Tag: Brian O’Neill

  • A veto-proof majority of Philadelphia City Council members have signed onto the ‘ICE Out’ proposal

    A veto-proof majority of Philadelphia City Council members have signed onto the ‘ICE Out’ proposal

    All but two of Philadelphia’s 17 City Council members have sponsored a package of legislation aimed at limiting ICE operations in the city, a level of support that could ensure the measures become law even if they are opposed by the mayor.

    The 15 cosponsors, confirmed Thursday by a spokesperson for Councilmember Kendra Brooks, indicate a potentially veto-proof majority of lawmakers back the sweeping “ICE Out” effort.

    Brooks and Councilmember Rue Landau, the proposal’s authors, on Thursday formally introduced the seven bills in the package, which includes measures that would codify Philly’s “sanctuary city” status, ban U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement from operating on city-owned property, and prohibit employment discrimination on the basis of immigration status.

    Landau said that “reaching a majority sends a clear message.”

    “Philadelphia stands with our immigrant communities,” she said in a statement. “At a moment when the federal government is using fear and violence as governing strategies, this level of support shows that Council will do everything we can to protect our immigrant neighbors.”

    Advocates and protesters call for ICE to get out of Philadelphia, in Center City, January 27, 2026.

    The 15 lawmakers on board with Brooks and Landau’s proposal have each cosponsored all seven bills, Brooks’ spokesperson Eric Rosso said. Only Councilmembers Mike Driscoll, a Democrat, and Brian O’Neill, Council’s lone Republican, declined to cosponsor the legislation, he said.

    Driscoll, who represents lower Northeast Philadelphia, said in a statement that the shootings of Renée Good and Alex Pretti by federal agents in Minneapolis this month “caused real pain and fear” and “deserve serious attention.”

    But he indicated that he had concerns about whether the “ICE Out” legislation would hold up in court. Similar legislation, including a California ban on law enforcement officers wearing masks, has faced legal challenges.

    “Locally, we should aim for immigration policies that are focused, proactive and aimed at practical, long-term solutions that ultimately hold up in court,” he said.

    Driscoll said he is open to amended versions of the legislation.

    O’Neill, whose district covers much of Northeast Philadelphia, could not immediately be reached for comment.

    The developments Thursday prompted Mayor Cherelle L. Parker to make one of her first public comments about President Donald Trump’s mass deportation campaign, saying in a statement that her administration “understand[s] the public’s fear of the unknown as it relates to federal policy associated with immigration.”

    “We have a comprehensive approach to public safety, and we will always be prepared for any emergency, as we have consistently demonstrated and will continue to demonstrate,” Parker said. “I have a great deal of faith in our public safety leaders — our subject matter experts — who I asked to be a part of this team and we’re going to do our best to work in an intergovernmental fashion, along with City Council, to keep every Philadelphian safe.”

    Parker said she and her team are reviewing the legislation.

    Advocates and protestors call for ICE to get out of Philadelphia, in Center City, January 27, 2026.

    The mayor has largely avoided confrontation with Trump’s administration over immigration policy, a strategy some have speculated has helped keep Philadelphia from the National Guard deployments or surges of ICE agents seen in Minneapolis, Chicago, Los Angeles, and elsewhere.

    But the popularity of the “ICE Out” package among Council members may force her to wade into the issue. Administration officials will testify when the bills are called up for committee hearings. If they are approved, Parker will have the choice of signing the bills into law, vetoing them, or letting them become law without her signature.

    Council bills require nine votes for passage, and 12 votes are needed to override mayoral vetoes. With 15 Council members already signaling their approval for the bills, chances appear strong that the city’s legislative branch has the numbers to override any opposition.

    Mayor Cherelle L. Parker has avoided confrontation with the White House on immigration issues.

    In a Council speech, Brooks addressed the debate over whether the legislation would draw Trump’s ire.

