When get the money, it should go to Logan. You're going to get the money, right?
No. We are not -- as we speak, we are actually not in receipt of the funds as it relates to the Section 108 for CD Year 26.
Yes. And when we receive them, they will be available during the coming fiscal year, and so the full amount that you are calling for will be available during fiscal 02.
It won't go anywhere else. The question of how it gets appropriated will depend in part on how Logan Assistance Corporation responds to the outstanding request for documentation and also on the Administration's policy for processing the relocation caseload of eligible relocatees that have still not yet received benefits and the 111 5/31/01 FINANCE - BILL 010373 question of whether some of that should be done through the Redevelopment Authority or through the Logan Assistance Corporation.
Well, I think the responsibility also rests -- as I understand it, there was supposed to be an effort made to come up with a plan to deal -- oh, the other question, the ineligibles. I understand that Specter and Santorum last year committed $300,000 in the federal budget to help with the ineligibles. Have you received that money? have you been asked to apply for that money?
I haven't received that money but I have heard the information that you described and I will get back to you.
What is your department doing to follow through to get those dollars?
I don't know what the plans are, but I will get back to you with more information on what the dollars are and what the opportunities are to pursue them.
Has anybody approached Senator Santorum or Senator Specter to 112 5/31/01 FINANCE - BILL 010373 follow through on the $300,000 commitment?
I don't know but, again, I'll find out and get back to you quickly.
Okay. Now, that money, I understand, was to be spent for. . . Okay, we still have four ineligibles who have to be settled, and that was to rest with you guys in terms of how you're going to handle that. So we have $3 million, plus $300,000, right?
Right. So, still, there are people in the rectangle who have to be -- I want the money to remain appropriated for Logan is the bottom line.
The other question -- let's talk about my favorite subject, which I'm sure you do not want to have a conversation about, and that is Bill 715. We passed Bill 715, which came as a result of last year's discussion here, where we wanted to gain additional dollars for 113 5/31/01 FINANCE - BILL 010373 counseling, and we were asked not to do that, not to amend the budget, but in the end, what we came up with was a bill to deal with predatory lending, which, as presently constituted, rests with your department. Could you tell me what's happening and what will happen by -- I think it's January 15th in terms of your oversight of Bill 715?
Well, I'm concerned about the legal issues that relate to the bill in one sense, but in another sense, the responsibility of OHCD is really a core responsibility that is apart from whatever may be going on with respect to the legal issues. Clearly, OHCD is the place where the counseling resource and the outreach and the intervention and the assistance has to take place. I don't know of any discussion of any other City agency handling that responsibility. And the need clearly is there; it's been demonstrated and documented in every possible way. So I -- it's just not appropriate for me 114 5/31/01 FINANCE - BILL 010373 as Director of OHCD to say, you know, we're going to wait on this and or we're going to wait and see or whatever. We've got a responsibility to move on the issue and address the issue. We've done a couple of things to date, and we're going to keep moving on this during Year 27. We've initiated, with the support of Alison Hughes, a training program for all of the existing housing counseling agencies. The first two rounds of training have been completed, a third round is in process. The testing of the counselors who have been trained has occurred; the testing results have been very satisfactory. I feel that the level of knowledge and expertise that our counselors have with respect to the predatory lending issue is substantially greater than it was a year ago or even six months ago as a result of this training. And I've initiated a series of biweekly meetings with representatives of the counseling agencies, coordinated through Miss Hughes and the housing counseling agency of Philadelphia and in concert with the Predatory Lending Task Force, and it does meetings every other week. We talk about what we are going to do together to increase the 115 5/31/01 FINANCE - BILL 010373 capability of our counseling agencies to address this issue. Our most recent meeting last Friday focused on two subjects, which I think are critical to Year 27. One was what exactly are the services that the counselors should be providing to people who have been victimized by a predatory lender or who will be warned about the threat of predatory lending. If somebody shows up at a City-funded counseling agency today and says, you know, I'm interested in purchasing a home, what services do you provide? The counselor can be very specific about what the scope of services is, and I can describe it to you. We don't have that kind of specific scope of services that relates to the predatory lending issue, and we're determined to get that by July 16th so that we have a written published statement of the services that are available through these counseling agencies. And when people contact these agencies as a result of our outreach, that they get a very clear presentation of what it is they're being offered. And there are trained staff in every 116 5/31/01 FINANCE - BILL 010373 counseling agency that is part of the promotion, and this will include most of the counseling agencies. There are trained staff who are ready and able to deliver that service. So the second issue that we have been focusing on, again, that we're determined to resolve by July the 16th is the mix of services that we'll be providing in the future, how much of the counseling effort should be devoted to the pre-purchase activities, which have been ongoing and are continuing, and to what extent should we shift counseling agency staff over to work more, or in some cases exclusively, on predatory lending. Again, the picture is changing substantially from the picture a year ago. We've got about 60 City-funded trained housing counselors, and by the middle of July, I would want to be able to tell you and the rest of the public what the breakdown in service is so that you would know how many of those 60 are working exclusively on predatory lending issues, how many are splitting their time between that and pre-purchase, and how many are continuing to work on pre-purchase.
