Foundation separation. Cracked masonry. Failing floor joists. A building so compromised that city officials said it posed “immediate danger” to human life.
That violation is just the tip of the iceberg. I know this because I have lived it. On Aug. 23, my wife noticed a large crack forming in our living room ceiling. We alerted management through their portal, and I went to their on-site office to report it. Less than 24 hours later, at 12:06 a.m., the entire ceiling collapsed.
Residents speak during a demonstration organized to protest against the living conditions at Brith Sholom House apartments in Philadelphia in April 2024.
Fortunately, we had renters’ insurance. While management took their time deciding what to do, we stayed in the apartment under the exposed ceiling until our insurance finally booked us a hotel. After two days of waiting, we were moved temporarily so repairs could be made. But that displacement came with costs: For eight days, we paid out of pocket for meals and essentials while living in the hotel.
Nevertheless, when we returned home, a notice was taped to our door: “Overdue rent.”
Management knew we were displaced because of conditions they failed to address. And still, they badgered us for late rent — as though the collapse was an inconvenience tothem, rather than a danger to us.
A citywide crisis
Unfortunately, my story isn’t unusual. My neighbors have filed a class-action lawsuit against the owners and managers of the property due to the complex-wide dangerous conditions described in an “unsafe structure” L&I violation. This lawsuit reflects a mounting rental safety crisis across Philadelphia.
Philadelphians deserve safe and healthy homes, tenants deserve roofs and ceilings that are secure, floors that don’t buckle, and air that doesn’t make their children sick. We have laws on the books intended to address these issues.
But a combination of loopholes, insufficient funding, and lack of enforcement leaves renters without a clear means to enforce those laws, placing many renters between a rock and a hard place: pay for unsafe housing, risk retaliation for withholding rent, or absorb the costs of displacement.
Renters aren’t completely powerless, though. This year, we’ve seen that when renters come together, they win. This spring, City Council took the first steps toward addressing the city’s rental safety crisis by creating a fund for tenants displaced because of unsafe conditions. But that fund sat empty for months, until a coalition of housing justice advocates successfully lobbied for Mayor Cherelle L. Parker’s H.O.M.E. Plan to fund it.
The Safe Healthy Homes (SHH) campaign, led by OnePA, Renters United Philadelphia, Philly Thrive, and the office of Councilmember Nicolas O’Rourke, provides commonsense answers to these issues: protecting renters who speak up about unsafe conditions from landlord retaliation, authorizing proactive L&I inspections, and requiring proof of code compliance to evict or collect rent. These are all things we would assume are happening already, but this package adds the critical enforcement provisions that have been missing.
Safe housing is not a perk — it is the bare minimum, and City Council’s Housing Committee had a long-overdue hearing for the SHH package tentatively scheduled for Tuesday.
I encourage you to let the members of the committee know how you feel about having safe and healthy homes for tenants across our city.
B. Cincere Wilson is the chief operations officer of Myra’s Kids Inc., a nonprofit serving justice-impacted and high-risk youth. He lives in Philadelphia and works in New York City.
They say imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, but Kendra Brooks isn’t taking kindly to a recent gesture of duplication by one of her colleagues.
It all came to a head Thursday when Ahmad introduced a resolution to hold a hearing examining access to such care in Philadelphia — legislation that would, under most circumstances, be uncontroversial in a body where Democrats hold a supermajority.
But Brooks and Councilmember Nicolas O’Rourke, both of the progressive Working Families Party, voted against it — a highly unusual move in a body that almost always unanimously approves legislation to authorize hearings.
The backstory: Brooks had already authored legislation to hold a hearing on threats to reproductive healthcare, and City Council approved it five months ago.
Now, Ahmad is poised to call up her own legislation on the matter, leaving Brooks and her allies feeling squeezed out.
Ahmad said her legislation is far more broad than Brooks’ and would allow Council to examine the entire reproductive healthcare landscape, not just access to abortion care.
The Council member who authors a resolution to holda hearing typically has sway over how the hearing is conducted, including steering the tenor of it by lining up witnesses to testify. In turn, that can drive the creation of more concrete legislation.
