NORTHEAST TIMES ENDORSES RUBIN!

Four angry men. The Courageous Quartet. Two Republicans, two Democrats. Bobby Henon, Joe McColgan, Bill Rubin and Al Taubenberger.

Remember those names when you vote next Tuesday.

Of all the men and women on the ballot to fill City Council’s 17 seats, Messrs. Henon (6th district), Rubin (10th district), McColgan and Taubenberger (both at-large) are, sadly, the only ones brave enough to have publicly promised not to vote for Marian “DROP Queen” Tasco for Council president when the new Council takes office in January.

By refusing to give Ms. Tasco a verbal spanking for taking hundreds of thousands of dollars in DROP retirement money but not retiring, all of the other Council candidates are anti-taxpayer.

Yes, they have the legal right to remain silent on their picks for president, but their silence is immoral and speaks volumes. You, the voters who have gotten the shaft from greedy politicians like Ms. Tasco and her cronies for far too long, have the right to punish Council candidates who tolerate Ms. Tasco’s shenanigans. Do not vote for them on Tuesday.

In the at-large race, voters can select up to five candidates for seven seats (two seats are reserved for Republicans). Voters across the city should think outside the box by voting for Messrs. McColgan and Taubenberger twice — once the regular way, by pushing the buttons next to their names, and then by casting their names in the write-in slots on the ballot.

Anti-DROP Mayor Michael Nutter, who will win a second term Tuesday by demolishing Republican “challenger” Karen Brown, should show some spine by publicly acknowledging that Ms. Tasco is not ethically fit to lead Council.

10th District Councilman Brian O’Neill, the sole Republican District representative on Philadelphia’s City Council, commands a great deal of influence.

He also commands a great number of jobs, according to many sources inside City Hall.

While O’Neill’s district staff is a little smaller than average — the city’s directory lists four aides working out of O’Neill’s office — various sources independently confirmed to City Paper that O’Neill has near-total control of the obscure “Republican Technical and Planning Office.”

The fifth-floor office ostensibly serves the legislative needs of Council Republicans.

The City Council Technical & Planning Office began in the ’90s, according to attorney Stan Shapiro, who worked in it for more than 20 years. In the beginning, Shapiro says, the office employed two Republican attorneys to assist with legislation, but Republicans and Democrats worked side by side.

At some point the number of Republicans expanded, desks were moved and a door was shut between the two groups. The Republican wing now employs five personnel — that’s one more employee than the Democratic tech office, which serves four times as many legislators.

But, according to various sources knowledgeable about City Council, the office mostly serves the needs of O’Neill, and they describe the staff — theoretically there to facilitate the legislative needs of all three Council Republicans — as working more or less directly for the 10th District Councilman.

Councilman O’Neill did not, of the time we went to press, return an email and several phone calls to his office. We will update this blog post with any response from the Councilman.

At-Large Councilman Jack Kelly did not return a call for comment. Asked what his relationship to the republican Technical Staff is, Republican Councilman Frank Rizzo (who has been feuding with O’Neill for several weeks) told CP: “I’ve never received any legislative support from that office … when asked they’ve always been preoccupied with other things.”

Rizzo added: “The technical staff works for Brian O’Neill and it’s basically an extension of his office staff.”

Indeed, several sources suggested that the tech office effectively constitutes a staff in addition to his District staff, buried in another office, and over which O’Neill, as Majority Leader, has great control.

Patronage might be one word to describe the setup.

The office, it turns out, happens to consist entirely (with one possible exception) of political actors — specifically ward leaders and committee people, as does O’Neill’s entire staff, as listed on the city’s directory. All of the nine employees who make up the Republican tech staff and O’Neill’s district staff are Republican committee people and/or ward leaders; at least eight of them represent areas in O’Neill’s district.

To be sure, the Republican Technical and Planning Office isn’t the only office in City Council — or City Hall — to employ politically connected individuals. There is nothing ostensibly wrong with doing so, nor is any of this to say that the individuals in question aren’t perfectly qualified for the job. Severa Council employees (who aren’t committee people) pointed out that committee people are closely tied to their communities and sometimes better able to serve constituents. Still, we think O’Neill may hold the record proportion-wise.

