Citizen Voices Q&A with the Candidates
October 2, 1999

Here is a transcript of the Citizen Voices mayoral forum held Oct. 2 at the Zellerbach Theatre on the University of Pennsylvania campus.

The format was as follows. Each candidate spent a half hour responding to questions and followups from Citizen Voices participants who had spent the morning reviewing their position papers and deliberating on the six Citizen Voices issues. Education, jobs, neighborhood quality of life, public safety, government reform and race and diversity. The moderator was Chris Satullo of The Inquirer.

Sam Katz went first, John Street second.

Then the candidates spent 30 minutes in direct dialogue, discussing what each had heard the other say.

We hope this record of this dialogue helps inform your decision.

Chris Satullo, Deputy Editorial Page Editor.

Sam Katz

Jobs:

A: Well, presently there's a disparity between the resident wage tax and the non-resident wage tax, which was a negotiated compromise with the legislature about a decade ago. I'm driving toward reducing the wage tax to a level approximating 4%. That's my goal. I believe that by the end of the second term, (which I have the highest level of optimism that I'll have a chance to compete for), that Philadelphia needs to be in a position where both the wage tax, and the business privilege tax particularly -- which are two taxes that have significantly contributed to the decisions by private businessmen and women to leave to the city, and by families to leave the city -- that those two taxes need to be at a level which when compared to the costs of taxation on business and residents in the suburbs, ceasing to be a factor in decisions by private enterprise to leave Philadelphia or to not consider Philadelphia. But my immediate short-term goal is to get as close to 4% as we can. And the difference between where I am and where the current 5-year plan is, is that it would be at about 4.45% by the year 2003. And if you extrapolate that reduction at the rate at which it has been occurring to the year 2007, the wage tax would be at approximately 4.3%. I also have the goal of equalizing both suburban and resident wage taxes because I think that that will create more incentive for suburbanites to reconsider locating in Philadelphia. And I think it's fair to Philadelphians as well.

A: What I've tried to do since starting my campaign for Mayor is to be visible and attentive to the interests of neighborhood groups, to do as much listening as I do lip-moving. And over the course of this campaign I think some of the best days I've had were days that I spent with neighborhood associations, civic groups, and business associations listening to people's concerns and aspirations for the city and the interests that they reflect. By the way, I'm very optimistic about Philadelphia's future, in part because everywhere I go, no matter how difficult the problems people are confronting in their neighborhood, there's a very strong sense of hope. Particularly that what they perceive having happened in downtown Philadelphia -- with the resurgence of hospitality and tourism, the invigoration of arts and culture, and all the other things that have improved the image and the feel and the look of the city -- are things that could happen for them, where they live. And I think that that's really one of the most important legacies of the Rendell administration. I believe that city government needs to be a partner with neighborhoods. I believe that the nature of that relationship often ought to be contractual, and very formalized. And that our understandings of what we expect from each other be the subject of negotiation. I believe that wherever the city is involved in doing things, it needs to reflect the interests of stakeholders. And that the planning process, the resource allocation, and the decision-making process be such that neighborhood groups feel like they had a good chance to participate.

A: One thing I'm going to do is make sure that every citizen in Philadelphia has my email address, when I become the Mayor. The city, I think, has not done a particularly good job of using the Internet as a vehicle for communicating among and between citizens. I intend to be visible and accept invitations, sit down with neighborhoods and listen and try to make sure that my job, in addition to being the leader of the city, effectively is the person that communities can expect to hold accountable the agencies of city government which are supposed to deliver the response to the partnerships that I see developing. And I intend to do that vigorously, I intend to ask my commissioners, and the heads of the boards to commissions who I appoint, to consider their days to be long days and to consider their responsibilities to be interactive with citizen groups.

Q. (From Sam Lewis): Some people think we need to cut taxes to encourage business development and jobs in neighborhoods. What do you think about cutting the business privilege tax as an example? And in general, will we lose services by reducing revenues with such tax cuts?