“You have to be comprehensive,” Ahmad said in an interview. “I’m evidence-based. I’m a scientist. I want to look at the whole breadth of things.”
City Councilmember Kendra Brooks stands in Council during the first day of the fall session in September.
But Brooks said she is focused on all forms of reproductive healthcare and criticized Ahmad’s legislation for failing to acknowledge the role of the city’s Reproductive Freedom Task Force, which Brooks leads. Members of that group called for Council hearings after local Planned Parenthood leaders said they were disappointed that the most recent city budget did not include a $500,000 line item for sexual and reproductive healthcare, as it did the previous year.
Brooks said Ahmad was engaging in “foolishness.”
“This is a level of petty that turns people off from politics,” she said. “It’s really unfortunate that she would play politics on an issue that’s this important.”
And Brooks intimated that the saga could cause her and her progressive allies to target Ahmad next year, when every City Council member is up for reelection.
“I’m not going to forget this,” Brooks said. “We’re very close to reelection to be playing this game.”
The veiled threat from Brooks, the face of the city’s Working Families Party, is notable and could put the WFP on a collision course with the local Democratic Party — which tends to endorse incumbents such as Ahmad. The WFP has previously said its efforts to win minority-party seats on Council are no threat to Democrats.
However, in 2023 when both Brooks and Ahmad were running for seats on Council to represent the city at-large, Ahmad said that the WFP was trying to “poach” Democratic voters and that its political strategy was “lazy.”
But Ahmad said Thursday she is not playing politics.
“She’s the one,” Ahmad said of Brooks. “I’m the chair of the Public Health Committee, and I need to be aware of what work is going on in these respects. And if people don’t want to share, that’s up to them.”
Brooks said she plans to hold her own hearing in March — what she is calling a “people’s hearing” that will take place outside the walls of City Hall.
Some advocates say they will participate in both that event and Ahmad’s traditional hearing.
Signe Espinoza, the vice president of public policy and advocacy at Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania, said she is supportive of any legislation that elevates the issue — no matter the author.
“We are committed to keeping the doors open, and we also recognize that this is the most hostile environment we’ve ever been in,” Espinoza said, noting that clinics have closed across the country. “The clock is ticking.”
Pennsylvania joins 31 states and the District of Columbia in giving low-income workers an effective, research-backed wage boost; in 2024, the federal and state credits combined lifted an estimated 6.8 million working people from poverty.
While the new state EITC is incredibly welcome and historic, it is relatively modest compared with other refundable state EITCs. Most range from 20% to 50% of the federal credit, with a handful below 10% or over 50%. This major step forward still won’t overcome the hardship facing low-wage workers — hardship compounded by Pennsylvania’s and Philadelphia’s deeply regressive overall tax structure.
The Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy’s “Who Pays?”report found that the lowest-income Pennsylvanians pay 15.1% of their income in state and local taxes — more than double the share paid by the wealthiest 1%, making the new state EITC essential for offsetting the lopsided tax code.
In the same way states are building upon federal tax credits, localities should consider building on state tax credits.
In Philadelphia, low earners pay an even higher share of their income in state and local taxes, in part due to the highly regressive, flat wage tax.
The city’s wage tax refund ordinance, a well-intentioned credit aiming to address regressivity by retroactively reducing the city’s income tax to 1.5%, reaches very few people. This year, 2,700 applications were approved, even though 50,000 were eligible, a dismal 4.5% take-up rate (which is actually double last year’s rate).
One major reason for this abysmal take-up is linkage to the state’s special income tax forgiveness program, requiring people to first be approved by the Pennsylvania Revenue Department for individuals earning no more than $8,750, or $24,750 for a family of three.
Councilmember Kendra Brooks in chambers as City Council meets Dec. 11.
Councilmembers Kendra Brooks and Nicolas O’Rourke introduced legislation as part of the People’s Tax Plan that would raise income eligibility to that of the PACENET prescription assistance program and expand the wage tax refund to include the entire 3.75% wage tax, but the proposals have not moved forward.