Here’s the breakdown. Sources are the city’s online directory; a list of Republican tech staff employees obtained by CP via a Right To Know request; and lists of ward leaders and committee people maintained by the Committee Of Seventy, last revised in 2010.

Republican Tech Staff:

Linda Trush (Committee Person, 63rd ward, 15th Division)
William Ivers (Ward Leader 61st Ward)
Timothy Gerard (66th Ward, 29th Division)
Leonard Amodei (Ward Leader, 53rd Ward)
Wallace Quinlan (Committee Person 63rd Ward, 8th Division)

10th Council District Staff

Anne Marie Boyle (Committee Person 58th Ward, 16th Division)
William Rapone (Committee Person 66th Ward, 43rd Division)
Margaret Recupido (Committee Person 57th Ward, 22nd Division)
Alice Udovitch (Committee Person 58th Ward, 41st Division)

*

Because City Council, unlike every other department and office of the city, is not subject to budget hearings — and Council’s spending, over which the Council president has tremendous discretion, is not always easily examined.

A Right-To-Know request filed by City Paper reveals that the Republican tech staff’s five employees earn a combined $186,830, plus an unknown hourly expenditure of $16 per hour for one employee (combined salaries of the four Democratic tech office employees amounts to $385,367).

Follow Hall Monitor Isaiah Thompson in City Paper, online and on Twitter.
Posted by Isaiah Thompson @ 4:53 PM Permalink | File Under: News | Post a comment

O’Neill, Rubin clash at debate
By Tom Waring
The candidates for City Council’s 10th district, Democrat Bill Rubin (pictured) and Republican Brian O’Neill, air their differences at Monday night’s debate at the Klein JCC building in Somerton. KEVIN COOK / FOR THE TIMES The candidates for City Council’s 10th district, Democrat Bill Rubin (pictured) and Republican Brian O’Neill, air their differences at Monday night’s debate at the Klein JCC building in Somerton. KEVIN COOK / FOR THE TIMES

The controversial DROP tops a spirited discussion involving the hopefuls in the 10th Councilmanic District. Also on the agenda: Ethics, pensions and perks.

The candidates in the 10th Councilmanic District debated on Monday night, clashing on issues such as the Deferred Retirement Option Plan, the use of city-owned vehicles, outside employment and the city pension fund.

City Councilman Brian O’Neill, an eight-term Republican, and Democrat Bill Rubin debated for an hour in the auditorium of the Klein JCC. The forum, sponsored by the Northeast Times and a number of other organizations, was moderated by Rachel Lawton, president of the League of Women Voters of Philadelphia.

The candidates answered numerous questions and gave closing statements, interrupted by applause from partisans and one woman who stood up to complain about benefits paid to new city employees.

Rubin answered, “Absolutely not,” on questions tailor-made for him about whether he would accept a city car and hold another job while serving in Council.

“I will not take one when I’m elected,” he said of a car.

O’Neill explained that there are more than 4,000 cars issued to city employees, adding that a vehicle is helpful when traveling back and forth between City Hall and the Far Northeast.

“I need it more than anybody,” he said.

O’Neill has told Mayor Michael Nutter that he will give up the car when hizzoner does.

“I’m still waiting for him to call me back,” the councilman said.

O’Neill did indicate that, if the Nutter administration set a policy prohibiting the use of city-owned cars by employees, he’d be glad to comply.

“I’d be in the front of the line with my keys,” he said.

As for outside employment by Council members, Rubin mentioned his opponent’s somewhat lucrative work as a lawyer. The annual salary of a Council member is about $120,000, with those in leadership positions making more.

“If you can’t make ends meet, then there’s a problem,” Rubin said.

O’Neill, leader of Council’s three-member Republican minority, said he works “more than full time” as a councilman. He recalled the 1979 race, when he told voters of Democratic Councilman Mel Greenberg, “If you’ve seen, heard or met him, vote for him.”

