City Council passes legislation allowing Sixers arena to be considered

Philadelphia City Council on Thursday they passed two pieces of legislation related to the proposed arena for the 76ers City centerthough the measures were largely procedural and do nothing more than allow lawmakers to continue considering the bill.

However, it marked the first time that the 17 members of the Council had voted legislation related to the arena project, one of the most controversial measures The city’s legislative arm has been considering it for years.

Lawmakers voted, 11-5, to pass two resolutions that effectively give the body the green light to hold hearings on a package of 11 more pieces of legislation related to Sixers Arena. Several members who opposed the legislation criticized the process as rushed. They tried unsuccessfully to put the resolutions on hold.

“I want to be clear that I’m undecided (on the arena), but I’m really opposed to the process,” the city councilor said. Jamie Gauthiera progressive Democrat who is considered to be one of the few potential swing votes.

Most members said they remained undecided and that their vote on Thursday did not mean their position on the matter was final.

Here’s what you need to know about the legislation that passed Thursday.

What does the Sixers arena legislation do?

The council passed two resolutions, each with accompanying bills to be voted on at a later date, likely next month. Resolutions only initiate the bill review process. The two associated bills would follow:

Remove the arena site from an existing tax increment financing district covering the area currently occupied by the Fashion District mall. In areas covered by TIF, the city can use a portion of the tax revenue to support development and job growth. But if the Council approves the arena, the site will be on city-owned land and not be taxed.
Remove the arena site from an existing neighborhood improvement district that similarly covers the mall site. In such districts, the city may levy special assessments on commercial properties to finance neighborhood improvements.

Why did the 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 this, the Council had to adopt the resolutions considered on Thursday to initiate the process of hearings on the bills that would actually make the changes.

Bills and other legislation that must be passed for the arena project to move forward will be considered during public hearings next month.

How did members vote and why?

Eleven of the Council’s 17 members voted Thursday in favor of the legislation. The five who voted against include a trio of members who have previously expressed opposition to the arena: Council members Kendra Brooks and Nicolas O’Rourkeof the Progressive Working Families Party and Councilman Jeffrey “Jay” Young, who represents North PhiladelphiaHis 5th District.

Brooks said in a statement that “there was no need to take a procedural vote to meet the arbitrary deadlines of a billionaire owner when we have dates set for public input in two weeks.”

He also voted against the legislation Gauthier represents West Philadelphiaand Councilman Rue Landau, a Democrat who represents the city at large. Landau said she was “deeply concerned about how quickly this process is proceeding.”

Local councillor Mark Squillawho represents the district where the arena would be located and is the lead sponsor of the legislation related to the project, was absent Thursday and did not vote.

Other members who remain undecided said Thursday’s vote was purely procedural.

“Today’s vote is not an actual arena vote or anything like that,” said Isaiah Thomas, the Democratic majority whip.

What did arena opponents and supporters say about the legislation?

A sizable contingent of arena opponents attended Thursday’s Council meeting wearing “no arena” t-shirts and holding “don’t play” signs. Many were there on his behalf Chinatownthe historic district that would be adjacent to the new arena.

More than a dozen people testified in opposition, most of whom said the trial was rushed. One speaker said the Council was trying to “shove this beast down our throats”.

“You’re 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 Asia Pacific Islander Political Alliance.

Perhaps the most moving testimony came from Debbie Wei, a longtime activist opposed to the arena project who sheriff’s deputies removed from Council chambers last week for chanting and waving a sign during the legislative session.

Wei, who was executed last week but not arrested, said on Thursday that she was “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 was going to “behave”.

“I’ve never been so disrespected and I’ve been protesting in these rooms for decades,” Wei said. “This is how Chinatown and communities throughout 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 were not on board Thursday, namely members of the Philadelphia Board of Builders and Trades, who often attended meetings wearing pro-arena T-shirts.

Jeremy Blatstein, a real estate developer, testified in favor of the legislation, saying it was “the next step in really changing Market Street.”

“The market street around the fashion district is a problem area and needs to be changed,” he said. “The arena is what will be the catalyst for that.”

Inquirer staff writer Sean Collins Walsh contributed reporting.