Councilmember Nicolas O’Rourke in chambers as City Council meets Dec. 11.
Pennsylvania’s new state EITC opens the door for a far more generous and administratively simple wage tax refund that reaches more residents. Tying the wage tax refund directly to the new state EITC and coordinating with the state can streamline this process.
Montgomery County, Md., pioneered one practical and high take-up approach: It partners with the state to automatically deliver the refundable portion of its county credit to all residents receiving a refund from the state. The credit is directly deposited or mailed with no additional application required.
Similarly, Philadelphia can improve eligibility for the wage tax refund by disconnecting it from the state’s income tax forgiveness program and instead linking it to the state’s working Pennsylvanians tax credit. Local policymakers should also automate applications, wage and residence documentation, and payouts.
Our city’s poverty rate is nearly double the state average. Local refundable credits, such as earned income tax credits and child tax credits, are anti-poverty tools proven to quickly lift incomes and stabilize households facing increasingly high costs. With the federal government retreating from long-standing health and economic security programs, the responsibility now falls even more heavily on states and cities to step up.
A strengthened, refundable, and automatic local EITC is exactly the kind of targeted investment that can help Philadelphia reverse decades of persistent poverty.
Kamolika Das is the local tax policy director at the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, a nonprofit, nonpartisan tax policy organization that conducts analyses of tax and economic proposals. She lives in Queen Village with her husband and daughter.
Mayor Cherelle L. Parker marked the halfway point of her term as mayor Friday by portraying the city as safer and more stable than when she took office two years ago, pointing to metrics like the plummeting homicide rate and cleaner streets.
During her second end-of-year State of the City speech, Parker also briefly acknowledged challenges she faced this past year, including the eight-day city worker strike and a spat with City Council over her signature housing plan.
And she outlined a plan to address rising street homelessness heading into 2026, when the city will host several major events expected to draw more than a million visitors.
Parker outlined a plan to address rising street homelessness heading into 2026, when the city will host several major events expected to draw millions of visitors, during her end-of-year speech at Temple University Friday.
“I am here today to proudly report to all of you,” she said, “that the state of our city is strong and good, and we are moving in the right direction.”
Parker’s announcement to add 1,000 shelter slots to the city’s system was a stark reminder that — despite progress on public safety and a coming year ripe with opportunity for tourism and growth — some of the city’s longest-term challenges remain unresolved.
And after the mayor this year unveiled a long-awaited plan to build thousands of units of housing in the city, she hit roadblocks in City Council, where members rejected her vision to bolster the middle class in favor of a plan that prioritizes the poorest Philadelphians.
Still, Parker and members of her administration struck an optimistic tone Friday. During the highly produced event, top officials repeatedly proclaimed that the “state of the city” is strong, and they thanked municipal employees in attendance, like police officers and sanitation workers.
Parker’s State of the City address last year was Philadelphia’s first. Traditionally, the mayor’s March budget address to Council was seen as the city’s version of the presidential State of the Union speech in Congress. Parker plans to make the December event an annual tradition as well.
Here are three takeaways from Parker’s speech Friday in North Philadelphia:
A homelessness plan is in the works for 2026
In the middle of her speech, Parker signed an executive order on stage, directing city departments to add 1,000 new beds to the existing shelter system by Jan. 31. That would represent a 35% increase in the number of beds citywide.
The move comes as city data shows homelessness in the city is rising. There were 1,178 unsheltered people in Philadelphia this year, a 20% increase over last year and the highest number recorded since at least 2018, according to city data.
In total, 5,516 people were considered homeless, a number that includes people who live in emergency shelters, are couch surfing, or otherwise lack an adequate nighttime residence. That number is up slightly from 5,191 last year.
Parker’s executive order directs city agencies to increase outreach efforts to people living on the streets and to collaborate with the Philadelphia Housing Authority to move people from shelters to more stable housing.
“We are seeking long-term solutions,” she said, “Solutions that will not only provide an expanded quality shelter system, but with more beds in safe, clean, and welcoming environments.”