O’Neill argued that his law degree has allowed communities to win more than 99 percent of cases in front of the Zoning Board of Adjustment.

“I have been successful in thousands of zoning cases,” he said.

There’s a big Democratic voter-registration advantage in the district, but most observers consider O’Neill the favorite because of his name recognition, incumbency and bigger campaign war chest.

The wild card is DROP, the city’s controversial retirement-incentive program. Council created it for city workers, but a number of elected officials — backed by rulings from the city solicitor — have taken advantage of it. Some officials have even run for office after “retiring.”

“It was not ever intended for elected officials,” Rubin said, explaining that DROP was created, in part, to give city departments a better idea of when employees planned to retire.

Rubin conceded that the participation by elected officials in DROP is legal, but not necessarily moral or ethical.

“We saw in the primary, the voters spoke,” he said.

City Councilman Frank Rizzo and City Commissioner Marge Tartaglione sought re-election this year despite being enrolled in DROP, but they were defeated in the primary.

Rubin is running a cable television commercial that shows O’Neill pictured with Councilwoman Marian Tasco, who is expected to run for Council president despite the fact that she is enrolled in DROP. Tasco will collect $478,057 in retirement money in January but remain on Council and continue to collect her full salary.

An announcer calls Tasco his “DROP ally,” shows a bag of money falling into O’Neill’s hands and declares that he voted for DROP so he could “pocket half-a-million in cash.”

O’Neill said his opponent is “spreading a lie.”

“I’m never going to take DROP,” he said.

O’Neill wondered why Rubin, a longtime employee of the commissioners’ office, never mentioned Tartaglione’s role in DROP and is focusing on the issue only after two incumbents were defeated because of it.

“He got religion. All of a sudden, it’s the worst thing in the world,” the councilman said.

The incumbent and challenger were asked about their vote for Council president.

“Without a doubt, I will not vote for Marian Tasco,” Rubin said.

“I’m concentrating on my election, not the next election,” O’Neill said.

As for the city’s chronically underfunded pension system, Rubin blamed O’Neill and Council for underfunding it for years and recalled the stock market crash of 2008.

O’Neill blamed Rubin, who served as vice chairman of the Philadelphia Board of Pensions and Retirement.

“I’m no pension expert,” the incumbent said, “but apparently my opponent isn’t, either.”

For 28 years, constituents were able to see O’Neill or his staff on Monday nights at various locations. Three years ago, he opened a district office.

“I wish I had more than one,” he said.

Rubin promised to open a district office, “where I am actually there.” The office would feature language interpreters for the district’s large Russian and Indian population. The challenger also wants to hold Council meetings at nights, on weekends and in neighborhoods.

In his next term, O’Neill’s goals include strengthening local public schools. He pointed to Parkwood’s Stephen Decatur Elementary School, where students used to be bused in from other neighborhoods. Today, it is a community school with strong parental involvement and rising test scores. The councilman favors breaking the School District of Philadelphia into smaller districts and creating an elected school board.

Rubin said he is looking forward to becoming the seventh new councilman next year to bring energy and excitement to the 17-member Council. His year-long campaign has already handled constituent requests.

“They’ve seen more service in the last ten months than in the last ten years,” he said. ••

Reporter Tom Waring can be reached at 215-354-3034 or twaring@bsmphilly.com

Heated debate in competitive 10th Councilmanic District

BY DAVID GAMBACORTA
Philadelphia Daily News

gambacd@phillynews.com215-854-5994

THERE’S NO LOVE lost between City Councilman Brian O’Neill and Bill Rubin, his Democratic challenger.

That much was abundantly clear Monday night when the two went head-to-head for a debate at the Raymond and Miriam Klein Jewish Community Center, on Jamison Road near Red Lion in Northeast Philly.

A small crowd showed up to watch the pair trade verbal jabs, even though the race for the Northeast’s 10th Councilmanic District is shaping up as one of the city’s most competitive with the Nov. 8 election drawing ever closer.