A: I feel that, just as an aside, that the business privilege tax is a confiscatory tax. And by that, I mean that it's really a tax that disincents private enterprise, it disincents investment. And I'll give you a small example. I set up a company to be a C-corp, a regular corporation, and found that even though the company's first couple of years were not productive economically, we still paid the gross receipts tax. We paid taxes to the city on revenue, but not on income. And I thought when I first confronted that that I could imagine nothing more debilitating to a small businessperson particularly, and a start-up small business, where you expect not to be in an income-producing situation. And you think about all the young people coming out of the colleges and the universities who might choose to be entrepreneurs and investors, why would they stay in a city where you were taxed without regard to whether you made money. There has to be a balancing between tax reduction and service delivery. But I am equally confident that Philadelphia has not deployed, in the same way that I see the private sector in this country, the kinds of management tools, the investments and technology, the information systems, the budgeting systems, the accounting systems, that would enable middle managers of city agencies to make decisions that would enable us to both decrease the cost of delivering services and to improve their quality. How many people feel that they can get something from city government without political influence, without going to a councilperson, or without getting the mayor's office or a commissioner to respond? Where in almost any other interaction with an enterprise you would expect a sales person or their manager to solve your problem. And in Philadelphia, I think far too many of us in our dealing with city government find that resolutions of issues get kicked upstairs to higher and higher levels. So I have a very high level of confidence that Philadelphia, if it tries to make itself competitive, for a small business particularly, for a small neighborhood, by reducing taxes, by considering negative impacts of regulation, that we can not only reverse the decline of small business and jobs, but begin to re-grow the economy of the city.

Government reform:

A: I can tell you, and I know that John feels the same way, that both of us are spending an extraordinary amount of our energy and time trying to raise a lot of money to pay for 30-second tv ads that most people use remote control devices to avoid watching. It's a rather frustrating experience, but the other thing that I've learned to do quite effectively is to leave voicemails for people who know exactly why I'm calling and have no intention of talking to me. And I think that's unfortunate that politics in this country, and particularly in Philadelphia in this election, have become so expensive and that we have allowed the civic dialogue to be dominated by 30-second television and by direct mail. It's a beautiful day out and this is a terrific event, but we should have these events every night. And in my opinion, the television stations, which are doing a much better job in this election than they did in 1991, should be encouraged to create opportunities for dialogue around specific issues so that every night or every week you could see what you needed to see from the candidates in the truest tradition of Lincoln-Douglas. We are having debates in this campaign, and I think it is productive. And increasingly I think people are paying attention to the Citizen Voices project, to the Re-thinking Philadelphia project that the Daily News is running, and to forums like this. But we need limitations on the amounts of individual contributions, where those contributions are collected from people who expect to, or have done business with the government to which they are contributing. There should be some disclosure of that. We need enforcement of the existing rules so that candidates are not permitted to provide poor quality disclosure. For example, requiring that where they fail to disclose the occupation in a certain number of days, that unless they do that the contribution would have to be returned. I think there are things that we can do to improve the nature of campaign finances and to eliminate the perception as well as the reality of pay to play.

A: Well last week when the state legislative committee, led by a Republican from Buck's County, held a hearing here in Philadelphia on the issue of campaign finance reform, I was the candidate who testified. I sent my position over the summer to Governor Ridge and to the legislative leaders. And I intend to be an outspoken advocate of campaign finance reform. Because I don't want to be sitting here in 2003 at the Citizen Voices meeting talking about what we need to do (that will be my re-election campaign I hope) in order to improve the quality of disclosure, and to make campaign finance reform happen in the next cycle.

Safety:

