What Cherelle Parker’s victory could mean for the proposed Sixers arena

Unlike the playoff debacle last Sunday in Boston, Tuesday turned out to be a pretty good day for the Sixers.

In choosing former City Councilmember Cherelle Parker as the presumptive next mayor, Philadelphia Democrats picked a leader who has spoken positively about the team’s highly contested plan to build a $1.3 billion arena on the edge of Chinatown.

And they selected a candidate who was ushered to the nomination with heavy backing from organized labor, the same unions who salivate over the 9,000 construction jobs the team has promised.

The Sixers declined to comment on what Parker’s election could mean for their plans. Efforts to reach Parker campaign officials were unsuccessful.

But signs of how she may approach one of the biggest and most controversial development proposals in recent history appear in the ways Parker has talked about the arena and in the insights of government observers.

“She’s going to look at the big picture, who it’s going to impact, looking at East Market Street as a commercial corridor,” said Mustafa Rashed, a veteran political consultant whose firm represents the company that owns the Wells Fargo Center, where the Sixers are an unhappy tenant. “But it goes right back to the community. Everything Cherelle has done in Northwest [Philadelphia] with commercial development has been about what’s best for the community.”

The privately funded arena would rise four blocks from City Hall, on the footprint of 10th to 11th and Market to Filbert Streets, claiming the bus station, part of the Fashion District mall and, at Cuthbert Street, abutting a Chinatown neighborhood that’s been outspoken in its opposition.

The project is endorsed by the Philadelphia Building and Construction Trades Council, a coalition of politically powerful labor unions, and the Eastern Atlantic States Regional Council of Carpenters, whose deep pockets have helped elect mayors and governors across the country.

Both were among the labor organizations that supported Parker.

“She’s got strong backing from the building trades, and the trade unions have come out in strong support of the project,” said a former Nutter administration official, who asked to remain anonymous because of their current employment obligations. “At the same time, she sounds like she has a high sensitivity to community interests, and not just in Chinatown.”

Others harbor doubts.

“I have some concerns, in particular, the overwhelming support from the building trades for the Democratic nominee — and the building trades very much want this project done,” said Bishop Dwayne Royster, executive director of POWER Interfaith, which has supported Chinatown’s fight. “How about the voice of the people? We have a very iconic Chinatown. It’s not worth any amount of money to risk losing that cultural community.”

When news of the Sixers’ proposal broke in July, then-Councilmember Parker tweeted that she was “excited by the opportunities to bring the 76ers downtown.”

The project would “create thousands of family-sustaining, union jobs that will lift Black and brown Philadelphians out of poverty.” If done with a robust community-engagement process and a commitment to workforce diversity, she said, the arena could be transformational.

“Reflexive opposition,” Parker said then, “is a luxury that our city simply cannot afford and one that I will not indulge.”

But in April, at the Center City Business Association’s mayoral forum, Parker struck a less definitive tone.

“I have not publicly affirmed whether I’m for or against,” she said. “I do know that residents in any neighborhood have a right to have a say in what land use takes place in their community. With that being said, when we’re talking about the poorest big city in the nation, before we [express] reflexive opposition, how about we actually know the details about what is being proposed?”

To many in Chinatown, the Sixers’ proposal represents the latest in a half-century of big, unwanted development projects. They say an arena would generate traffic and parking problems, and drive a wave of gentrification and displacement that would ultimately destroy the neighborhood.

This week, Chinatown community members called Parker’s win concerning, but not a focus of their campaign to stop the arena.

Yes, many would have preferred the nomination of Helen Gym, the candidate who was most publicly skeptical of the Sixers’ plans. But they’re more worried, people said, about what they called deception by developers and elected officials, including an under-the-radar legislative provision that would have made it easier to close Filbert Street near the site.