Rubin previously worked as the supervisor of elections for the City Commissioners Office and as vice chairman of the city’s Pension Board.

O’Neill, the Republican minority leader, has held the Council seat in the 10th District since 1979.

Here’s where they stood on issues raised during the debate, which was sponsored by the League of Women Voters:

Pensions

Rubin said O’Neill and other City Council members put the city’s pension fund in a precarious spot by not adequately funding it for years. To fix the sorry state of the fund, “you have to think outside the box,” he said. “Obviously, what we’re doing now isn’t working.”

O’Neill rejected the idea of blaming Council for the city’s pension woes. The Pension Board “lost a billion dollars at one point,” he said, “and Rubin was the vice chairman.”

DROP

The Deferred Retirement Option Plan remains a hot-button issue. Rubin chided O’Neill for previously filing an application to possibly enter the program.

O’Neill said he’ll never sign up for the program – and lambasted Rubin for working for outgoing City Commissioner Marge Tartaglione, who previously took a DROP payment, retired for a day and returned to work.

Council president

Rubin said he wouldn’t support Councilwoman Marian Tasco for City Council president, then added that he’s not sure whom he’ll back.

O’Neill said he’s only focused on winning re-election.

Wheels

Rubin called Council members driving city cars “a waste of taxpayer money,” and said he would not take one if elected.

O’Neill said he’d be fine if Council members weren’t given city cars and would give up his as soon as Mayor Nutter did the same.

A political day in the neighborhood
By Tom Waring 10/19/2011 1:01 pm
Font size: Decrease font Enlarge font
Bill Rubin, a Democrat running for City Council in the 10th district, goes door to door in Morrell Park while making his pitch for residents’ votes. JENNY SWIGODA / TIMES PHOTO Bill Rubin, a Democrat running for City Council in the 10th district, goes door to door in Morrell Park while making his pitch for residents’ votes. JENNY SWIGODA / TIMES PHOTO

Bill Rubin, the Democratic candidate in the 10th Councilmanic District, enjoys campaigning door-to-door in the various neighborhoods of the district.

“You get to talk to actual voters and find out what their issues are,” he said.

Rubin, 44, is challenging Councilman Brian O’Neill, a Republican seeking his ninth four-year term.

O’Neill has more money and name recognition, but there’s a reason Rubin was seeking out registered Democrats last week as the Northeast Times followed him on a canvass of the 66th Ward in Morrell Park.

“We’ve got twenty-thousand more Democrats than Republicans,” he said, citing voter-registration figures in the district. “I just need Democrats to vote Democrat. And I have a base of Republican support.”

Rubin, a married father of two from Bustleton, worked for the city commissioners’ office for almost 25 years. He was supervisor of elections and formerly served as vice chairman of the Philadelphia Board of Pensions and Retirement.

The challenger was joined on Oct. 18 by ward leader Shawn Dillon and committeemen Chris Guest, Ed Schonewolf and Bob Miller.

Though he had no primary opponent, the Democrat has been knocking on doors since February, usually with Guest by his side with a street list of so-called “super voters.”

“There hasn’t been any negative reaction,” he said.

Few people, according to Rubin, tell him they are fervent O’Neill supporters.

At a typical door, Rubin will hand the resident a piece of campaign literature that features him pictured with his family, former City Controller Jonathan Saidel, an elderly woman and a veteran.

The piece calls for ending the “abuse of DROP by our elected officials,” referring to the Deferred Retirement Option Plan.

In a “Dear Friend” letter, he vows not to vote for any Council member for president who has taken DROP money. Councilwoman Marian Tasco, who is enrolled in DROP, is expected to seek the Council presidency.

O’Neill has not yet ruled out supporting Tasco for the top spot.

Rubin mentions his two campaign offices to voters and asks them to place a sign on their lawn. About two-dozen people per night agree to take a sign. The campaign estimates it has about 2,600 signs on lawns, and all residents with a sign get a follow-up letter of thanks.