A: Well there are a couple things I think the Mayor must do. First of all, I'm pleased to say that John Street and I both agree now on the re-appointment of John Timoney. And I think that's an important thing for continuing to improve police-community relations because Commissioner Timoney has been such an outspoken and visible and aggressive example of improving police-community relations. I am constantly asked at civic meetings, how can we get the police respond to the curfew? How can we get police to respond to some of the petty crimes? And I think that one of the things, not only in the police department but particularly in the police department, that we need to clearly define as a job of a police captain who runs a district or runs an operation that interfaces with the community, is that that job includes regular, active, and understandable communications with affected neighborhoods. Personally I would like to see us redesign all of the service delivery boundaries of city government, so that we can effectively create district cabinets among various city agencies, because I think that, with Operation Sunrise, we have seen what the effects are when agencies of city government work together. I think most of the problems that confront neighborhoods today are not solvable by a single agency of the city or the state, but require cooperation that require tearing down some of the barriers to cooperation. I would say that asking the Commissioner to make a priority of aggressive, regular community relations between the police captain, who runs the district, and between the other members of the command structure in that district, so that in effect a neighborhood knows who its police leadership is on a first name basis. And that you can pick up the phone, instead of calling 911, you can call the district. And the district, instead of waiting for an order from the roundhouse will respond. Because, in fact, that's what the comparative statistics initiative is truly about. It's about empowering the district leaders in respect to deployment and developing strategies that are unique to a neighborhood. I think we need a lot of alternatives to maximum security incarceration, so that we can make sure that the space that we need for those people who need to maximum security incarceration is available. And far too many of the adjudicated cases in our municipal and common pleas court that are found guilty in respect to felonies end up in sentences in a correctional system which has been, for most of this decade, operating under the orders of a federal judge who has imposed a prison cap. I think we need community programs that will enable people, particularly people who are found guilty of drug violations of the use of drugs, who may not need such sentences, that perhaps some of the mandatory sentencing that we've seen promulgated in Harrisburg and imposed on the court system has required, to be engaged in other kinds of incarceration other than higher cost maximum security. But I also think that we need to get back the power to run the correctional systems in this city. That we have effectively, through these two cases in the state and federal courts, seen the management of the correctional system largely taken over by the federal judiciary. And in the long run, one of the things I want to see done as Mayor is that we get that back, and sooner rather than later.

A: This is an issue that is not subject to a soundbite answer. In this debate, which is very intense in this election and very healthy for this community, we are talking about trying to reflect the interests of the collective group versus the interest of the individual. And oftentimes in the history of our country, and certainly in the history of this city, the interests of the collective versus the individual have clashed. I think we can accommodate both interests. I think we can make Philadelphia's public school system the best urban education system in the country, while we also respond to the individual needs of parents, who for good reason or bad, feel uncomfortable and dissatisfied with the quality of education that their children are getting. I believe that we can make progress, that we can improve the conditions of public education, that we can provide safer classrooms by getting disruptive and violent kids out of the classroom. That we can improve the quality of the teachers by reducing the starting pay and other pay of Philadelphia versus suburban teachers. That we can invest in training, that we can do the kinds of things to make ours a great school system without compromising the interests of those families who are today exercising choice by choosing to leave. And I'm not deluded into thinking that there is not a voucher option that could work for families. I think there are a variety of options. One that we've heard a lot about is the $1,000 or $1,500 a year option. And that won't put anyone into a $10,000 tuition program, but it will create opportunities for faith-based education. It may create incentives for people to form alternatives to education. I find also that the charter schools are a variation on school choice in which we are taking, not $1,000 but $6,000 that was previously going into the public schools, and paying it directly to private enterprises that are formed by community interests to provide charter schools. We're now going to engage in a private contract with a Texas company to supply educational services for violent and disruptive kids. And I think the most important thing is that both the proponents of more aid for the Philadelphia public school system, and the proponents of a voucher system have consistently been unsuccessful getting 102 in the state House, and 26 votes in the state Senate for either position. And it's time to recognize that if Philadelphia, which after the next census, will probably lose a couple more seats in the legislature and not become more politically powerful. But by virtue of population decline become weaker, it's time to recognize that if we want to get what we want for our school system, to close that $1,900 a year gap for students that we're going to have give something. And I think that you can see United States presidential candidate former Senator Bill Bradley advocating for vouchers on a test basis, Mayor Rendell in the last round of negotiations with the legislature in a letter he wrote to the Wall Street Journal, saying that he thinks it's time to test vouchers. And that's what we're talking about: no diminution of investment in the Philadelphia public school would have resulted from the position that Governor Ridge offered in the last vouchers. And we all just need to, I think, lower the decibel level and listen to each other and see if we can find some kind of compromise. Although I recognize this is a very emotional and important issue for the city.