    “Staying silent is not an option when people are being publicly executed in the streets and the federal government is covering up their murders,” Brooks, of the progressive Working Families Party, said. “I want to be clear: ICE is already here. We don’t want a Minneapolis situation, but I reject the claim of those who are pretending we don’t already have a problem.”

    Council President Kenyatta Johnson, a centrist Democrat and an ally of Parker, shared a similar view.

    “From my perspective, the Trump administration has already been looking at the city,” Johnson told reporters. “Overall, the majority of members of City Council support the legislation, and so we see this legislation being successfully voted out of committee.”

    ICE agents have been arresting suspected undocumented immigrants in the city before and during Trump’s tenure, and his administration has canceled grants for the city and educational and medical institutions in Philadelphia. But the city has not seen a mass deployment of ICE agents or federalized troops.

    Councilmember Anthony Phillips, also a centrist and Parker ally, represents the 9th District, from which the mayor hails.

    “What the ’ICE Out’ legislation ultimately says to Donald Trump,” Phillips said, “is that no matter what you try to do to undermine the health and safety and well-being of Philadelphia citizens, we will stand up to you.”

    Johnson suggested potential legal issues could be ironed out through amendments if needed.

    “The reality is this: This is a moral issue, right?” he said. “And if there are any legality issues that has to be addressed as a body, we’ll work with our members to address it.”

    Next, Johnson will refer the legislation to committee, where members will hold one or more hearings featuring testimony from administration officials, experts, stakeholders, and the public. Council members can also amend the bills in committee.

    Kendra Brooks shown here during a press conference at City Hall to announce a package of bills aimed at pushing back against ICE enforcement in Philadelphia, January 27, 2026.

    Supporters of the legislation packed Council chambers Thursday morning, and many spoke during public comment, ranging from leaders of advocacy organizations to a former immigration judge to immigrants who tearfully pleaded for Council to pass the package swiftly.

    Several Spanish-speaking residents spoke through interpreters; other residents testified on behalf of friends or family members who are undocumented and were fearful to come to City Hall themselves. A school nurse told Council members that her students have asked her what tear gas feels like.

    “The traumatic effects of these [ICE] raids on our children and our families and our communities will last for years and generations to come,” said Jeannine Cicco Barker, a South Philadelphia psychologist who said she is the daughter of immigrants. “These times call for bold, brave new measures to protect our community, and you have a chance to do some of that here. Philly urgently needs these protections.”

    Ethan Tan, who said he is an immigrant and a father of two, said he is fearful for his family and community.

    “To this administration, fear is the point. Alienation is the point. Isolation is the point,” he said. “The ‘ICE Out’ package says to me and immigrants that we may be afraid, but we can show solidarity and resolve anyway.”

  • Philly Council votes against Mayor Parker’s vision for her signature housing plan, signaling a win for progressives

    Philly Council votes against Mayor Parker’s vision for her signature housing plan, signaling a win for progressives

    For almost two years, Mayor Cherelle L. Parker has dominated Philadelphia City Hall with an unbending approach to negotiations.

    On Wednesday, City Council signaled those days may be over.

    During a combative hearing on legislation related to Parker’s signature housing initiative, Council President Kenyatta Johnson on Wednesday afternoon refused to allow a vote on an amendment brought by the Parker administration and instead advanced Council’s version of the proposal over the mayor’s objections.

    In a voice vote, Council’s Committee on Fiscal Stability and Intergovernmental Cooperation approved its own changes to the legislation — authorizing the city to take out $800 million in city bonds to fund Parker’s Housing Opportunities Made Easy, or H.O.M.E., initiative — without considering the mayor’s requested tweaks.

    Councilmembers Brian O’Neill, Anthony Phillips, and Curtis Jones Jr. signaled their support for Parker’s vision by voting against the measure, which now heads to the Council floor for a final passage vote or further amendments, either of which could come as soon as January.

    It is unclear how Johnson’s handling of H.O.M.E. will change the tight working relationship Parker and Johnson have maintained since both took office in January 2024. Wednesday’s vote marked their most contentious public disagreement during their tenures. Both officials still agree on many policy goals and have plenty to gain politically from maintaining their alliance.

