City Council passed the first legislation related to the proposed Sixers arena. Here’s what it means.
The measures were largely procedural and do little more than allow lawmakers to continue considering the project. “This project is not a ‘done deal,’ ” one member said.
/cloudfront-us-east-1.images.arcpublishing.com/pmn/VXPXRO45ZFE7JHQIHPRQ3UI5MA.jpg)
Philadelphia City Council on Thursday passed two pieces of legislation related to the proposed 76ers arena in Center City, though the measures were largely procedural and do little more than allow lawmakers to continue considering the project.
Still, it marked the first time that Council members voted on legislation related to the arena project, one of the most controversial measures the city’s legislative arm has considered in years.
Lawmakers voted, 11-5, to pass two resolutions that effectively green-light Council to hold hearings on 11 more pieces of legislation related to the Sixers arena planned at 10th and Market Streets. Several members who opposed the legislation criticized the process as rushed. Some had unsuccessfully tried to place the resolutions on hold.
“I want to be clear that I’m undecided [on the arena], but I really object to the process,” said Councilmember Jamie Gauthier, a progressive Democrat who is considered to be among a handful of potential swing votes.
State law necessitates specific waiting periods for the measures, so the resolutions had to be passed this week if Council is to have enough time to potentially vote on the arena legislation before its last meeting this year on Dec. 12.
Most members said that they remain undecided and that their vote Thursday does not signify a position. To pass legislation, Council needs nine votes, a majority of the 17-member body.
Here’s what to know about the legislation that passed Thursday.
What does the Sixers arena legislation do?
Council passed two resolutions, each of which has companion bills that will be voted on later, likely next month. The resolutions just initiate the process of considering the bills. The two associated bills would:
Remove the site of the arena from an existing Tax Increment Financing District that covers the area, which is currently occupied by the Fashion District mall. In areas covered by TIFs, the city can use a portion of tax revenue to support development and job growth. But if Council approves the arena, the site will be on city-owned land and won’t be taxed.
Remove the site of the arena from an existing Neighborhood Improvement District, which similarly covers the site of the mall. In such districts, the city can levy special assessments on business properties to fund neighborhood improvement.
» READ MORE: Councilmember Mark Squilla proposes a plan to protect Chinatown from displacement by the new Sixers arena
Council President Kenyatta Johnson said Thursday’s action was “not a final vote on the arena.” Council will be off next week due to the general election, and when it returns, “we’ll begin the actual real process of moving forward and having the opportunity to address the proposal regarding the arena,” he said.
Why did City Council vote on the legislation now?
State laws and regulations govern TIF districts and neighborhood improvement districts, dictating the process the city must use to consider changes to those overlays. Because of that, Council had to pass the resolutions considered Thursday to initiate the process of holding hearings on the bills that would actually make the changes.
The bills and other pieces of legislation that must be passed for the arena project to move forward will be considered during public hearings next month. Council is planning multiple daylong hearings but has not released a schedule.
How did the members vote and why?
Eleven of Council’s 17 members voted in favor of the legislation Thursday. The five who voted against it include three members who have previously expressed some opposition to the arena: Kendra Brooks and Nicolas O’Rourke, of the progressive Working Families Party, and Jeffrey “Jay” Young, who represents North Philadelphia’s 5th District.
Brooks said in a statement that “there was no need to take a procedural vote to satisfy a billionaire owner’s arbitrary timelines when we have dates set for public input in two weeks.” And Young, who described himself as “not a hard no,” said too many questions remain for Council to start the hearings process.
“In the history of stadiums or arena deals in the country, not one has produced the benefits that they say they were going to produce,” Young said.
Also voting against the legislation were Gauthier, who represents West Philadelphia, and Rue Landau, a Democrat who represents the city at large. Landau said she has not yet taken a position on the arena but is “deeply concerned about how quickly this process is going.”
Johnson chided members at the end of the Council session that lawmakers have technical staff at their disposal if they have concerns about the process of passing any piece of legislation before it comes up for a vote.
“Some members actually did their homework and actually provided recommendations in terms of what they want to actually see in terms of this proposal,” Johnson said.
» READ MORE: Five things to know about the proposed 76ers arena deal negotiated by Mayor Parker
Other members who remain undecided said they voted for the legislation Thursday because it was purely procedural.
“Today’s vote is not an actual vote on the arena or anything like that,” said Democratic Majority Whip Isaiah Thomas.
Mark Squilla, who represents the district where the arena would be located and is the prime sponsor of the legislation related to the project, was absent Thursday and did not vote.
What did arena opponents and supporters say about the legislation?
A sizable contingent of arena opponents attended Council’s session Thursday in shirts reading “no arena” and holding signs that said “don’t get played.” Many were there on behalf of Chinatown, the historic neighborhood that would be adjacent to the new arena.
More than a dozen people testified in opposition, most of whom said the process felt rushed. One speaker said Council was trying to “shove this beast down our throats.”
“You are looking at the beginning of a process where legislation is being pushed forward without the consent or any agreement of the community,” said Jenny Zhang, a Chinatown resident and an organizer with the Asian Pacific Islander Political Alliance.
Also testifying was Debbie Wei, a longtime activist who opposes the arena project and whom sheriff’s deputies removed from Council’s chambers last week for chanting and waving a sign during the legislative session.
Wei, who was not arrested, said Thursday that she had been “treated as a target.” She added that when she returned to City Hall on Thursday morning, she was asked by a security officer if she would “behave.”
“I have never been this disrespected, and I have protested in these chambers for decades,” Wei said. “This is the way that Chinatown and communities all across this city have been treated: literally thrown out of here while you roll out the red carpet and rush a process you don’t understand for a bunch of billionaires who will never live here.”
Some of the most visible supporters of the arena project didn’t attend Thursday’s hearing, namely members of the Philadelphia Building Trades and Construction Council, who have often attended meetings wearing pro-arena T-shirts.
Jeremy Blatstein, a real estate developer, testified in favor of the legislation, saying it’s “the next step to really changing Market Street.”
“Market Street around the Fashion District is a failing area and needs to change,” he said. “The arena is what’s going to be a catalyst for this.”
Staff writer Sean Collins Walsh contributed to this article.