Race and Diversity:

A: Institutional racism exists wherever the leaders of organizations allow it to exist. Where unfair hiring practices, where discrimination on the basis of race, sex, gender, and any other consideration is allowed to persist. Institutional racism occurs when we fail to address, through laws and through regulations and through practices, a breaking down of barriers that others can climb over because of who they are or where they come from. I think talking racism, which for the first time in a campaign is being done and frankly here, is a good thing. And I think talking about race relations and our own biases and our own stereotypes and our own anxieties and our own fears, is something that I think is healthy and productive for this city. I've tried through this campaign, notwithstanding the fact that I started this race as someone who was considered to be a decided underdog, that I would reach, that I would campaign, that I would go wherever I could go, wherever I could meet with people, wherever I could be seen and heard without regard to whether there were votes for me. And in the final analysis, how people might vote in this race is going to be up to them, but they're going to have in me someone who has been committed to being accessible, open, visible, inclusive and direct in my dealings with all groups in the city. So I feel very comfortable that this is something that I will be aggressive about, that I will be mindful of, and that I will work to try to overcome where I come.

John Street

Government Reform:

A: I think you can always do better. I think that we have made significant progress over the course of the last seven years, especially the Department of Licenses and Inspections and other city agencies that have the responsibility for this enforcement are doing much better. You can now go on-line and get information and file certain forms without actually leaving your office. There have been several efforts on the part of the Rendell administration in conjunction with City Council to do complete evaluations of our regulatory environment, all of the requirements that we have. And I think we are doing a lot better, however, at least on a bi-annual basis you have to take another look at everything that we're doing. My expectation is that, when elected Mayor of this city, we will convene a group of people to take a look at everything we're doing with a view toward updating, modernizing, and making sure that we're using the best technology, the best approaches to providing the services that we are obligated to provide as a government through the various city departments and agencies.

Race and Diversity:

A: I believe that every community in this city deserves and needs protection. Many years ago, when I first got into City Council, there was a lot of gay-bashing going on in my district on south 15^th street. And I took a very aggressive position that this was wrong, and the police department of this city needed to be a lot more attentive to that problem. Then in 1980 (was it 81 or 82?) when the gay rights bill as we came to understand it was before the City Council, which eliminated discrimination in housing and employment and those areas, I was firmly in favor of that bill. And then comes a domestic partnership bill and then there's this question. Well I believe that our individual religious views for the exercise of our discretion as elected officials. We need to have sound, basic, good policy reasons for doing what we do. I have consistently opposed gay marriage and registration, and believe that it is not in our best interest as a society to advance those interests. I do, however, believe that there are some issues of fairness in the way administrate our benefits. And although I'm not in support of a registration program I sponsored a bill which provided, and does provide that every employee of the city of Philadelphia has an opportunity to put one person on his or her health benefits that he is ineligible to marry. And what this does, I think, if you want to talk about fundamental fairness and economic fairness, it really treats all city employees alike. If a person is married, legally married, then that person's spouse automatically goes on the benefits.

A: No, I'm not saying that. I do not believe that any new mayor should decide as a matter of policy I'm going to try to undo all the laws that I didn't support. And I think it's particularly important for someone who was a member of the City Council for 19 years, I do not believe that it is in the best interest of the city or the best interest of a new administration to now go through and try to undo any and all laws that were passed that I disagreed with. And I have said that, although did not support those bills, it is not my intention now to go back and try to undo those bills as a matter of public policy.

Neighborhoods:

Q (Ben Drinen): After discussing inequality among neighborhoods, we as a group of citizens decided we want real and influential input into budget allocation for our neighborhoods. Would your administration support this decision, and how would you make it happen?