    Philadelphia Mayor Cherelle L. Parker stands beside Council President Kenyatta Johnson (left) after finishing her budget address to City Council in Philadelphia City Hall on Thursday, March 13, 2025.

    The dispute between Parker and Council centers on income eligibility thresholds for two of the housing programs that will be funded by bond proceeds: the Basic Systems Repair Program (BSRP), which provides funding for needed home improvements to eligible owners who might be displaced by costly repairs, and the Adaptive Modification Program (AMP), which funds projects to improve mobility for permanently disabled renters and homeowners.

    Parker had structured the H.O.M.E. initiative with unusually high income cutoffs to make its programs more easily accessible to middle-class households, saying they are often left out of city assistance programs despite being crushed by rising costs.

    “The whole debate over income eligibility limits for BSRP and Adaptive Modifications is to make sure that we leave no working Philadelphian and no qualifying Philly rowhome owner excluded from these vital programs,” Parker said in a statement Wednesday. “If we don’t save Philly rowhomes, we’re going to become a city of used-to-be neighborhoods, blocks that used to be nice but now are showing signs of age and decline. I will not allow that to happen — not on my watch as Mayor of Philadelphia.”

    In a win for progressives, Council instead stuck to its plan of prioritizing lower-income Philadelphians.

    Councilmember Jamie Gauthier, who chairs the Committee on Housing, Neighborhood Development and the Homeless, said Wednesday’s vote sent the message “that Council takes its job seriously as a steward of taxpayer money in the city of Philadelphia, that we are not here to just rubber-stamp in a proposal, that we’re here to work together.”

    Change in fortunes for Parker

    Wednesday’s vote appears to mark the first instance of Parker’s hard-line negotiating tactics failing her since she took office. Even when she could not get negotiating counterparts to bend to her will in the past, Parker has largely prevailed.

    Last year, for instance, Council declined to vote on one of Parker’s school board nominees. But the nominee, incumbent board member Joyce Wilkerson, then pulled out a letter from Parker instructing her to remain on the board until the mayor names a replacement, which she still has not done.

    And in July, when the largest union for city workers went on strike to try to squeeze larger raises out of the administration, Parker stuck to her guns amid increasing pressure to fold as trash piled up across the city and 911 wait times grew longer. The union ultimately folded after an eight-day work stoppage with a new contract that closely aligned with Parker’s last offer before the strike began.

    But this time, Parker appears to be out of options to prevent Council from getting its way because she cannot veto another key piece of legislation to keep the housing initiative in motion that needs to pass before the city can issue the bonds. That measure — a resolution setting the first-year budget for H.O.M.E. that received preliminary approval in a Council committee last week — could see final approval as soon as Thursday.

    In a last-ditch effort to rally public support for her version of how the H.O.M.E. bonds should be spent, Parker on Sunday barnstormed across 10 Philadelphia churches.

    “We’ve got to take care of the people who are most in need, but we can’t penalize the people who are going to work every day, pay their taxes, contribute to the city, and they can’t benefit from home improvement programs,” she said.

    Mayor Cherelle L. Parker speaks to the crowd at The Church of Christian Compassion in the Cobbs Creek neighborhood of West Philadelphia on Sunday, Dec. 7, 2025. Parker visited 10 churches in Philadelphia on Sunday to share details about her H.O.M.E. housing plan.

    That maneuver did not appear to go over well with lawmakers, who likely did not appreciate the mayor encouraging their constituents to oppose Council’s version of the plan.

    Even before chief of staff Tiffany W. Thurman presented Parker’s amendment at Wednesday’s hearing, lawmakers sounded off, with Gauthier saying the administration was spreading “misinformation” and Councilmember Nicolas O’Rourke calling Parker’s approach “Trumpian.”

    “It was in response to misinformation being spread during that tour,” said Gauthier, who, along with fellow progressive Councilmember Rue Landau, led the charge to lower the income eligibility thresholds included in H.O.M.E.