Philadelphia Mayor Cherelle L. Parker holds up executive order ending street homelessness.
30,000-unit housing plan swells to 50,000
The mayor’s second year in office was in part defined by her plan to build, repair, or preserve 30,000 units of housing. In March, she unveiled her Housing Opportunities Made Easy, or H.O.M.E., plan, funded by $800 million in bonds.
Parker made clear that her plan would be aimed at uplifting the middle class and often vowed never to pit “the have-nots against the have-a-little-bits.” But City Council this month advanced its own version of the proposal, rejecting Parker’s vision and directing more resources to the poorest Philadelphians.
It was the most significant break between Parker and the legislative branch of her tenure. But the mayor on Friday defended her strategy, saying the middle class should not be asked to wait for access to housing programs.
“You want me to tell you why we shouldn’t tell them to wait?” she said. “Because when I knocked on their doors and asked for their votes — and we’re running for reelection — we don’t ask them to wait.”
Of Council’s 17 members, just four attended Parker’s speech Friday: Anthony Phillips, a close ally, as well as Rue Landau, Jamie Gauthier, and Nicolas O’Rourke — three progressives who led the effort to amend her housing plan. They sat in the front row.
Parker struck a conciliatory tone, saying: “We will work together to press forward together, and we won’t let petty politics get in the way of us moving Philadelphia forward.”
The mayor also made clear Friday that her 30,000-unit benchmark is separate from a plan being advanced by the Philadelphia Housing Authority, which is pursuing an ambitious expansion plan that Parker said would add an additional 20,000 units of affordable housing.
“When you add our H.O.M.E. goal of 30,000 units with that 20,000, those are 50,000 units of housing,” Parker said, “and we shouldn’t have to leave any neighborhood behind.”
On Friday, Parker touted her administration’s work negotiating new contracts this year for almost all of the city’s major municipal unions. She acknowledged, but didn’t dwell on, the strike by the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees District Council 33.
“We did have to endure an eight-day work stoppage,” she said. “But guess what we did? In true Philadelphia fashion … we got through it. It wasn’t easy, but we persevered together, and we found common ground, and we reached a fair and fiscally responsible agreement with both District Council 33 and District Council 47.”
DC 33, the largest and lowest-paid union for city workers, called the strike when their previous contract expired at 12:01 a.m. July 1, the first minute the union was legally allowed to walk off the job. Union president Greg Boulware promised his members wouldn’t return to work unless they won raises of 5% per year.
Boulware eventually called off the strike and accepted a contract with raises of 3% per year, which is close to Parker’s last offer before the strike. The deal also included $1,500 onetime bonuses for the union’s roughly 9,000 members and the addition of a fifth step in the DC 33 pay scale, a benefit for veteran employees.
Parker also defended the city’s treatment of DC 33 under her tenure. Repeating an administration talking point from the strike, Parker noted that the union’s accumulated pay increases — combining raises the union won in a one-year contract during Parker’s first year with the increases included in the new three-year deal — will be higher in her first term than under any other mayoral term since the 1990s.
“Just for the record, I also need to affirm — because sometimes people [create] revisionist history — I want to be clear that they were historic pay increases for our city workers,” Parker said. “It’s the largest in one term from any Philadelphia mayor over 30 years.”
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.
“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.”
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.
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.
“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 upthe administration’s amendmentfor 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.”
Philadelphia City Council is escalating its clash with some harm reduction providers, with lawmakers on a key committee voting Monday to ban mobile addiction services from parts of Kensington and its surrounding neighborhoods.
Members of Council’s Committee on Licenses and Inspections voted, 5-1, to advance the legislation, which covers the Lower Northeast-based 6th District, represented by Councilmember Mike Driscoll, the bill’s sponsor.
The area stretches from the eastern side of the intersection at Kensington and Allegheny Avenues — long the epicenter of the city’s opioid epidemic — north along the Delaware River and up to Grant Avenue.
The full Council could vote on the legislation as early as next month.
