Stu Bykofsky: Green plans bill to rein in DROP payments

FOR THOSE who agreed with my Monday column, in which I asked City Council members to volunteer to relinquish the unearned income they can receive from DROP, relief may be on the way.

Newly elected Councilman at-large Bill Green, chairman of Council's Labor and Civil Service Committee, told me yesterday that he will introduce a bill at Council's first session on Jan. 24 to drop DROP for all future elected officials, not just for those on Council.

"I'm trying to be well-liked here," he said sardonically, knowing his peers would not be patting him on the back for trying to plug the beer keg.

It's nice to be liked by your peers, I told him, but it's more important to be well-liked by your constituents who have to foot the bill.

DROP is the city's well-intended but ill-used Deferred Retirement Option Plan. Launched in 1999 to help hold onto top-notch veteran employees, it morphed into a Lucky 777 payout for elected officials.

After Monday's column, the response from the Council members already receiving the bonus (Joan Krajewski), or having signed up for it (Anna Verna, Frank DiCicco, Frank Rizzo, Marian Tasco) or having asked about it (Brian O'Neill, Jannie Blackwell, Donna Miller, Jack Kelly) was a symphony of silence.

I didn't really expect volunteers to step forward like they did at the doomed Alamo after Col. William B. Travis drew a line in the sand with his sword, according to legend.

So I spent yesterday calling Council members to ask how they would answer two questions:

1. Would they eliminate the DROP program for future elected officials? and

2. Would they vote to get rid of it for current elected officials, including themselves?

I didn't reach them all, but I got to enough. Some didn't call back, probably seeing DROP as a lit Bic sitting on a powder keg of outraged voters who foot the bill for the program that costs an estimated $7 million a year. Think of how many rec centers, swimming pools or cops that could pay for.

In an exclusive interview, Green told me that for legal reasons, DROP couldn't be eliminated for those currently working for the city.

That being the case, voting for his bill would not impose any actual hardship on those now in office.

But (and I tremble to raise this for fear of queering the vote) if Council kills the program for future elected officials, by what moral right should it allow current officials to DROP in?

That conundrum wasn't lost on new 4th District Councilman Curtis Jones, who said he'd vote to end DROP for all elected officials, current and future.

"It would be semi-hypocritical if I say [end it] for only future elected officials," Jones said. Councilman at-large Jim Kenney agreed. "It distracts from everything else. Let's get rid of it," he said.

Sadly (and realistically), a bill that doesn't grandfather current elected officials probably wouldn't pass because once the gravy train leaves the station, few jump off it voluntarily - even when they're feeling heat from the peasants' torches.

With editorials in the papers, story after story, and columnists screeching, Council members must think we've lost our minds over DROP.

Maybe we have, but maybe that's because this is one we can get fixed. I'm not completely sold on the DROP program for anyone, but it's an unwarranted sugar plum for those elected by the public.

As I did Monday, I ask Council members who have or plan to sign up for DROP:

How can you look city workers in the eye when they almost certainly will be asked to take cuts in their health, welfare and pension benefits in the coming contract?

There's a difference between what's legal and what's right, and elected officials taking DROP money are wrong.

It should be ended for future elected officials. If current elected officials can't legally be denied DROP, then we're back to asking for volunteers, like Col. Travis.

It's wrong. Don't take it. *

E-mail stubyko@phillynews.com or call 215-854-5977. For recent columns:

http://go.philly.com/byko.