    Gauthier noted that Council’s version of the bill still increases those thresholds beyond what is offered in existing programs.

    “Obviously, the mayor, all of us, have the right to go and talk to our constituents,” she said, “but we have to be operating from a fact-based perspective, and telling folks that the Council proposal excludes them is not factual.”

    No vote on Parker amendment

    The legislative process for approving the city bond issuance — the centerpiece of Parker’s H.O.M.E. initiative, which she first proposed in March — has been long and tortured.

    Council initially approved the bond authorization in June, but lawmakers at that time inserted a provision requiring the administration to get their approval for annual budget resolutions determining how the proceeds will be spent.

    Johnson delayed a vote on the first H.O.M.E. budget resolution for months before allowing it to be approved last week by the Committee of the Whole. But lawmakers made major changes over the mayor’s objections, including granting themselves the right to set income thresholds for the initiative’s programs.

    It was the first sign that Council was serious about enacting its own ideas even if Parker was not on board and, in Council’s view, would not negotiate. In a twist, lawmakers took their latest stand Wednesday at a time when the mayor’s team came to the table with a significant, albeit last-minute, counteroffer.

    Council’s changes to the eligibility requirements for BSRP and AMP would require 90% of the H.O.M.E. bond proceeds for those programs to be spent on households making 60% of Philadelphia’s area median income, which is about $71,640 for a family of four.

    Thurman on Tuesday proposed a compromise in which only 60% of bond money would be set aside for those households. She told lawmakers that Parker, in part, wants to ensure H.O.M.E. helps city workers, who are required to live in Philadelphia but often struggle to make ends meet on municipal salaries. (Parker pointed to the H.O.M.E. plan during the strike as evidence she backed city workers despite opposing higher wages.)

    Johnson responded that he hopes “one day our city workers are getting paid enough where they don’t have to sign up” for assistance programs.

    “You know as well as I do we agree,” Thurman replied, prompting Johnson to cut her off.

    “I’m not acknowledging you yet,” Johnson said, referring to a Council hearing procedure in which the chair must recognize speakers.

    Tiffany Thurman, Mayor Parker’s chief of staff, takes questions from Council members in 2024.

    Parker’s latest offer, which came months into the standoff over H.O.M.E., appears to have been too little, too late.

    Phillips — who voted for the Council budget resolution last week but said he has since changed his mind to support Parker’s vision — wanted to call up the administration’s amendment for a vote, he said in an interview.

    “This week I changed my mind because that’s where my mind really has been,” said Phillips, who represents the Northwest Philadelphia-based 9th District that Parker held when she was on Council. “The 9th District neighbors — they’ve made abundantly clear that our housing policy needs to reflect them. … They’re long-term homeowners, residents who are on fixed incomes, multigenerational families.”

    Under Council rules, only Johnson can call on members to put forward amendments in committee. But instead he blocked it, prompting Jones, Parker’s most vocal ally on Council, to protest.

    “We should do the right thing always, even in spite of its inconvenience and time,” Jones said during Council. “Resolutions and amendments need to be introduced so that they can get the light of day and be heard.”

    Johnson said he pushed through Council’s version because the mayor’s administration did not engage with him about its new proposal ahead of the meeting.

    “Just for the record … I had not officially seen any official amendment prior to this actual hearing,” Johnson said. “The administration just showed up.”

    Despite Wednesday’s vote, the fight over H.O.M.E. may not be over. Councilmember Mike Driscoll, a Parker ally who voted to advance the bond authorization, signaled there may be further changes.

    “I wanted to keep the HOME initiative process moving,” Driscoll said in a statement, “but still hope to influence a reasonable solution which includes program support for row home Philadelphians.”

  • Northeast Philly’s Franklin Mills mall is for sale

    Northeast Philly’s Franklin Mills mall is for sale

    Northeast Philadelphia’s Franklin Mall — better known by its original name, Franklin Mills — is for sale after years of plummeting valuation, occupancy, and visitor numbers.

