Here’s what to know about Philly’s three ballot questions
The ballot questions ask Philadelphia voters to weigh in on Home Rule Charter spending, homeless services, and prison oversight.
The 2025 primary election will be held May 20.
This year, in addition to casting ballots in the district attorney’s race and a number of judicial races, Philadelphia voters will be asked to answer three questions that, if passed, could lead to:
More city spending on affordable housing programs and projects
An independent board to oversee Philadelphia’s prison system
An independent inspector to advocate on behalf of Philadelphians experiencing homelessness and their families, investigate grievances, and provide oversight and recommendations to city officials dealing with homelessness.
These initiatives require changes to Philadelphia’s Home Rule Charter, which is essentially the city’s constitution.
Keep in mind: While Pennsylvania has a closed primary system, meaning you’ll only be able to vote for candidates affiliated with your registered party, that doesn’t apply to the ballot questions. Anyone can vote on them.
Here’s what to know about the ballot questions:
Question 1
Context:
Homelessness in Philadelphia rose for the third straight year in 2024, when more than 5,000 Philadelphians experienced homelessness, according to the annual point-in-time count conducted by the Office of Homeless Services. While that’s still a lower figure than pre-pandemic levels, the amount of unsheltered individuals — those not in a homeless shelter or transitional housing — surged by nearly 40% from the previous year, the office found.
The city’s Office of Homeless Services provides resources aimed at assisting those individuals, from emergency shelters to linking residents with free meals and rapid rehousing programs.
Homelessness advocates, however, would like to see that office held accountable, with the goal of better services, improved spending, and resolved complaints.
City Council approved legislation last year to establish the Office of Homeless Services ombudsperson, an individual who would act as an independent inspector for the Office of Homeless Services, investigating grievances on residents’ behalf and advocating for those who the system may overlook.
If a homeless individual complained about physical conditions within a city shelter, for example, the ombudsperson would have the authority to independently investigate that concern on their behalf. Other major cities like New York, Washington D.C., and San Diego have created similar positions to address their own homelessness challenges.
Should voters enshrine the role into Philadelphia’s charter, the ombudsperson would have the authority to advocate not only for homeless individuals, but their family members, too, and would provide recommendations to the Managing Director’s Office. In addition, the ombudsperson would have the power to subpoena testimony over the course of its investigations.
If passed:
The city would create the position of an ombudsperson for the Office of Homeless Services. The mayor would nominate the ombudsperson, who would be subject to approval by City Council.
Question 2
Context:
Since the creation of the Housing Trust Fund in 2005, the initiative has helped address the housing needs of thousands of low-income Philadelphians through the creation of new, affordable housing units, payments for critical home repairs, adaptive property modifications for those with disabilities, eviction prevention, and programs designed to prevent homelessness.
In 2018, the city added another tool to addresses affordability: under the mixed-income housing program, building developers can bypass local zoning restrictions to increase the density of their new housing projects if they either 1.) construct additional, price-restricted affordable housing units or 2.) make “payments in lieu” of affordable housing to the city.
While those payments are supposed to go toward affordable housing programs, they are also nonbinding and can technically be used elsewhere; only a portion have made it to the Housing Trust Fund. Instead, city officials devote a fixed percentage of the general fund (at least .5%) to support the Housing Trust Fund each year.
Affordable housing advocates would like to see a change. They say more of those developer payments should be used for affordable housing, and that depending on how many projects are constructed in a given year, the sum raised from new projects can surpasses the city’s contribution.
City Council voted last year to approve changes to the city’s charter that, if enacted by ballot measure, would require that 100% of payments in lieu of affordable housing be appropriated to the Housing Trust Fund.
Budget officials in Mayor Cherelle L. Parker’s administration opposed the idea. They say the city doesn’t need another fixed cost that could avert funding away from other priorities like public education and violence prevention, and estimate that the decision could cost the city around $25 million over the next five years.
If passed:
Payments in lieu of affordable housing would be appropriated to the Housing Trust Fund.
Question 3
Context:
Philadelphia’s prison system has long been the subject to a myriad of complaints, and advocates have spoken out about poor conditions in jail cells, overcrowding, high-profile escapes, and a chronic shortage of corrections officers that has exacerbated those issues.
Oversight is conducted by the Prison Advisory Board, a seven-person body which is maintained under the Philadelphia Department of Prisons. The board, like the prison system itself, has become a target of criticism in recent years, and former members say that the group meets infrequently, out of the public eye, and without full independence from the department it is meant to keep in check.
City Council members are looking to change that. A proposal passed late last year approves the creation of a Philadelphia Prison Community Oversight Board and an Office of Prison Oversight, putting the initiative up for a ballot measure vote.
Advocates say the new board would be required to hold monthly meetings and provide recommendations to the Office of Prison Oversight and the Department of Prisons on policy and best practices.
The companion organization, the Office of Prison Oversight, would work to increase transparency within the Department of Prisons by monitoring facilities, maintaining access to databases and documents, meeting with staff and incarcerated individuals, and developing community education programs.
The office would be housed under the Office of Public Safety in order to maintain independence from the Department of Prisons. The goal is for increased transparency and accountability, advocates say, with consistent meetings, public participation, and minutes made available online — as well as oversight by City Council itself.
If passed:
The Philadelphia Prison Community Oversight Board and an Office of Prison Oversight would be created. The board would likely include four members appointed by the City Council president, four appointed by the mayor’s administration, and one appointed by the city controller. At least one member is required to have been previously incarcerated in a Philadelphia prison.