Elections, Elections

Yesterday was election day in America, and so too in our city betwixt D.C. and New York.  Amid breathless coverage of the race for governor of Kentucky and the Virginia state legislature, the  New York Times deigned to add Philadelphia’s mayoral race, a state-wide referendum on a constitutional amendment already in place in other states, and a judicial race to its list of items to cover.  Anyone who thinks the Philadelphia mayoral race is competitive is out of their reckoning, the amendment was neither here nor there, and the democratic election of judges continues to be a headscratcher, so clearly the Times was opting to leave the consequential matters of local import to local coverage.  Fair enough, except the locals being what they are, this morning’s headlines were dominated by speculation on who will run for Mayor in 2023 rather than reviews of particularly close races, re-election of a federally indicted Councilman, statistical reviews of voting patterns, or potential impacts of updated procurement procedures.  Not all was lost, however – given Philadelphia’s blessed “resign to run” provisions, we at least learned that the re-elected Mayor may leave office early to run for governor, while a bevy of Councilmembers will necessarily resign to run for mayor.

This being a Democratic city, the general election is usually a time of calm reflection awaiting the voters to pull the lever (or in this case, touch the screen on our new voting machines) on the city committee’s chosen ticket.  But the insurgent progressive wing of the party was determined to unseat the Republicans, which would have ruffled no feathers but for the fact that one of the Democrats, Helen Gym, broke ranks to endorse one of those running for office under the banner of the Working Families Party.  The Democratic City Committee, always suspicious of generating more jobs and income lest this lead to more education and so voters who think for themselves or their own interests, used this as an opportunity to call the troops to arms.  This internal conflict must be put down, they said, by raising more money!  Donate, so that I can drown out the texts and robocalls with my own advertisements – we shall blanket the city in ads for the establishment!  As it turned out, one Working Family member (a sibling?) was elected to Council, while one Republican, David Oh, kept his seat.

Internecine Democratic squabbling aside, our coming Council session – T-minus two months! – could be quite interesting given the terminus of the Kenney regime and the need to stake out a space for oneself.  The yakking about progressive causes will necessarily continue until a year from today, but I wonder if Council, which will now have 14 Democrats, 2 Republicans, and 1 Working Sibling, will turn its attention to matters beyond tax abatements and unenforceable resolutions about wages.  Will tax reform get done?  Will anyone take an interest in the spending increases and ensure they are justified or we receive value for money?  I will do a detailed follow up pursuing this line of questioning at a later time (I hope) but I noticed the Inquirer ran a piece showing the $1 billion increase in spending under the Kenney administration.  In terms of how deeply the piece probed it was more like a shot of Botox than a vivisection – it cited a few seven-figure programs but didn’t dig into the meat behind the ballooning budget.  I presume tax receipts are up – long may it last – but the praise of the city putting some $30 million into a rainy day fund for the first time ever (ever?!) came off as something of a golf clap, polite but by no means truly excited.

Then again, my own complaints are starting to smack of the familiar rote I hear elsewhere and aren’t sufficiently fact-enforced.  I want to dig into the budgets of the Kenney administration, with particular attention to:

1.  Overall budget growth and attribution of where that growth is going
2.  Pension costs and funding, including key details like the assumed discount rate
3.  If past performance targets have been met and if future estimates or goals are likely to be met

My oft-repeated phrase is that the city seems on a precipice, whether it wants to be or not.  Philadelphia can break towards Baltimore, Detroit, and Chicago, or it can try to aim for New York, Boston, and other high-performers.  A simple glance at the most recent budget projections show no inclusion of a recession for the next five years and revenue growing at 3% or more.  I hope we meet those targets, but I want to be forearmed if (when) things take a turn for the worse.  Hopefully the results of next year’s federal elections will mean an injection of federal tax dollars, but until then it’s best to learn how we can expect to perform on our own.