    A listing on the website of real estate brokerage Jones Lang LaSalle (JLL) includes possible uses a new owner can consider, including industrial and office development. The parcels including Sam’s Club and Walmart are not included in the sale.

    “Franklin Mall presents the opportunity to acquire meaningful control of more than 137 acres … in a densely populated location that may support additional densification and redevelopment,” the listing reads.

    The move comes amid a wave of mall sales and redevelopments in the region, with demolition and residential construction a common fate for many struggling shopping centers.

    Over 68% of Franklin Mall is occupied, which could be an incentive for continued retail operations. But sales and visitor numbers have been falling for years, and JLL reports the average existing lease lasts for only another 1.7 years.

    If a new use is sought, the mile-long, one-story structure would be difficult to repurpose.

    “I think it’s unlikely to be a shopping mall” again, said Jerry Roller, founder of the design firm JKRP and a longtime architect in Philadelphia. “What could it be? Obviously, residential. It might be a warehouse. It’s essentially a large vacant piece of land. It was fairly inexpensive when it was built, so it’s not hard to demolish.”

    The hundred acres of land that Franklin Mills sits on at the edge of Far Northeast Philadelphia is zoned for auto-oriented commercial use.

    JLL’s listing advertises the site’s suitability for industrial redevelopment.

    “The property’s infill location and highway access make it a strong candidate for redevelopment into a modern industrial facility,” the listing reads. The zoning “could provide a basis for an investor to pursue the development of up to 1.4 million square feet of new warehouse space.”

    The residential redevelopment opportunities for the site could be aided by a promised 20-year property tax abatement for the conversion or demolition of outmoded commercial buildings into housing, which Mayor Cherelle L. Parker’s administration promises next year following enabling legislation from Harrisburg.

    But the existing zoning would not allow that, so a residential project would need to win the permission of the city’s Zoning Board of Adjustment or have the land-use rules changed legislatively by Councilmember Brian O’Neill.

    The mile-long Franklin Mills mall drew Christmas-size crowds at its opening in May of 1989.

    Tribulations of a Northeast Philly icon

    The 36-year-old, 1.8-million-square-foot facility at Knights and Woodhaven Roads is the second largest mall in the Philadelphia area after King of Prussia. But while its larger cousin remains a dominant retail force, Franklin Mall has been struggling for years.

    The mall opened in 1989 to great fanfare as the largest outlet mall ever, with an iconic zigzag-shaped concourse that stretched for 1.2 miles.

    In its 1990s heyday, it attracted 20 million visitors annually. The latest numbers, provided by JLL, are 5.6 million visitors a year.

    In 2007, in retrospect near the end of Franklin Mills’ golden era, the property and the rest of the Mills Corp. was taken over by Simon Property Group, the largest mall owner in the country. The new ownership group rehabbed the property in 2014, although there were already signs Simon was distancing itself by moving Franklin Mills (renamed Philadelphia Mills) into a different balance sheet category than its core properties.

    Simon’s loan on the property had been intermittently distressed since 2012. An April 2024 report from real estate analytics firm Morningstar Credit was headlined “Legacy Philly Mall Back to Special Servicing for the Umpteenth Time.”

    Shoppers stroll through the Franklin Mills mall in 2014.

    The 2007 loan still had an outstanding balance of almost $250 million when it came to maturity in July 2024. Simon stepped away from the day-to-day operations at that time, with Philadelphia-based OPEX CRE Management appointed as receiver of the distressed property. The name was changed to Franklin Mall because Mills was trademarked by Simon.

    Last year Franklin Mall’s appraised value was $76 million, a precipitous decline from its $201 million valuation in 2012 and $370 million in 2007. According to Morningstar Credit, a new appraisal is likely in the next month.

    Full financials haven’t been publicly updated since last year, but at that time, the cash flow for the property was $9.5 million, the lowest since Simon took over in 2007. That’s down from 2019, when cash flow was $17.5 million, according to Morningstar, and from $11 million in 2022.