A: Absolutely. I couldn't agree with you more. I have proposed a major blight elimination, neighborhood improvement program. I have said that I want to create a fund of $250 million that can be used city wide to eliminate blight, to do the kind of neighborhood improvements that I am sure you are interested in. But I've also said that I want a planning process, and I want every neighborhood in this city to be organized so that an organized neighborhood can work with representatives of local government so that we can come together to try to figure out what it is you need in your neighborhood. One of the most troubling things to me in my 19 years in the government has been come into neighborhoods that are in different need of help. They have no infrastructure in those neighborhoods, no community organizations, not a lot of block captains, and the kind of organization that would help you do what needs to be done. I think it's our responsibility as a government to come into your area, of course working with the other elected officials and appointed officials that have a responsibility, and to help organize you in your community so that you can work with us to develop a plan for that community. I also believe that we need to take more of government out into the communities. When I was Council president we had numerous public hearings in neighborhoods and schools and community centers, because I believe that it is our responsibility to communicate with people. One of the great strengths of our city is neighborhoods, and the strong feeling that people have for their neighborhoods, and it is something that I feel very strongly about and I look forward to the opportunity to work with you and your neighborhood as we try to set a common agenda for things that you think are important.

Safety:

Q. (Harry Robinson) One of the statements you made as far as gun control is that you would sue gun manufacturers, how would you fund that program?

A: I think I'm going to be able to get one of our local law firms to file that suit on behalf of the city of Philadelphia as a part of its public service. We have some great law firms in this city who do a lot of work for the city without compensation, and I hope to be able to get an individual law firm or a group of law firms to partner with the city to represent us in what I think is a critical suit on behalf of the citizens of Philadelphia. I mean guns are creating so much problems, and creating such a problem in our neighborhood, I think we absolutely have to do anything and everything we can do to something about it.

Jobs:

A: Sam! We're being put down together! Actually, I have a little bit of experience in working with other governments to not only create jobs, but doing other things that are important to this city. One of the things that I had an opportunity to do during the course of my tenure on City Council was to work to establish the PICA (sp?) legislation. Another thing that I did was work with the General Assembly in Harrisburg as we sought to solve one of the great problems that senior citizens had with increases in assessments. I had a wonderful working relationship with the President of the United States, the Vice President, and the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development when I agreed to serve as the Vice Chairman of the Philadelphia Housing Authority. You know, one of the things that I feel so strongly about in my own support as Mayor of this city is the 19 years of experience that I had, seven of which as a Council president, when I had an opportunity to interact with people in governments all over the commonwealth. I believe that there ought to be an intergovernmental cooperation authority to deal with drugs in the 5 county region. That's going to require that I deal representatives with all of the counties of this city. I've had an opportunity to work with those counties in dealing with SEPTA problem. Some of you know that we actually did have a strike. Of course I was suing them at them time, trying to get that strike stopped, but you develop a certain capacity and understanding about other people and other people's responsibility. And I really feel very good about the experience that I've had, and which I think will stand me in good stead when I have the responsibility to work with people in other governments.

Race and Diversity:

Q (Darcel Caldwell): Our discussion group talked about racial group loyalty and self-reliance as one of the means of addressing the racial situation in this city. Given that, many black citizens would feel obligated to vote for you out of that loyalty. What, if anything, could you do for blacks and the racial situation of this city that Mr. Katz cannot do?

A: Well, I think people in this city all fundamentally want the same thing. It doesn't matter what community you live, it doesn't matter what age group you're in, we all basically want the same thing. People want a decent neighborhood to live in that's free from crime and blight, drugs, and all of the guns and violence. They want to feel safe on the street, they want to be able to go out after dark. And if you're a senior citizen you don't want to know when if I go into the house, I'm stuck until the next day. People want to know that the schools in their neighborhood work for them. They want to be able to send their children to the neighborhood school like the children who live near Smedley School where 80% of the children are scoring at basic level or above. It's just a neighborhood school that's fortunate to have some grants. And people in that community can just send their children to the school. They want to be able to know that there's a job for them there. And that if I do the right thing, and I work hard and I get a decent education, I'm going to have an employment opportunity. And I think that people have a certain amount of pride from public leadership that comes from their community. I think that the Italian-American community in this city took great pride when they saw Frank Rizzo as the Mayor of this city, and I suspect that African-Americans will also take pride when I'm elected Mayor. But I think what we have to do is run a city in a way that is fair and equitable, and we need to make sure that there is room at the table for everybody and everybody benefits. And on that basis, I think that we can bring people together and we can all have a city that we can be proud of. That's what I look forward to. I want people to vote for me because I'm going to be a good Mayor of this city.