Before the campaign is over, Rubin will knock on every door with a registered Democrat living there. He’ll also stop by Republican doors that are open and chat with people waiting for a SEPTA bus or pulling in and out of their driveways.

Almost all residents are polite — even a woman who had cookie batter on both hands when the candidate knocked and a family that was eating dinner. A woman sweeping leaves was not happy about high taxes and a lack of snow removal.

A man living on Morrell Avenue had a simple question.

“Democrat or Republican?” he asked.

“I’m a Democrat,” Rubin replied.

“See you later,” the man said before closing his door.

That man does not fit into one of three categories Guest checks off after each conversation. Voters are listed as “undecided,” “lean” to Rubin or “strong” for Rubin.

The “strong” Rubin voters will be contacted by volunteers on Election Day, Nov. 8.

An East Keswick Road man fits into the “strong” category.

“Glad you’re a Democrat,” he tells the candidate.

The challenger points to the front of his literature, which reads, “Think it’s time for a change? Let’s end DROP abuse.”

“You know it, it’s time for a change,” a woman on Elliston Circle tells him.

After Rubin explains his support for a three-term limit for Council members, a man on Rayland Road said he supports a one-term limit.

Rubin said voters are most concerned with property taxes and a lack of police presence. Many have a general anti-City Council feeling.

“Far and away, the biggest issue is DROP. People are so outraged at the half-million-dollar DROP payments,” he said. ••

Reporter Tom Waring can be reached at 215-354-3034 or twaring@bsmphilly.com

Shar

Posted on Sat, Oct. 8, 2011

Rizzo stripped of leadership position on Philadelphia Council

By Bob Warner

Inquirer Staff Writer

City Councilman Frank Rizzo was abruptly dumped Friday from his mostly ceremonial position in Council’s Republican leadership, in apparent retaliation for his support of a Council redistricting plan opposed by his two GOP colleagues.

Those colleagues – Brian J. O’Neill and Jack Kelly – advised Council President Anna C. Verna that they had voted to strip Rizzo of his position as Council’s minority whip and give the job to Kelly.

The demotion will cost Rizzo about $500 in reduced pay over the next 10 weeks, with Kelly’s pay bumped up by an equal amount. O’Neill and Kelly also asked Verna to move as quickly as possible to change the signs outside Rizzo’s and Kelly’s offices.

“I expected this from Brian O’Neill,” Rizzo said Friday. “He’s the most petty guy I ever met.”

O’Neill and Kelly did not return calls seeking comment.

Rizzo said that he had already taken steps to change his party registration from Republican to independent, and that he intended to campaign against O’Neill in the Northeast, where O’Neill seeks another four-year term against Democrat Bill Rubin.

“This is an example of why this guy [O'Neill] should be defeated,” Rizzo said Friday. “It’s a blatant political decision to remove me from leadership based on a single vote. It’s nothing more than being vindictive. I knew it was coming. . . . It’s all about the redistricting.”

Two weeks ago, Council approved new boundaries for the 10 district seats, to take effect with the municipal elections of 2015. Over protests from O’Neill, his district in the Far Northeast was redrawn to include all of Rhawnhurst’s 56th Ward, a longtime Democratic stronghold.

Council’s final vote on the redistricting plan was 15-2, with Rizzo in favor, O’Neill and Kelly opposed.

But a closer, more critical vote was taken a week earlier.

Council’s leadership, including O’Neill and Democratic leader Marian Tasco, had drafted a map that divided the 56th Ward between two districts. They offered an amendment trying to make the plan more palatable to the full Council membership, but the proposed change was voted down, 9-8, with Rizzo’s nay the deciding vote.

Afterward, O’Neill looked over to Rizzo and offered a sarcastic “thanks,” according to Rizzo. “I just ignored him,” Rizzo said. “I didn’t want to get involved in a confrontation in the chamber.”

Kelly and Rizzo each have less than three months left in their Council careers, both cut short by their participation in the lucrative deferred-retirement program known as DROP. Kelly stands to receive close to $400,000 from the program when he retires early next year, and Rizzo will get an estimated $194,000.