Map of the 6th Council District, the target of proposed legislation to ban mobile addiction services.
Some Kensington residents who have begged lawmakers for years to address the sprawling homelessness and addiction in the neighborhood said they support the legislation because the providers draw people who use drugs into residential areas.
“I have grandkids who can’t come and see me because of where grandmom lives at,” said Darlene Abner-Burton, a neighborhood advocate. “It’s not fair that we have to endure what we have to endure. No one should live like we do, and no one should go through what we go through.”
However, a half dozen harm reduction advocates testified that the legislation would not reduce homelessness or addiction, but would instead erect barriers to medical care that vulnerable people rely on and would lead to more overdose deaths.
“Every member of our community deserves dignity and compassion, not punishment,” said Kelly Flannery, policy director at the Positive Women’s Network, an advocacy organization for people with HIV.
Flannery called the measure a “cruel ban.”
Councilmember Mike Driscoll, who represents the 6th District and authored the legislation, greets Mayor Cherelle Parker after her first budget address in City Council in March 2024.
It’s the second time Council appeared poised to pass a bill aimed at restricting mobile service providers, which are groups that operate out of vans or trucks and offer a range of assistance to people in need, including first aid, free food, and overdose reversal medication.
Earlier this year, Council voted to pass restrictions on the providers operating in the nearby 7th District, which covers the western parts of Kensington.
But that bill — which passed the full Council 13-3 and was signed by Mayor Cherelle L. Parker — was not a blanket ban.
That legislation, authored by 7th District Councilmember Quetcy Lozada, requires providers obtain a license, and it limits organizations that provide medical services to specific areas designated by the city. Groups that offer nonmedical services like distributing food are prohibited from parking in one place for more than 45 minutes.
The city is expected to begin enforcing that law on Dec. 1.
Driscoll said he introduced his own legislation to ban the services from his district entirely because he was concerned that providers who faced restrictions in the 7th District would migrate into the neighborhoods he represents.
The only committee member to vote against Driscoll’s legislation Monday was Nicolas O’Rourke, a member of the progressive Working Families Party who represents the city at-large and also opposed the 7th District legislation.
SEPTA’s21.5% increase in transit fares and service cuts fell hardest on disadvantaged Philadelphians this year, showing an urgent need to make the city’s Zero Fare program permanent, CityCouncilmember Nicolas O’Rourke argues.
He touted his proposal to dedicate 0.5% of the city budget each year to pay for the initiative that provides free SEPTA passes to people living in poverty.
O’Rourke’s proposedTransit Access Fund would be written into the City Charter “so it can’t be yanked away at a moment’s notice when somebody wants to shift something around in the budget,” hetold about 150 people in a town hall at the Friends Center on Cherry Street.
O’Rourke, Democratic State Sen. NikilSaval, and the advocacy group Transit Forward Philadelphia called the meeting to push for affordable public transportation and ways to sustainably fund SEPTA after Harrisburg’s failure to provide new state money for mass transit agencies.
A broad coalition and patience are needed in Pennsylvania, Saval said. ” Every major political win comes from months, years, sometimes decades, of work,” he said.
“We pushed back hard,” said O’Rourke, a member of the Working Families Party. “People with the least income are paying a larger share of their money just to get around. That’s upside down.”
Funding is not guaranteed after June 30, when the current budget expires, however.
If enacted, a Transit Access Fund would generate an estimated $34 million in the 2026-2027 fiscal year, O’Rourke’s office calculates.
That would generateenough money — between $20 million to $25 million, according to managers of the Zero Fare program —to give free SEPTA passes to 60,000 Philadelphians at or below the federal poverty standard.
O’Rourke and his staff also are considering usingthe remaining $10 million to $14 million for matching grants to help businesses, landlords and housing developments to join the SEPTA Key Advantage program, which provides subsidized transit passes.
People living at or below the federal poverty standard are eligible for the Zero FareSEPTA passes. For 2025, that is $15,650 for an individual and $32,150 for a family of four.
Philadelphia’s poverty rate was 19.7% in 2024, the latest figure available, according to the U.S. Census.