A: I think that answers some of them. As has been said, there are racial tensions that occur in this city on a daily basis, and some of that racial tension is within racial groups, some of it is among and between racial groups. I think we have to have a pro-active human relations commission that is on that case. I was very active in the whole problem associated with the 5,000 person march that was planned for Gray's Ferry. And it created all kinds of potential problems for this city. And what I did was I meet with people from all of the various communities that were involved, we tried to work out their differences, we tried to get them to sit down and try to talk with each other. But ultimately we had to take a position that, due to the circumstances that existed at the time, that having that march wasn't a good idea. But we are still working with those people in that neighborhood trying to make sure that they work out their racial differences. I think we'll never ever solve all the problems of race in this city or any other city. But I do think that we need to be very active and pro-active in trying to resolve those problems in a fair and reasonable way.

Jobs:

A: If you force me to choose, I have to walk the plank if I don't choose… I don't want to choose you understand that? I think that probably our greatest prospect is with small businesses. I think we should do everything we can to keep small businesses, large businesses, the like. But I think the greatest prospect for growth and development of jobs in this city is by developing a very clear and specific course of action that encourages people, little people, entrepreneurs to come into our city, set up. And we help them with capital, help with getting locations that are good locations, maybe Keystone opportunity zones and other areas so that we can try to grow an entrepreneurial base in our city, and a jobs base that can be good for us. I think we should try to take our private industry council programs and make sure that we have the kind of job training that's necessary in order to support the growth industries we're courting. So that people will know if I come to the city of Philadelphia, if I locate in one of these areas, then I'll have somebody to work in my plant or in my company. I believe that there's a tremendous opportunity for us to do those kinds of things, particularly in neighborhoods around this city. I talk about blight removal and neighborhood economic development and all that, you have to talk about it all together. If we go through, and if we clean out a lot of the blight, and if we have large tracts of lands, we're going to be able to do some things with that land. We're going to be able to provide economic development activity, but we have to sort of prepare it before we can do it. And I think providing an opportunity for small businesses to come into this city and to grow into larger businesses and employ our people is something that's got to be a priority for this city. And big businesses are also very important!

Neighborhoods:

Q (Octavia Greene): During election time, politicians knock on our doors to ask us to come out and vote. And they can call us on the phone to ask for donations. Would you as Mayor use the same techniques to generate the activism that is needed to improve neighborhood environments that in turn can help enhance jobs that will improve the quality of life, and at the same time build a more solid relationship between you and the citizens of Philadelphia?

A: Absolutely. And I couldn't be more pleased with that question. One of the problems that we have in this government is the disconnect between what we are doing downtown and what happens in neighborhoods. I'd like to use a hypothetical, and I feel so strongly about it. A lady came up to me one day and she said, "Mr. Street oh I love you, I love you, I've known you for a long time, and you know I've been following you and you are doing such a good job, but if you can't get that cap off that fire hydrant I never needed you." She wanted the cap off of the fire hydrant because she wanted to be able to wash down her street. It should be our duty to see to it that cap is off that fire hydrant so that when she organizes that group of young people and they sweep that street she can open up that fire hydrant and wash that street down and feel good about her community. I have said that I do not intend to establish an administration of people who only want to put on stiff shirts and 100% wool suits and go down into a building in Center City and never go out into the neighborhood. People are going to have to make a commitment that I want to know what the neighborhoods in this city are about. They're going to have to make a commitment that periodically and regularly they're going to get out into the neighborhoods, they're going to have interaction with people out there. I want every neighborhood in this city. I want every block to have a block captain. I want to have regular clean-ups. I want regular contact between our government and its people. I think they should be out knocking on doors. There ought to be community meetings. You shouldn't have to send notices down to city hall saying, "we want you out here. We're going to have a protest and if you don't come down here, we're blocking the street." That's a terrible thing. You ought be able to contact your government. You ought to be able to say we have a problem with this policy or that policy, or what's going on in any particular way. And we ought to beat you to the meeting, we ought to be there waiting for you when you get there. Because, you know, I have a little bit of community activism in my background. I have done this, I know about this. And it is a really sad day when you can see us all out in the neighborhoods when it's time to run for election, but when it's time to deliver the services that are important to you, you can't find us. I promise you, you will be able to find us. We will be there in your neighborhood, out in the streets, talking to you about what's important in your community.

