Being Green

Why is freshman Councilman Bill Green so busy making enemies?

by Tom Namako

politics

Green Michael T. Regan

When Bill Green was campaigning for office last year, there was some question about how he'd fit in on City Council. He called for political reform, yet he was the son of a former mayor and grandson of a U.S. congressman. He declared himself "independent of the system," and later accepted the endorsement of the building trades union, the muscle that keeps "the system" running. By all indications, Green seemed to be a candidate of the long-fabled Democratic machine.

But just a month into this year's council session, Green has earned a different name among many of his colleagues: thorn in the side.

In January, Green wanted to ban elected officials from the Deferred Retirement Option Plan (DROP), the controversial pension program that let former Mayor Street walk away with $450,000 at the end of his term. But Councilwoman Marian Tasco, the majority leader who, along with three other council members, is enrolled in DROP, told Green she would rather "help" him craft the legislation to ease its sting. Green said no thanks, and proposed the bill anyway. Tasco called Green's stance "anti-council, anti-current council."

Then, in the first council session in February, Green introduced a bill that would prevent the casinos from getting a 10-year pass on property taxes — a deal the gaming houses had reached with the casino-friendly Street administration. The taxes, according to Green, could bring in anywhere from $40 million to $65 million in revenue. But he was on another councilmember's turf: Frank DiCicco has led the opposition to the two slots parlors' location in his district for years, and asked Green to back off because he didn't understand the issue. Green didn't, violating a strictly traditional deference, called councilmanic prerogative, that happens all the time in City Hall. DiCicco showed his displeasure at the meeting. "You have to wonder if Councilman Green was around for a few more months, if he would have made the same decision or would he have gone about it in a different way than he did." DiCicco finished by saying Green should speak to the "few thousand" residents opposed to the casinos, and that "if he's not willing to do that ... then I suggest he keep his nose out of this issue."

Green expected some backlash, but not this. "Councilman Green, thank you for the offer and for giving us the opportunity to use this as a measure during the course of our negotiations, but I don't particularly need this, thanks," said Councilman Darrell Clarke, scoring a laugh throughout the chamber.

Sitting in his office the day after the smackdown, Green laid out his logic for going ahead with the casino bill against DiCicco's wishes: "I think that it is more important to have a public dialogue on issues of citywide import than it is to have private, backroom conversations. Were I not to introduce the bills, there would not even be a public debate." He added, "I do think some traditions of council have been taken to an outrageous extreme that was not even in case in the '60s, '70s and '80s."

For anyone surprised by this preview of Green's council tenure, he has one message: Don't be.

"I wouldn't want to characterize it as going to bat or going to war, but I am willing to advocate for my policies," he said. "And if someone disagrees with me, all I ask my colleagues to do is have a respectful debate on the merits." He added, "I was sworn in on the same day they were."

DiCicco's two issues with the casino bill, according to spokesman Brian Abernathy, is that it makes council look like they are already accepting the casino locations, and that the entire tax abatement program — which was created by DiCicco — could face a court challenge and cease to exist.

"In principle we agree with him," Abernathy said. "We're willing to concede that Green has found a way to get around the issue. But we still think it will be challenged in court." He added, "Green has taken this personally."

Green says he has, and is willing to fire back. "We can certainly pull out the history of Councilman DiCicco and [state Sen. Vincent] Fumo's stance on the issue, and let's just say their views on casinos have evolved over time, coincidentally coinciding with primaries last May and this April," Green said, alluding to DiCicco's early support of gaming in his district.

Green's defiance is similar, in a way, to how Mayor Nutter handled big issues, like ethics and the smoking ban, when he was on council. It's a refreshing attitude that keeps some members on their toes. But there are also consequences: Many of Nutter's ideas were railroaded for years into a kind of council purgatory because they lacked the support of his colleagues.

"I fully expect my colleagues to act in best interest for the people they represent and to behave as professionals and not play personal games and one-upmanship," Green said. "But I do think we have district councilpeople who are going to stick to [councilmanic] prerogative, and that's going to be a hard nut to crack."

The first test is coming soon. His casino tax bill was recently referred to the finance committee, where Green hopes it will go to public hearings. But the only person who can call those hearings is the committee's chairperson, Tasco, who offered Green her "help" earlier in the year and was thoroughly rejected.

(tom.namako@citypaper.net)