Cherelle Parker for Philadelphia’s 100th mayor | Endorsement

After a string of 99 men running City Hall with varying degrees of success and failure, Cherelle Parker is poised to make history Tuesday as the first woman elected mayor of Philadelphia.

If Parker shatters that glass ceiling, she will inherit a city facing many thorny issues, namely high crime, troubled schools, and onerous taxes. That calamitous combination largely explains why Philadelphia lost more than a quarter of its population since 1950 and earned the ignominious title of the poorest big city in America.

All the mayoral men who preceded Parker implemented plans to address the city’s problems. Some exacerbated them (see Frank Rizzo), while others transformed the city (see Ed Rendell).

It is probably too much to expect Parker to solve Philadelphia’s most vexing challenges in one or two terms. But the good news is that she grasps how the problems of crime, failing schools, and high taxes are intertwined and stunt the city, compounding poverty and inequality.

Parker’s vision is to create the “safest, cleanest, greenest big city in the nation with economic opportunity for all.” Her time as a city and state legislator — as well as her lived experience as a Black woman with humble Philadelphia roots — shapes her gritty and relatable rowhouse perspective.

She is a pragmatic consensus builder. Yet she can be forceful — or, in her words, “unapologetic.” Parker does not put much stock in experts and instead leads with her gut. She frequently mentions using “the convening power” of the mayor to bring together diverse parties to create a “comprehensive,” “collaborative,” and “intergovernmental approach” to addressing the city’s problems.

Whether all that process turns into effective execution will determine Parker’s success. No doubt she will bring her own style and much-needed energy to City Hall.

For those reasons and more below, The Inquirer endorses Cherelle L. Parker to be Philadelphia’s 100th mayor and the first woman to lead the city.

» READ MORE: Find out who else the Editorial Board has endorsed for Nov. 7 in our full endorsement guide

Parker, 51, is running against David Oh, 63, the Republican former City Council member. The loquacious Oh has run a muted campaign. Many of his positions are similar to Parker’s. Oh even acknowledged she is “a good candidate.”

To his credit, Oh supports more aggressively reducing the city’s job-killing wage tax and is not afraid to call out District Attorney Larry Krasner’s soft-on-crime approach. Oh is also far removed from the MAGA Republicans trapped in Donald Trump’s vice-like grip.

But in a city where registered Democrats outnumber Republicans 7-1, Tuesday’s election is expected to be a Parker coronation.

Madame Mayor’s arrival can’t come soon enough, given outgoing Mayor Jim Kenney’s more than yearlong abdication following a sullen and lackluster tenure marked by pandemic missteps, a 50% increase in city spending, record gun violence, murders topping 500 the past two years, sticker shock hikes in property assessments, and a sharp drop in population.

After emerging from a crowded field of candidates during the hotly contested Democratic primary last spring, Parker has sketched out an ambitious agenda.

Her tough-on-crime stance, including support for the controversial police tactic known as “stop-and-frisk,” distinguished her from all the primary candidates. In a city besieged by daily shootings, lootings, and streets overrun by ATVs and dirt bikes, many residents want law and order.

Parker’s challenge is to restore safety without the heavy-handed and illegal tactics that mainly target Black and brown residents and alienate communities confronting the most crime. She promised to strike a balance by empowering the police to do their job while firing cops who abuse their authority.

Parker told this board that as the mother of an 11-year-old Black son, she is “ultrasensitive” to what “profiling is like.” That certainly buys her credibility, but the implementation must be watched.

The new mayor’s top priority will be appointing a new police commissioner. It is important to find a high-quality law enforcement leader who can change the culture of a Police Department with a long history of inefficiency, corruption, and racism. Parker said she wants a commissioner “with a knowledge of Philadelphia.”

That sounds like only insiders need apply, which is often the parochial Philly way. Yet the best two police commissioners over the past quarter century — John Timoney and Charles H. Ramsey — came from other big cities. Both made instant impacts by importing state-of-the-art policing tactics that reduced crime and murders while rooting out bad cops.