Public Safety:

Q (Gertrude Henry) Do you think we would be better off if the next Mayor had a new police commissioner for Philadelphia?

A: No, I think we would be better off if I reappoint Commissioner Timoney, which is what I intend to do. I helped Mr. Timoney here. Actually, when I interviewed him for the first time he told me about his 3 masters degrees, and the fact that he started with the police department just as a kid off of the street. I really had not met anybody that I thought was as qualified to lead this police department as he was. And I think that he's doing a good job, and over the years I've tried to support him and give him the tools he needs to do a better job. And as Mayor this city, I'm going to make sure that Commissioner Timoney and the other people in the Philadelphia police department have everything they need to make you safe in your community. I want a thousand undercover narcotics to roam these streets and to lock up, if necessary, people who want to violate the drug laws. It is unconscionable and untenable that people think they can't use the sidewalks in their neighborhoods. And we're going to do something about it because one of the things that causes people to leave this city, aside from the wage tax and other kinds of problems, one of the major problems that people have is public safety. And a person who doesn't feel safe and isn't safe in his community is going to find a way to get out if he can. And I intend to support Commissioner Timoney and we're going to make this city the safest city in the country.

Government Reform:

A: I think the Mayor of this city ought to have greater flexibility to organize the government. Ed Rendell and I went through this charter change thing, I'm not so sure I'm ready to go back through that. We got killed. What we have today is a managing director and 10 operating departments. And in 1950 that probably was a good way to go, but it's different now. We now take in $400 million a year through a contract with the state to provide mental health services for people in this city. We manage $400 million a year. That's a budget that's bigger than the police department's budget. And yet it is actually a subdivision of the health department the way it is organized. I think we should have a lot more flexibility. I would love to be able to organize the government into different clusters. Because I think you need a public safety cluster, a public services cluster. I think you need a health and human services cluster, and I think you need an economic development cluster. The city doesn't provide for that, the charter doesn't provide for that. We have to get agencies in this government who are responsible for serving the same people, all working together and talking together. It's possible. I once heard a story where one family in this city had 19 caseworkers. 19! It was a large family, two of them were in the juvenile system, a couple of them were in the dependent system. They had 19 people visiting their house. That is terribly, terribly inefficient. That's not today, we're doing a lot better than that today. But if there was one thing that we could do, it would be good if we could have the flexibility to reorganize and to organize the government in just a little different way than is currently provided under the Philadelphia home rule charter.

Education:

Q (Judy Muenzberg): If, as Mayor, you are given the authority to be the chief executive officer of the public schools, how would you use that authority to hold parents, students, teachers, administrators, and government accountable for making the improvements that are needed to make the children successful.

A: Well first of all, I would visit every school in the system personally. Every single school, because I intend what is happening in schools. I also intend to send people to visit those schools on an ad hoc basis, unbeknownst to the people who are running the schools, because we what we need to know is what is really happening in those schools. I believe that the key to quality education in this system, in Philadelphia and state-wide, is increased funding. We have a system that is dramatically underfunded. Anytime we spend $1,900 a year less on the average than that which is spent in the 61 political subdivisions surrounding us, we have a problem. And when our teachers get paid $3,000 a year less in starting salaries… The way to overcome that, I think, is to get additional funding, reduce class size. We need the after-school programs, the evening programs, summer school and the like. Once we put some of those reforms in place, which can only be done with adequate funding, we will be in a position to hold the administrators and teachers and other people more accountable in this system. And I think we can ask them to do more. We can ask them to be held to higher standards, and I think they will be more than willing to do that. But fundamentally I believe we need to implement those things that we know are right, those things that we know work. And I think we'll get a good educational product in this city that will not only help us by keeping children actively engaged in the school system, but it will provide a much brighter long-range future for the city of Philadelphia.