We have also been discussing an outreach 117 5/31/01 FINANCE - BILL 010373 that would be supported by the City but would bring in the advocacy groups, the churches and the civic organizations, and do the things that we've talked about over the past year in terms of making known information about the threat of predatory lending and the opportunity to get assistance in dealing with that threat. And we'll be contacting the lending institutions and the intermediaries such as the Reinvestment Fund and ACORN who have expressed interest in developing new products and determine whether by the 16th, they could roll out those products; and if not, whether by the 16th, we could start promoting them, you know, for a roll-out in August or September. So, again, I'm very concerned about the legislation, the legal issues, and so on, but in terms of OHCD's responsibility and what we need to do and our determination to move forward, we're not slowing down. And to the extent that your office wants to see us doing something more than that, or if there's some request for additional support, we want to be very responsive, because there's no 25 question that that issue has got to be addressed. 118 5/31/01 FINANCE - BILL 010373
Well, in the bill, and until the Administration can decide which department will enforce the legislation, right now, OHCD is in the bill to do that.
But we left it to -- during the course of the legislation, we said, Well, it's up to the Administration to determine if they want someone else to do that but we believed it was the most appropriate as I believe the task force came up with -- the drafting committee decided, based on their intensive discussions, that since you are in housing and control the counseling process, that your department would be the best department to oversee the legislation. And let's forget the legal issues; that's an aside that we'll be taking care of. But we have to proceed in any case with or without that. And we do have to form the advisory board, which we will work with the Administration to do.
What about the enforcement piece? Have been given any instruction about that yet? 119 5/31/01 FINANCE - BILL 010373
No, I don't have any information on that but, again, I can provide some more detail if there's something additional to report.
Thank you, Councilwoman Tasco. Councilman Mariano.
You forgot to come -- you forgot to come to our meeting the other day that we had scheduled. You didn't call. I was left waiting at the altar. My feelings are hurt.
I'm sorry to leave you at the altar, but this is the first I've heard of the meeting.
Well, it was on my schedule. But anyhow, on May the 2nd of this year, I received a letter denying funding for the WCRP 120 5/31/01 FINANCE - BILL 010373 project at Third and Diamond. I understand you spoke about it a little when I was out for lunch there. What's the story with this?
I mentioned Third and Diamond as an example of the approach that we've got to take in the coming fiscal year in funding our development ventures, the need to do more neighborhood planning and link our funding decisions with neighborhood plans. If we weren't taking this approach, then the response I'd be giving you today would be, well, as you know, WCRP applied for funding through our last RFP and was unsuccessful. We'll have another RFP in January and they should apply again and we'll work with them to try to increase the chances that they'll be successful. Now, that approach was okay, and in that approach, we funded a lot of outstanding development ventures, so there was nothing wrong with that per se. But this year and in the future, that approach is not going to be enough because the block grant is not enough of a resource these days to support all of the development activities that we need to fund. In addition, we need to be more systemic 121 5/31/01 FINANCE - BILL 010373 and a little smarter about the way that we use the block grant in neighborhoods. There's a need for a little more planning to guide the investment, not just an RFP, but a neighborhood plan so that everything fits together. And as you know, the issue with respect to WCRP was that part of the parcel that was proposed for housing development, Phase and Phase of the residential venture, was the same land that the Commerce Department, apparently with the community's consent, had been acquiring for economic development. So somebody didn't talk to somebody else. And I don't think that means we need to get into a, you know, multi-year planning process, but I think it will be easy for everybody to get to the table and put together the appropriate plan for Norris Square. That includes the housing development, the economic development element, and included in that discussion WCRP. Where's it going to be, how many units, what's the cost going to be, CDBG and what else are going to be the funding sources, and how are we going to move this thing this coming fiscal year. 122 5/31/01 FINANCE - BILL 010373 The commitment to move ahead with ventures that you're concerned about, including Third and Diamond, is unchanged. We're going to work with you to get this moving and to get this to happen. We just want to do it a little more systematically than we did last year so that we won't be stuck as we were last year with this one and others.
So basically WCRP's project at Third and Diamond, I understand you're -- when you say economic development, I guess you're referring to that originally, they were in the KOZ and then they were told and they moved out. And when we had this meetings in my office a couple months ago, you didn't know anything about a KOZ, but Commerce tells me that your office knew all about it. Now, I'm a very simple guy. When am I getting the money, when are they doing the project? And if it's not going to happen this year, I'm going to make it happen this year. So you got to figure out how to do this dog and pony show that you come up here and every do it and not anger -- see I'm getting sensitive, I'm not going to say "pissed 123 5/31/01 FINANCE - BILL 010373 off," but not anger nine of us.
