Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Federal Policystatement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council adopts resolution condemning Department of Government Efficiency actions as unconstitutional
Summary
Philadelphia City Council unanimously adopted a resolution (No. 250130) condemning actions by the Department of Government Efficiency that the resolution characterizes as attempts to dismantle federal agencies. The measure was introduced and moved by Council Member Kendra Brooks and drew public comment both in support and opposition.
Philadelphia City Council on March 6, 2025, adopted Resolution No. 250130, which condemns actions by the Department of Government Efficiency described in the resolution as unconstitutional and as effectively dismantling federal government institutions. Council Member Kendra Brooks moved for the resolution’s adoption; the motion carried by voice vote and was recorded as adopted.
Supporters in the public comment period argued the resolution defends democratic institutions. David Alexander Jenkins, among others, framed the matter in constitutional terms: "This is not efficiency. Ladies and gentlemen, this is at best oligarchy," Jenkins said, calling the actions an erosion of democracy and urging the city to stand firm. Ernest Wiley, speaking as an activist, described proposals to protect seniors financially if federal programs are disabled. Several other speakers voiced alarm about federal cuts to social programs and the potential local consequences.
Opponents of the measure or critics of the resolution’s framing also testified. Lynn Landis, representing SafeStreetsPhilly, said she opposed the resolution (which the transcript places on the calendar in proximity to other items) and disputed parts of the resolution’s language. Obona Hagans delivered a lengthy public comment arguing the council had not addressed local obligations to residents descended from enslaved people and called for additional institutional responses.
Council adoption was made by voice vote after the motion to adopt was seconded; the chair declared the ayes had it and the resolution was adopted. The resolution is a policy statement of the council expressing opposition to the cited federal actions; it does not itself change city code or appropriate funds.
Ending: The adopted resolution formalizes the council’s policy stance and may be used to support future advocacy and intergovernmental communications; it does not create a new city program or funding stream.