“When we’re made to feel like we’re on opposite sides of the fight, our numbers become smaller and we focus on the wrong targets,” said Saval.
“It’s not the person in Schuylkill County frustrated about potholes and road conditions that’s to blame for lack of transit funding” he said. “That person deserves to get safely where they need to go, too.”
Fetterman has not announced whether he will run for reelection in 2028, but the progressive party put out a public declaration Tuesday pledging to endorse — and, if necessary, recruit and train — a challenger.
The announcement, first reported by The Inquirer, is a remarkable step for the left-leaning organization to take more than two years before an election and speaks to the degree of frustration with Fetterman among progressives.
“At a time when Donald Trump and Republicans in Congress are doing everything they can to make life harder for working people, we need real leaders in the Senate who are willing to fight for the working class,” Shoshanna Israel, Mid-Atlantic political director for the Working Families Party, said in a statement.
“Senator Fetterman has sold us out, and that’s why the Pennsylvania Working Families Party is committed to recruiting and supporting a primary challenge to him in 2028.”
Fetterman did not immediately return a request for comment about the Working Families Party’s announcement.
The Working Families Party is a progressive, grassroots political party that is independent from the Democratic Party, but it often endorses and supports Democratic candidates.
Though he supports extending federal healthcare subsidies, Fetterman has long said he is against government shutdowns as a negotiating tactic and will always vote to get federal coffers flowing and federal employees paid.
“I’m sorry to our military, SNAP recipients, gov workers, and Capitol Police who haven’t been paid in weeks,” Fetterman said in a post on X after the vote. “It should’ve never come to this. This was a failure.”
Already one of the most well-known and scrutinized senators in Washington, Fetterman was back in the spotlight this week as he returns to work following a hospitalization after a fall near his home in Braddock. His staff said he suffered a “ventricular fibrillation flare-up” and hit his face, sustaining “minor injuries.”
Ventricular fibrillation is the most severe form of arrhythmia — an abnormal heart rhythm — and the most common cause of sudden cardiac death.
He spent Thursday and Friday in the hospital and was released Saturday, saying he was feeling good and grateful for his care with plans to be back in the Senate this week.
Working Families on the offensive
Israel said in addition to the online portal, the party will hold a number of recruitment events across Pennsylvania in the coming months to train candidates and campaign staff on the basics of running for office and managing a campaign with hopes of finding quality candidates for a variety of races ahead of 2028.
The party is also pledging a robust ground game and fundraising for a potential challenger it supports.
It wouldn’t be the first time the Working Families Party has opposed Fetterman. In the 2022 Democratic Senate primary, WFP endorsed State Rep. Malcolm Kenyatta (D., Philadelphia) over Fetterman, who was lieutenant governor at the time.
The book makes no mention of a reelection bid but laments the ugly politics he experienced in both the Democratic primary and his general election race against Mehmet Oz.
Fetterman said in the book that Oz’s attacks during his rehabilitation from his stroke became so mentally crushing he felt he should have quit the race.
And he grapples with criticism he faced during the primary surrounding a 2013 incident in which he wielded a shotgun and apprehended a Black jogger he suspected of a shooting. Fetterman calls the backlash an early trigger of his depression.
Fetterman has said he will remain a Democrat even as Republicans have lauded his independent streak and willingness to work with the GOP.
Earlier this year, Fetterman was the first Senate Democrat to support the Laken Riley Act, a Republican immigration bill that requires U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement to detain and take into custody individuals who have been charged with theft-related offenses, even without a conviction. Critics of the law say it severely cracks down on due process for immigrants.
Fetterman was the sole Senate Democrat to vote to confirm Attorney General Pam Bondi, who was one of Trump’s attorneys when he tried to overturn the results of the 2020 election.
“He has repeatedly shown disregard for the rights of Palestinians,” the Working Families Party release said. “Refusing to support a two-state solution and breaking with the rest of the Democratic caucus on Israel’s illegal annexation of the West Bank.”
Staff writer Aliya Schneider contributed to this article.
