local Councilperson.

The professional norms seem to push button everybody in the direction of the councilmanic prerogative logic, even when it concerns things that the mayor tin do administratively.

For the Councilmembers worried that the end of councilmanic prerogative would hateful important district decisions being made without their involvement, it's merely incommunicable to imagine.

For those of u.s.a. dying to see a more muscular Planning Committee, the sad truth is that things probably wouldn't work all that differently. It's inconceivable that whatsoever truly of import decisions would be made without strongly because the District Councilperson's view.

2. Nigh land utilize business is deadening

To Councilmember Gym's point nearly Council being poorly "equipped to review every single small thing that goes through a councilmanic district" the councilmanic prerogative system makes Council waste way too much fourth dimension on inane stuff that could just be done administratively, similar approving outdoor café seating or planters.

Because of all the different areas of regulation and permitting that have been added to the e'er-growing scope of councilmanic prerogative, near one in 4 bills at present deals with these kinds of modest-brawl issues, according to reporting from WHYY reviewing 15,000 Council bills.

Many of these hyperlocal bills involve zoning tweaks, parking regulations and small-scale street alterations. Council is required by police force to pass a resolution to sell a piece of metropolis country: that accounted for ane in 10 pieces of all legislation, the analysis found.

Some of the matters that fall under prerogative are pocket-sized, notwithstanding City Quango approval is required to open a newsstand—94 bills, for example — or cock a sidewalk buffet (41). Members can act to ban food trucks or vendors from a block of their commune, or from the whole affair , as Brian O'Neill did earlier this year.

For the vast majority of these kinds of bills, there's goose egg controversial to decide. But some Councilmembers prefer to have this huge workload of mundane bills only so they tin can swoop in to broker the relatively small number of controversial cases.

That'southward a bad trade-off for members, and having watched several of these types of cases play out in my own neighborhood, it often seems like having the ability to intervene in some of these neighborhood controversies ends up doing political damage to Councilmembers every bit every bit frequently every bit there's a political upside.

Wouldn't it be nicer to be able to deflect to the mayor more often when people are upset about zoning, and avoid getting roped into some of these neighborhood skirmishes?

3. The mayor has the right incentives to practise what'due south in the wide public interest, while small, vocal groups rule Quango's earth

Prerogative defenders would like to frame this effect as elected officials versus bureaucrats making decisions, but really it's about which elected official is the right person to make the conclusion about any particular topic.

When information technology comes to land use and planning issues, where all kinds of loftier-level urban center goals for affordability, sustainability, mobility and more than hang in the residue, the best person to brand those decisions are the elected officials best able to keep these major citywide priorities in perspective, and balance them confronting the need for some local accommodations along the way.

That doesn't hateful the mayoral administration is inattentive to the small details. Planning Commission staff accept geographic focus areas too, and are function of the same conversations as Council around zoning much of the fourth dimension, or L&I or Streets staff in the example of some of the other councilmanic prerogative areas like sidewalk seating and planters.

Considering of all the different areas of regulation and permitting that accept been added to the always-growing scope of councilmanic prerogative, about one in four bills now deals with these kinds of pocket-sized-ball problems.

The difference is the mayor and his staff are able to keep the wide citywide public interest in perspective, while Metropolis Council District members take a much narrower vantage point on what matters, because of their small geographic districts.

The people who participate in zoning and planning tend to be generally older, whiter and more privileged members of the community. They also tend to disproportionately oppose housing, co-ordinate to some interesting inquiry in the new book Neighborhood Defenders, which studied participation in neighborhood zoning meetings across the Boston area.

Anecdotally, this is as well a pretty common public meeting dynamic in Philadelphia, and information technology raises some existent questions nigh whether the Registered Community Organization review process for zoning variances is actually useful for giving Council and the Zoning Board of Adjustment good information about the community'southward sentiment about planning issues if the people participating are so unrepresentative of their neighborhoods.

This is the kind of distorted motion-picture show Council is getting most the issues that prerogative typically touches on.

A perfect case of how Planning could counteract the worst excesses of that kind of political dynamic is their pocket-veto of the Social club Loma rezoning bill at the end of concluding term.

Councilmember Squilla introduced a pretty unfortunate rezoning bill on behalf of Society Colina Borough Association that Planning Managing director Anne Fadullon criticized as "exclusionary," and Planning had the rare power to end information technology considering it was the end of the term.

Nosotros would go more than balanced outcomes if Council could innovate the bills, and Planning could have a veto pick in order to temper how parochial things tin can become.

4. The 2035 District plans have the nearly democratic legitimacy

The other primary argument for the mayoral administration to accept more influence over traditional prerogative topics, particularly in the area of zoning, is that the Planning Commission'south comprehensive plans have a lot more democratic legitimacy than what happens at RCO meetings.

The Planning Commission just completed a citywide comprehensive planning process for all eighteen planning districts in Philadelphia, and each of these plans involved pregnant public participation by hundreds of people—many more than local zoning meetings tend to attract and with a much more representative public.

Everybody tin can bespeak to an instance where Prerogative has come in handy in a pinch, only it also has a tendency to place members at the middle of lots of deals they shouldn't be a part of, illegal or not.

At these meetings and other avenues for participation that were part of the district planning process, neighbors in different regions of the city weighed in on the big-pic goals and values for their regions—each near half the size of a Council District.

Each of the plans came with zoning recommendations for the entire surface area, across multiple neighborhoods, offer a wider and more appropriate lens for thinking about things like where growth should exist directed.

This is the nigh valuable kind of public feedback, and the larger number of participants involved means it should carry more than weight equally a guiding force on zoning questions than the type of reactive politics that councilmanic prerogative encourages.

The Planning Committee is much more than suited to properly weighting these democratically-chosen planning goals in the course of making twenty-four hour period-to-day decisions.

Jon Geeting is the director of engagement at Philadelphia 3.0 , a political action committee that supports efforts to reform and modernize City Hall. This is function of a serial of articles running on both The Citizen and 3.0's weblog .

The Fix is made possible through a grant from the Thomas Skelton Harrison Foundation. The Harrison Foundation does non exercise editorial control or approval over the content of whatever material published by The Philadelphia Citizen.

Header photo courtesy Jared Piper / Philadelphia Urban center Council

calesbectim.blogspot.com

Source: https://thephiladelphiacitizen.org/councilmanic-prerogative-planning/

Share this post