City Council candidates say public safety is the No. 1 issue. But what can city lawmakers actually do to curb violence?

In the wake of the shooting outside Roxborough High School in September, when four young men killed a 14-year-old and injured four others after a football scrimmage, Philadelphia’s City Council members did what they often do after a high-profile act of gun violence.

They voiced their outrage, promised they’re doing everything they can, and called for “additional action by the city.” Their reactions reflected Council’s limited powers when it comes to addressing gun violence: Council members can appropriate money and they can apply pressure on the mayor.

And yet dozens of other Council candidates are running this year on promises to reduce crime — a top issue in this year’s municipal election.

» READ MORE: Philly’s gun violence remained at record levels for the third straight year

Most candidates’ platforms are thin on details. Some offer more specific creative ideas, like using drones to respond to crime scenes in real time, while others talk up broader structural changes, like improving the public school system and access to family-sustaining jobs.

“The expectation is that we can fix [gun violence], but the reality is that, while we can legislate ways to help, we give the money to the administration and they spend it as they see fit,” said Councilmember Jimmy Harrity, a Democratic at-large lawmaker now seeking his first full term in office. “We gotta try everything, because it’s bad.”

But before you vote in the May 16 primary, it’s worth noting what Council can and can’t do to attack the problem.

The mayor has far more power than Council over public safety policy. The top executive chooses a police commissioner, sets policing priorities, and most important, gets to spend taxpayer dollars.

City Council approves the mayor’s budget, and can seek to steer dollars toward different public safety initiatives and guide policy through the budget process. But spending city money and implementing programs and policies is out of their hands.

And Philadelphia officials and advocacy groups have long been fighting against “preemption” rules that stop local governments from setting their own laws on issues like gun control and the minimum wage.

» READ MORE: From 2022: After the South Street shooting, frustration mounts over the Pennsylvania law that keeps Philly from passing its own gun control

“I think we sometimes expect our local elected officials to have complete control over these situations, but they have limited options at their fingertips without support from the state or federal government,” said Adam Garber, executive director of CeaseFire PA.

Council members’ offices are often flooded with phone calls from residents about the city’s unrelenting gun violence. And sometimes, despite their limited powers, they introduce legislation that touches on the issue.

Last year, Council passed a few dozen resolutions that involved gun violence: recognizing “Gun Violence Awareness Month” and “Gun Violence Survivor’s Week,” authorizing various Council committees to hold hearings on gun violence and related social ills, and honoring organizations and community leaders for their work around violence prevention.

That’s not to say symbolic gestures are limited to Council.

Most Democratic mayoral candidates are vowing to declare a gun violence emergency in Philadelphia — something they criticize Mayor Jim Kenney for not doing. Such declarations can allow governments to open up new funding resources and mobilize response units after natural disasters, but some say the move in Philadelphia would be ceremonial at best.

Right now, City Council is negotiating Kenney’s proposed $6 billion budget for the next fiscal year, which it must approve by the end of June. Kenney’s proposal includes a significant boost to the police department’s budget, as well as more funding for violence prevention initiatives and quality-of-life improvements.

Some Democratic candidates — like cybersecurity attorney Jalon Alexander — see the budget process as an opportunity to vouch for policies such as drone surveillance by police. Others, like Democrat Amanda McIllmurray, emphasize fully funding parks, rec centers, and libraries as a violence deterrent.

Council has the most impact when setting the city budget.

Council members often point to the more than $200 million it funneled toward anti-violence programs in recent years as an example of their work around violence — even if, as Council President Darrell L. Clarke noted last year, Council doesn’t spend that money or control the success of the programs.

Council’s other big power? The bully pulpit. Lawmakers often use their megaphones to apply pressure to the mayor, department leaders, or other elected officials.

Sometimes the budget and the pulpit overlap. (See Councilmember Cindy Bass excoriating District Attorney Larry Krasner over violent crime at the DA’s budget hearing this week.)

Council members view bringing stakeholders together as a big part of the job.

Eryn Santamoor, a former Council staffer now running in the Democratic primary for an at-large seat, is campaigning on a promise to develop a 90-day “community safety plan” tailored to each neighborhood’s needs, in coordination with the mayor and district attorney.

“It can’t just be all on the mayor, or the police commissioner, or the DA, it’s gotta be everyone working in concert,” Santamoor said. “Residents don’t care what your title is, they just want to know what you’re doing to make them safe.”

Council can also pass laws with a more tangential connection to gun violence.

In December, for example, the body approved a permanent 10 p.m. curfew for Philly teens, despite little evidence suggesting it would reduce juvenile crime or victimization rates. Council has also championed nighttime resource centers to provide at-risk youth with a safe space to go after curfew.

“I’m not going to apologize for seeking to do all that I can to help our young people,” Councilmember Katherine Gilmore Richardson, who championed the curfews and is seeking reelection to a second term, said in December.

Garber, of CeaseFire PA, said Council could be more proactive and efficient in using its limited tools. Hearings are often clustered around budget season instead of spaced throughout the year, he said.

Council could also do more to pressure the success of violence interruption programs that it appropriated millions to fund.

The city has yet to launch an ambitious anti-violence program called Philadelphia READI that it announced three years ago. Garber said the city still has been slow to release long-promised evaluations for many of its existing anti-violence programs. (Officials in November released a set of critical reports about one of the city’s key violence intervention programs, and issued another report in February showing encouraging results in another program.)

“I think the Council could make a more robust effort to oversee and implement those programs,” Garber said. “They can be a helpful thought partner and a resource partner if they’re discussing things openly.”