“This project has been plagued with a series of incidents that raised mistrust from the community, that the community’s concerns aren’t sincerely being addressed,” said Debbie Wei, cofounder of Asian Americans United, an advocacy group. “Government forces and private forces are aligned together against our community.”

On Election Day, campaign literature appeared that featured photos of Parker and City Councilmember Mark Squilla and urged, “Build 76 Place. Save Market East!”

Squilla said that he was surprised by the door-hangers — paid for by a super PAC funded by Local 98 of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers — and that he remains undecided on the arena, which would be located in his 1st District.

The union said the fliers were not meant to imply that Parker or Squilla supported the arena but to encourage them to do so.

The Sixers want to leave the venue where they have played since 1996 to build what they say would be a majestic downtown arena — with what promises to be a challenging approval process ahead.

“Cherelle has said she’s a fan of equitable development that’s considerate of what the neighbors want,” said Rashed, who has known Parker for 15 years but was not involved in any candidate’s campaign. “It’s clear what Chinatown wants.”

Rashed is president and CEO of Bellevue Strategies, a communications and lobbying firm that represents Comcast Spectacor, which owns the Wells Fargo Center and the Flyers hockey team.

Parker, 50, is poised to become Philadelphia’s 100th mayor after winning the decisive Democratic primary. In November, she’ll face Republican David Oh in a general election in which she’s heavily favored, given the Democrats 7-1 advantage in voter registration.

Technically, the mayor holds no direct say over whether plans for the arena can proceed. In fact, a single City Council member, Squilla, possesses more authority because the tradition of councilmanic prerogative grants him veto power.

Yet the mayor can influence the outcome in at least three important ways.

One, the mayor holds the political power to grant or withhold assistance to Council members — to encourage them to move in one direction or another by making their work and lives easier or harder.

Squilla won’t be immune from that.

Councilmanic prerogative gives the 10 members who represent geographic areas the ultimate say on land-use decisions in their districts. But Squilla will have to weigh how his action cuts with the new mayor, knowing she could be in office for up to eight years.

Second, the mayor holds the power of the bully pulpit, the ability to speak and be heard on any issue, and to use the platform of the office to rouse, influence and lead public opinion.

Third, the mayor is the boss of the city bureaucracy, including the agencies that would play key roles in reviewing the arena proposal.

That power has been displayed before.

In October 2018, an Arizona-based agency, VisionQuest, planned to confine 60 undocumented immigrant children at a facility in North Philadelphia, angering advocates who said the sanctuary city of Philadelphia should never accept it.

Kenney administration officials called the plan illegal and pledged to “vigorously apply the law.”

The Department of Licenses and Inspections investigated the site, then issued a notice of violation, leading to appeals and a VisionQuest lawsuit against the city.

By the time VisionQuest won the legal right to proceed in November 2019, it had been fighting the city for more than a year. The shelter never opened.

A big difference between then and now was that VisionQuest’s plan was opposed across Philadelphia, by city officials, activists, union leaders, Logan residents and Council members.

Today most Democratic voters don’t want the Sixers arena — 51% were opposed in a pre-election poll by Emerson College Polling/PHL17, compared with 30% in favor and 19% unsure.

The Sixers insist the project will be a huge benefit for the city, drawing foot traffic, spending and businesses to a stretch of East Market Street that’s defined by boarded-up windows and empty storefronts. Last year, economists who reviewed more than 130 studies found clear evidence that sports stadiums and arenas do not generate strong economic benefits for host communities.

Some African American pastors endorse the arena as a fount of needed jobs, while others reject it as harmful. The African American Chamber of Commerce of Pennsylvania, New Jersey and Delaware also has voiced support.

Wei and other Chinatown supporters want to meet with Parker, while focusing on the wishes of the community. Last month organizers delivered more than 15,000 signatures on petitions opposing the arena to City Council.

“Ultimately, our target is the hearts and minds of Philadelphia,” Wei said. “There’s no specific political target. It’s the will of the people. That should be what holds the politicians accountable.”