    According to Morningstar, the latest reports from the special servicer for the property, Greystone Servicing Co., say cash flow is even lower this year and occupancy has fallen to 65.4%.

    Possible reuses for Franklin Mills

    Franklin Mall’s for-sale status comes as some old-school regional shopping destinations are declining.

    While some of its counterparts like King of Prussia and the Cherry Hill Mall are still thriving, there has been a wave of sales and redevelopments of area malls as the nature of retail evolves.

    Some ailing malls have been purchased on the cheap, allowing their new owners to reinvest and refurbish the property in its previous mold.

    “In terms of using the buildings that are there, it’s a challenge because they are generally big box retail, and they’ve got a center mall, which is completely out of fashion,” Roller said. “Could somebody, if they had the right tenants, recreate the mall? Turn it inside out, open the thing up?”

    “Maybe it’s possible,” Roller said. But “I don’t see a lot of uses for the buildings that are there right now.”

    The redevelopment of Exton Square Mall is in legal limbo.

    When regional malls are redeveloped, more commonly, the retail options are reduced with much of the old structure demolished. Diverse new uses often take a faded shopping center’s place.

    Two weeks ago, the sale of Plymouth Meeting Mall was announced with the new owner planning residential development. The contentious redevelopment of the Exton Square Mall would also see a burst of residential development and expanded healthcare options — if the owner can win a lawsuit against the township.

    In New Jersey, the Echelon, Moorestown, and Burlington Center malls have or are going through a variety of demolition and redevelopment options. The commonality is that residential building is a part of all three plans.

    At Franklin Mall, redevelopment would likely require demolition of the existing building.

    “Ultimately, it may just be a piece of land” for sale, said Roller.

    JLL’s listing, however, pitches the property as either redevelopment or continued mall use.

    “This offering presents prospective purchasers with the opportunity to acquire a strategically positioned super regional shopping center with significant upside potential and/or redevelopment opportunity,” it reads.

    JLL’s managing directors on the sale are John Plower, David Monahan, and Jim Galbally.

  • Philly has had a ‘soda tax’ since 2017. One lawmaker wants the city to consider repealing it.

    Philly has had a ‘soda tax’ since 2017. One lawmaker wants the city to consider repealing it.

    City Councilmember Jimmy Harrity wants to revisit the contentious debate that led to the 2017 creation of Philadelphia’s sweetened beverage tax, arguing that the levy has cost the city jobs and will eventually prove insufficient to pay for the programs it was enacted to support, such as subsidized prekindergarten.

    “We‘re going to keep on pulling more money out of the general fund each year, taking away from other programs,” Harrity, a Democrat, said Monday at a hearing of Council’s Labor and Civil Service Committee, which he chairs. “If we were in business and these numbers were the numbers of the business, we wouldn’t be in business long.”

    The tax, which is paid by distributors of sweetened beverages sold in Philadelphia, is 1.5 cents per ounce. Council approved it in 2016 despite vociferous opposition from the beverage industry and Teamsters Local 830, which testified Monday the tax has led to 1,000 of its members who drove trucks for distributors losing work.

    Harrity, an ally of the Teamsters, noted that revenue from the tax has declined as Philadelphians either drink fewer sweetened beverages or find ways to purchase them outside the city. The tax produced about $73.4 million in the 2023 fiscal year, but only $64.4 million last year, he said.

    A Council staffer arranges a table of sugary drinks before Councilmember Jimmy Harrity (not shown) holds a hearing in City Council Monday, Oct. 27, 2025 on former Mayor Jim Kenney’s tax on sweetened beverages.

    For Harrity, that means that the city should consider eliminating the “soda tax,” as it is widely known, in favor of a more “sustainable” funding stream. He did not offer any alternatives.

    But based on his colleagues’ reactions, it is unlikely the tax will be reconsidered in a serious way any time soon.

    Several Council members, public health advocates, and childcare industry representatives defended the tax, which was championed by former Mayor Jim Kenney. They noted that research by the University of Pennsylvania indicates it has been a public health success story that has helped to keep down obesity rates.

