Four conflicts the next mayor must address

Editor's note: This column was written prior to the May 4 debate held at Temple University.

The mayoral candidates will meet tonight for a debate sponsored by the Next Mayor project, and it should be a lively exchange.

However, I'm willing to bet the following topics won't come up - at least not in any detail. Combined though, they represent the greatest challenges the next mayor will face. And unlike the schools, all of them deal with departments and policies directly under mayoral control.

Here are the four, in rough order of importance:

Pensions. Warren Buffett has called the issue of public pensions a huge explosive with a long fuse. In Philadelphia, the fuse is getting shorter. The city's pension fund has a long-term deficit in excess of $5 billion. The city has only 47 cents in the fund for each dollar it will eventually have to send out to retirees.

At least Mayor Nutter tried. He opted for an asset sale - of Philadelphia Gas Works - but Council wouldn't even debate the idea.

PICA, the state board that oversees Philadelphia's finances, recently issued a staff report suggesting ways the fund could work toward lowering its deficit, but many are politically unpalatable: abolish DROP, increase employee contributions, require employees to go into a "hybrid plan" that includes a 401(k).

None of the candidates have embraced these ideas.

Why it's important: State law requires local governments to make what are called MMO's - minimum municipal obligations. To put it bluntly, the city's pension MMO means the more the city must pay into the fund, the less can go into police, sanitation, recreation, and other city services.

Policing. There's been talk about "stop and frisk" in this campaign, but that is just part of a larger issue dealing with the police that centers on changes in thinking of how best to deploy and train and how police interact with the community.

For 20 years, law enforcement has been guided by two principles: use of data to help fight crime, and the "broken windows" theory that says police have to keep an eye on small items - a broken window, turnstile hopping, petty theft - to prevent growth in crime overall. Stop-and-frisk is part of that preventive strategy.

The police - including Commissioner Charles H. Ramsey - believe those methods have resulted in a decrease in crime, a claim borne out by statistics showing crime, large and small, falling in the city. Despite all the talk of community policing, critics believe these crime-fighting policies have alienated many in minority communities because they end up unfairly targeting black men.

Why it's important: The next mayor and his or her police commissioner are going to have to decide on a crime-fighting strategy. Ramsey believes in the current methods, though he acknowledges they can be tweaked by such things as better training. He wants the police to be seen a community partners, not as an occupying force. It's a good goal, but wishing doesn't make it so. As we know from other cities, the situation can become volatile. The next mayor needs to reconcile the police and poor communities - without risking a rise in crime.

Pent-up demand. The recession battered the city and its employees, but the unions mostly blame Nutter for failing to address their needs. The hostility - among police, firefighters, blue- and white-collar city workers - is palpable. They feel they have been shortchanged and dissed for the last eight years. Contracts with all city unions have to be negotiated in the next mayor's first term. The unions want to feel the love.

Why it's important: Pay and benefit increases, plus work-rule changes, all have price tags. In a city where growth in tax revenue is incremental at best, a mayor has to balance the needs of employees with the needs of city residents. Maybe it was a question of style, but Nutter and the unions simply didn't mix. Can the next mayor say "No" without engendering the same hostility? Can he or she say "Yes" without harming the city budget?

Conflict over growth. The good news about the city is its population is growing, changing neighborhoods - and housing values - in positive ways. But the dilemma, as housing economist Kevin Gillen put it, is "people want growth but not change." Newcomers believe they are revitalizing neighborhoods, but old-timers see it more as an invasion. As housing prices rise, so do taxes. Rents become pricier. Older residents get displaced by "progress."

Why it's important: The alternative to growth and renewal is stagnation and decline. The next mayor will have to find a way to make peace between the old and new. He or she can do that through personal leadership and with policies on housing and redevelopment that take the old community's needs into consideration. It's a difficult balancing act that will require political skills and smart policy.