Maybe someone within the ranks can meet the moment, but past internal hires often lacked the perspective or presence needed to lead effectively.

Reforming the scandal-plagued Police Department, empowering good officers, and standing up to the intransigent police union are central to fighting crime. The goal should be to hire the best top cop available.

The next commissioner will determine if the police are part of the solution or part of the problem. The choice will be an early indicator of the new mayor’s judgment.

To her credit, Parker appears poised to take on the dire public safety and health emergency in Kensington. For far too long, the city has essentially ignored the crime, open-air drug dealing, homeless encampments, and addiction that turned a proud working-class neighborhood into a Dantean hellscape.

“I will shut down that open-air drug market,” she told the Editorial Board but added that addiction treatment must be available.

» READ MORE: Watch the mayoral candidates' full endorsement interview with The Inquirer editorial board.

Parker suggested the National Guard should be part of the solution and told this board that the problem in Kensington is that the city never thought “big enough.” The full plan remains to be seen, but her willingness to confront the complex problems plaguing Kensington signals she will not be a shrinking violet.

The challenges in Kensington are immense, and making the streets clean and safe while stamping out a $1 billion drug industry and addiction is a delicate balancing act.

Here’s where Parker must muster the full force of her comprehensive, intergovernmental approach. As with many of Parker’s ideas, success depends on the execution. But more of the same is not an option.

That also goes for the city’s public schools.

Philadelphia will spend $4.5 billion this year on education to largely produce failure. Only 17% of students in third through eighth grades met the state standards in math proficiency and only 34% met the standards in English, according to the latest figures. Meanwhile, the district’s four-year graduation rate is just 71%.

The city’s schools have struggled for decades, leading to increased inequality and a shortage of skilled workers. A landmark court ruling found that the state has persistently and unconstitutionally shortchanged the city.

More state money is not only needed but is overdue. Parker’s working relationship with Harrisburg — given her experience as a state legislator — should help. Spending the money wisely with a focus on results will bolster funding support.

Parker does not have total control of the schools, but who she appoints to the school board will set the bar for results and accountability. Some of her ideas include year-round school and a “robust program to rebuild our schools.”

Many school buildings need repair, but many are also half empty. Parker understands the district needs rightsizing, which means developing an often controversial plan to merge, close, and build schools. If done right, it could set up the district for long-term success. Or it could be a costly boondoggle. Once again, execution will be key.

Parker is also reasonable when it comes to taxes. She knows the city’s onerous tax structure hampers job creation. She’s committed to tiny cuts to the wage tax for now and would accelerate reductions once the city grows the economic pie. Most economists argue that growth comes after taxes are reduced. Time will tell if the Parker administration can bake a bigger pie.

Parker also supports working with Harrisburg to change the uniformity clause to shift more of the property tax burden to commercial buildings. Past attempts to change the law failed. If elected, Parker plans to try again.

Balancing the need to fund city services with the need to reduce taxes is the right approach. Making the city more attractive to businesses and residents is crucial given the decline in population and rise in remote work.

The other big and divisive issue Parker must confront soon after taking office is the proposed $1.55 billion Sixers arena on Market Street, which neighbors in Chinatown oppose. The influential and politically connected Comcast Spectacor is also aggressively working to keep the Sixers in South Philadelphia.

Parker said she has not made a decision on the arena and wants to see studies on its economic and community impact. Her close ties to the building trades union — a relationship that requires watching throughout her tenure — have led many to assume she will ultimately support the arena. Indeed, she told this board that the country’s “poorest big city” can’t afford “a knee-jerk no” to a major economic development project.

Can Parker find a win-win for the Sixers and Chinatown? That will certainly require all her convening and collaborative power.

Of course, all mayors enter City Hall with big plans. Then, seismic events like the Great Recession or the pandemic blow them off course and wear them down. How Parker executes her strategy and responds to unforeseen challenges will determine if the history she makes extends beyond Election Day.