As political storm clouds were gathering around DROP-tainted incumbents last year, Kelly decided not to seek reelection. Rizzo sought another four years, but Republican ward leaders refused to endorse his run and GOP voters dumped him in the May primary.

Asked Friday night whether he split with his Republican colleagues on redistricting as payback for GOP leaders’ abandoning him in the primary, Rizzo said, “Not at all. My vote was based on a quality district for the constituents. We’re trying to fix this, not make it worse. . . . [O'Neill] wanted only the divisions that were good for him.”

Kelly’s paycheck as a rank-and-file councilman was $120,233 annually, but now he’ll trade pay grades with Rizzo, who was paid $122,686. O’Neill, the Republican floor leader, gets $126,366 a year.

Contact staff writer Bob Warner at 215-854-5885 or warnerb@phillynews.com.

With four days leading up to the election, Mayor Nutter continues to bang the drum – DROP must go.

“Sometimes in this biz of government and politics, you just have to do the right thing. This is one of those moments,” Nutter said this week about DROP, which costs the teetering pension fund at least $9 million annually. “There’s nothing else to do with this program but end it.”

But Nutter’s call has hardly become a rallying cry for Council candidates.

Most candidates, with important municipal-union endorsements in hand, say they would salvage DROP by eliminating its cost or replacing it with a similar benefit. Ten sitting Council members are still eligible to join it, even after all the controversy.

DROP stands for Deferred Retirement Option Plan. It allows employees, including elected officials, to walk out the door with sizable lump-sum payments in addition to their pensions.

“I think we should put it all on the table, but the most important thing is to make it cost-neutral,” said Councilman Darrell L. Clarke, the Democratic majority whip.

That’s how DROP was sold to Council by the Rendell administration and unions in 1999. But it has cost at least $100 million since then, according to a City Council analysis. Nutter’s study last year put the cost at $258 million, though that appears to have been overstated.

Most Council members now say they support saving DROP in an altered form, though the Pension Board’s actuary refused to provide a hard cost estimate for changes. Hearings are scheduled for June 6, with some decision expected before Council recesses for the summer later next month.

DROP is meant to encourage experienced employees to stay on the job longer by allowing them to amass pension payments in an interest-bearing account for their final four years on the job. It was advertised as a tool for planning, by giving advance notice of employee retirement dates, but it has not been used effectively.

“That’s garbage. That’s what you’re supposed to do under any circumstances, with or without a DROP,” said James McAneny, executive director of the Pennsylvania Public Employees Retirement Commission, the state’s pension oversight agency.

Rubin, a Democrat who is running against Republican O’Neill in the 10th Councilmanic District, today called on O’Neill to pledge that he would not enroll in the controversial Deferred Retirement Option Plan and sent O’Neill a waiver form that he could provide to the Pension Board to prove his commitment to staying out of the program.

We checked in with O’Neill who said he has no plans to enroll in DROP. But he also said he’s not doing any paperwork provided by Rubin.

“I’m not going to get involved in an issue like that. The timing is just very bad for that,” O’Neill said. He added that he thinks this is an issue for the fall election season and that he needs to focus on schools funding right now.

New elected officials are not eligible for DROP under state law. But there are ten members, including O’Neill, who could enroll.

PHILADELPHIA – Change it, don’t chuck it – that’s basically what city council wants to do with Philadelphia’s costly and controversial DROP retirement program.

Legislation to amend the program was introduced Thursday.

We’ve been reporting for weeks that council would introduce legislation to try and make the Deferred Retirement Option Plan “cost-neutral” going forward by, among other things, cutting the interest rate on the account where the city employee’s pension money goes in those four years before they retire.

Here’s how the council said it plans to make those changes:

Tie the interest rate on the pension money that’s set aside for the lump sum check to the rate on treasury bonds, to better reflect the state of the economy
Allow current employees who are eligible for DROP as it now exists, to join under those ruled whenever they choose, so there is not rush to get in before the program changes
Mayor Michael Nutter, of course, wants the program killed altogether, but that ain’t going to happen, at least not now, Fox 29′s Bruce Gordon reported.