    Marcy Boroff with Children First dresses as a coke can for a City Council hearing Monday, Oct. 27, 2025 on former Mayor Jim Kenney’s tax on sweetened beverages. She was there to support the tax. Children First advocates for policy changes to improve child health, education, and welfare, especially for low-income children. .

    And they stressed its critical role in paying for the three initiatives that Kenney launched alongside the tax: PHL Pre-K, which provides free childcare to 5,250 kids; community schools, which offer a multitude of services to families in 20 Philly schools; and the Rebuild program, which renovates and improves recreation centers and playgrounds.

    “We have to make tough decisions that will actually benefit the greater good, and that’s what we did here,” Democratic Councilmember Rue Landau said during the hearing, adding that “the majority of us up here on this panel think this is a great investment.”

    ‘What we always intended’

    Mayor Cherelle L. Parker, a Democrat who voted for the tax as a Council member, also remains supportive of it.

    “We would not have been able to fund these programs without that beverage tax money,” said city Finance Director Rob Dubow, who has held his role under Parker, Kenney, and former Mayor Michael A. Nutter. Nutter twice tried unsuccessfully to implement a “soda tax” before Kenney succeeded.

    Dubow told lawmakers that the decline in the tax’s revenue over time was always part of the plan and that city leaders intended for the regular city budget to make up the difference for funding Rebuild, pre-K, and community schools when they created the tax. The moment when the soda tax began taking in less money than the city pays out for the three programs it helped launch was the 2024 fiscal year, he said.

    “We pay for it out of the general fund, which is what we always intended we would do,” Dubow said.

    This year, Rebuild, pre-K, and community schools are projected to cost $110 million, Dubow said. Of that, $73 million pays for the 5,250 slots in the city’s pre-K program.

    Preschoolers and their caregivers attend a City Council hearing held by Councilmember Jimmy Harrity Monday, Oct. 27, 2025 on former Mayor Jim Kenney’s tax on sweetened beverages. The tax funds the city’s universal pre-kindergarten program

    ‘Why not Taj Mahals?’

    Councilmember Brian O’Neill was the only other Council member besides Harrity to vocally criticize the tax at Monday’s hearing.

    O’Neill, Council’s lone Republican, noted that Council members have traditionally had control over capital funding for Philadelphia Parks and Recreation projects in their districts. That money, he noted, is split evenly among the 10 district Council members.

    Rebuild, he lamented, instead gives the power to decide which projects move forward to the mayor’s administration. Consequently, he said, the program has produced uneven results and overbudget and unnecessarily ambitious playground and recreation center renovations.

    “This program — Rebuild, they call it — they didn’t decide to bring playgrounds up to some minimum level where people over the years may not have spent their money well,” O’Neill said. “They decided to build Taj Mahals in many cases. … You know what happens when you build a playground and spend tons of money on it? … All the playgrounds around it look terrible.“

    Councilmember Brian J. O’Neill (center) speaks during a hearing in City Council Monday, Oct. 27, 2025 on former Mayor Jim Kenney’s tax on sweetened beverages. Behind him, front to rear, are: Councilmembers Kendra Brooks, Jimmy Harrity, Nina Ahmad, and Rue Landau.

    That comment did not go over well with some of his colleagues.

    “My community benefited from a rec center that was through the Rebuild program,” said Councilmember Kendra Brooks, a member of the progressive Working Families Party who lives in Nicetown. “It’s not a Taj Mahal. It’s a quality rec center in the middle of North Philadelphia. It does not have everything, because I personally went and bought a refrigerator.”

    And Councilmember Nina Ahmad, a Democrat, questioned why building grandiose rec centers would be a problem in the first place.

    “Why not Taj Mahals for all our folks? Why not have the best-quality rec centers so our children want to go there, our children want to spend time there?” Ahmad said. “We live in a first-world country and yet we are begging for scraps for our youngest citizens.”