By a vote of 13-2, Philadelphia City Council passed Councilmember Anthony Phillips controversial ban on ski masks.
The legislation adds the following language to an existing law that established fines for the wearing of a mask in the commission of a crime:
(4) No person shall wear a ski mask or balaclava in any school building, recreation center, daycare, park, City-owned building, or on any mode of public transportation, including, but not limited to, buses, trains, trolleys, and subways. For purposes of this Section, a “ski mask or balaclava” means a close-fitting garment covering the whole head and face, with holes for the eyes, mouth, or nose, or any combination of the three.
(5) The provisions of Section 10-613(4) shall not be construed to apply to any person who wears a ski mask or balaclava while:
(a) Wearing a traditional holiday costume;
(b) Worn for a religious purpose;
(c) Engaged in a trade or employment where they are worn for the purpose of ensuring the physical safety of the wearer;
(d) In a theatrical production;
(e) Protecting the wearer from the elements while participating in a winter sport; or
(f) Lawfully engaged in First Amendment activities.
(6) Any person who wears a ski mask or balaclava in violation of Paragraph (4) of this Section, where such violation is not otherwise covered by Paragraph (1) of this Section, shall be fined two hundred fifty dollars ($250).
(7) If a court of competent jurisdiction declares any part of this Section to be invalid, such judgment shall not affect the validity of this Section as a whole or any remaining part thereof. It is the intention of City Council that the remaining provisions of this Section would have been adopted as if such part found to be invalid had not been enacted.
While the bill passed, criticism was leveled against it during the public comment section of the meeting.
Solomon Furious Worlds, an attorney with the Pennsylvania chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union, said the proposed legislation felt like an attempt to further criminalize young people of color.
“Safety is important, but there is no evidence to suggest ski masks cause or encourage violent crime,” Worlds said. “If you’d like to address violent crime, I’d suggest housing, food assistance, and child care.”
Worlds also questioned the constitutionality of the legislation, which allows police officers to stop citizens without suspicion of unlawful activity, which violates both the federal and commonwealth constitutions.
Tara Schiraldi of the Defender Association of Philadelphia, an organization that represents 70% of those charged with a crime in Philadelphia, also opposed the bill, comparing the legislation to similar laws enacted decades ago condemning the wearing of specific suits and hats, which lead to the public harassment and, at times, violence against t African-Americans wearing such clothing.
Schiraldi also raised the point that those prosecuted for violating the law would not be eligible for representation from the Defender’s Association.
In an oddly passionate defense of the measure, Councilmember Phillips said the legislation was intended to seek a safer and better city for each resident.
“What unites us today is more powerful than what divided us,” Phillips said. “I encourage us all to stand together as we head towards a better city with the promise of more safety and decency.”
Phillips said the legislation had “significant support” from many across the city and ideological spectrum.
“Senior citizens, our most vulnerable population, are crying for us to pass this measure,” Phillips said. “For too long and in too many instances, they have lingered in the shadows of our inaction. Too many seniors have told my on their way to public spaces they feel unsafe.”
Councilmember Kendra Brooks acknowledged Phillips work on the legislation, but still voted against its passage.
One of her chief concerns is the lack of knowledge of the legislation passed by council.
“My concern is when we pass legislation, and it does not have the opportunity to reach the population that would be most affected by it,” Brooks said. “My fear is we’re putting legislation on the books that they won’t know will victimize them until it does.”
Brooks added the legislation could further harm the relationship between the police and young people.
A meeting of the Philadelphia City Council Committee on Appropriations offered a glimpse into the future economic health of the city.
The committee heard testimony on transfer ordinance legislation, which is local government parlance for moving from one budget item to another. This is a regular occurrence each fall and spring.
In response to questions from Councilmember Katherine Gilmore Richardson, City Budget Director Sabrina Maynard provided estimates of the city’s fund balance, or amount left over after meeting all its expenditures, for 2023-2028, provided below:
Much of the past year’s reserve, however, has come from unspent budgeted funds for personnel, as the city has a nearly 20% vacancy rate across its workforce.
Another matter on council’s mind was funding for the Parks and Recreation Department, particularly in matters of hiring and repairing infrastructure.
The passage of the ordinance took an unusual amount of time, with the original committee hearing beginning on Tuesday and not ending until 8:20 Thursday evening.
The reason for the delay was disagreement between the administration and council over various appropriations.
The legislation was passed last evening at 8:42 last evening.
Our reporters sit through hours of city council meetings, dig through piles of documents, and ask tough questions other media overlook. Because we’re committed to addressing Philadelphia’s poverty crisis — and challenging those who sustain it. If you think this work is important too, please support our journalism.