“Do you get the sense that there are votes there to amend rather than end?” Gordon asked.

Democratic Councilman Darrell Clarke answered, “Well, I can say that there are not enough votes to end the program, at this point.”

Tenth District Republican Brian O’Neill is one of 10 council incumbents who are still eligible to join DROP, even though newly-elected members are now barred.

The councilman’s Democratic challenger, Bill Rubin, hand-delivered to O’Neill on Thursday a so-called waiver form and asked that O’Neill promise not to join DROP in the future.

Remember, with O’Neill’s 30-plus years in office, he’d be eligible for a half-million-dollar check.

Rubin said his message to O’Neill was: “You are not a regular city employee. You are an elected official. The program wasn’t meant for you. You know that it wasn’t meant for you. You had four opportunities to exclude yourself from that program (through council votes) and be a part of that system. And you’ve chose not to do that. And all of your statements on record are that you are entitled to it. And, I think, at that point, you need to let voters in our district know whether or not you will or will not be a part of that program.”

O’Neill’s was response, in a separate interview: “I’ve never enrolled in DROP. I’m never gonna enroll in DROP. End of story.”

Pressed by Gordon on whether he’d sign Rubin’s form, O’Neill said, “I’m not filling out any waiver forms that my opponent sends me, and he doesn’t have to fill out any because I’m not gonna send him any.”

O’Neill said if there was ever any confusion about his plans regarding DROP, it’s only because “this is the first time somebody’s asked me.”

Well, that’s not exactly true, Gordon reported. In the run-up to last week’s primary, the good government group Committee of 70 specifically asked all council candidates for their position on DROP.

O’Neill did not respond to the questionnaire.

Joining Gordon on the Fox 29 News at 5 to talk DROP and other council concerns was Councilman Bill Green.

Did incumbent republican Brian O’Neill once give serious thought to joining the controversial program?

It sure looks that way, based on new documents that surfaced on Tuesday.

We know that most council incumbents who signed up for the retirement perk known as DROP paid a hefty price in the May primary elections.

Voters made clear that they do not think elected officials should be promising to retire, pocketing the lump sum check and in some cases running for re-election.

Which is why Brian O’Neill’s democratic challenger Bill Rubin was at city hall today, hand-delivering a letter to O’Neill’s office, once again demanding a clear statement from the incumbent, that he will not join drop- remember, as an incumbent, O’Neill is still eligible to get in on the perk.

Why the confusion?

Fox 29 political reporter Bruce Gordon spoke with O’Neill just last week and asked if O’Neill would ever join DROP.

“I have never enrolled in DROP. I’m never gonna enroll in DROP. End of story,” said O’Neill.

“I can say it fourteen times, but it comes out the same: I’ve never enrolled in DROP and I never intend to enroll in DROP.”

When pressed by Gordon, O’Neill said, “this is the first time somebody’s asked me!”

Now there is evidence that O’Neill once strongly considered getting into DROP.

Rubin used a “right to know” request to get his hands on an application to join DROP, signed by councilman O’Neill on November 30th, 2007.

Interestingly, O’Neill was quoted by an Inquirer reporter six weeks later, as saying he had not yet applied for the program, but was contemplating doing so.

Rubin’s reaction to the document?

“I’ve watched the interview you had with him last Thursday. I’ve watched the news reports in the different papers. And he’s clearly said that he had no intentions of ever getting into DROP- that he never applied- and that there was never any issue with him being in drop and he hoped that this would be the end of the story. And when i heard that i was kind of disheartened, because the facts are that he did apply in November of ’07.”

It is important to point out that signing this application is just the first step in a several step process to formally join DROP and we know O’Neill never completed the process because he is not in DROP.

But he took the first, big step, and Rubin says any suggestion to the contrary, is not accurate.

Councilman O’Neill did call Fox 29 late on Tuesday afternoon. He says he filled out the DROP form back in 2007 simply to find out about all of his possible pension benefits.

O’Neill said, “I was just making an inquiry.”