Because if the nine of us vote against this, nothing happens. So what you're saying is on the record. You understand that, right?
So am I getting that project this year, or am I not? No respects to the other Councilpeople, let them work on you. Third and Diamond I want that. Now, if that's not going to happen, tell me now. Don't come back in four months and tell me something different or come back in six months and we play this game forever, 'cause I can last, I'm getting paid by the hour here, it doesn't matter.
My commitment this year is the same as it's been every year. That is --
Mr. Kromer, am I getting the project at Third and Diamond? 124 5/31/01 FINANCE - BILL 010373
And then we sit down and we decide who gets and who don't get it. See, that's the problem that goes on. That's why nobody's here, that's why there's three or four or five or six Councilpeople sitting here. When you come and give us the same -- I don't know, what's the sensitive word for "bullshit"? Caca, the same caca every year. Come on, John. We're adults here.
Tell me I don't got it and I'll go lobby to get it, but we got to know.
Every venture that is published in the plan that is authorized by the Mayor and City Council moves ahead. That's the way it's been for a decade.
The Majority Leader asks projects, I gave her the project that I wanted, one project, she got it. I only have one in the 125 5/31/01 FINANCE - BILL 010373 district that I'm working on right now, that's it, and only because they were stiffed for the last couple years. This is very important project, but we have to make these things more clearer for us.
Absolutely, but some of that responsibility falls on the developer and --
And when we have a conflict between land uses, we've got to resolve that.
I got a feeling you can lie and keep a straight face. Am I getting my project?
How much money is there going to be citywide for projects?
If you look at the budget on the first pages of the budget breakdown, housing 126 5/31/01 FINANCE - BILL 010373 production, , the total amount is 18.4 million.
You mean you like DiCicco better than me? Is that what you're telling me?
So he's getting 16 three projects and I'm not getting any? John -- 17
You know, I got all the friends I need in the world. I just need to get this project done.
I understand. And we'll do -- as in the past, we'll work with you to get that done and to get the other development ventures that you identified moving. 127 5/31/01 FINANCE - BILL 010373
But 18.5 million -- well, how do you decide who gets what and what districts get anything? I mean, is it a top secret like a secret society I have to get in or what? I mean, what's going on? How do we decide?
There are two things we've got to do. One is, we've got to get them ready to be funded. WC --
And they've been sitting there for a couple years. You know, I'm getting different stories from them, from Commerce, and from you. That's what confuses this whole issue.
Proposing housing on a commercial development site does not constitute being ready for a plan.
Well, that was a mistake. Then they came and say, Okay, now we understand and we changed it, but that was a couple years ago. They've been waiting a couple years since they flipped off the KOZs, which, by the way, 128 5/31/01 FINANCE - BILL 010373 they had this before the City came and made it a KOZ. And when come into a neighborhood and decide that something's going to be a Keystone Opportunity Zone, who are you calling? They're not calling me, I'm just a District Councilman there. They're not Angel, he's an at-large Councilman, or Councilman Goode or anybody.
Yeah, they authorized KOZs, but you didn't ask us to pick where they were going to be, 'cause I wouldn't have wanted to pick there 'cause I would have known that RCP wanted their project there.
I think what is not being said is that, in essence, the same thing that happened the other day here, when we had the Chief of Staff. The problem is that there is a neighborhood transformation plan that has not been developed. The CDBG money is going to go into that 129 5/31/01 FINANCE - BILL 010373 supposed plan that is supposed to be developed. Since it hasn't been developed and they have not made a decision on how they're going to make use of that CDBG money, the poor gentleman here cannot give you any explanation as to what because all of that money is going into NTI, and then that's why we keep on asking questions of the -- as you asked the question of the Chief of Staff, and they had no 10 answers for that. So they're trying to decide -- I mean, they're trying to reconcile different budgets here -- PHA, CDBG, right? What else, RDA or something? Come up with some private investment that -- you know, this is like the stadium deal, right? There are shortfalls here, there are shortfalls, there are shortfalls everywhere. And there are plans galore, but no plan in black and white. So places that need economic development, that need a comprehensive -- the Fifth Street Corridor, Frankford and so on, we cannot get to that because nobody knows what they're going to do as of the present time. That's where we're at, isn't it?
He's not allowed to 130 5/31/01 FINANCE - BILL 010373 say. And let me just say this. Councilman unlike you, I don't see a bogeyman behind every rock, and I believe that's good. But, Councilman, what I really think it is is, he's here doing his job, he can tap dance all day long, but you know what? I sat down with this mayor when he was a mayor for three months, and we sat up in my office upstairs, and my staff went, Christ, we've been working here six years and we never seen the Mayor come up on the fourth floor, on the fifth floor, he sat in there. We sent a guy to Milwaukee, we sent a guy to Baltimore. And you know what, it's a big plan. You don't just knock houses down, they know that.
But -- (Unintelligible, parties talking over each other.)
But something's being missed here. I hear what you're saying. I don't totally agree, but something's amiss here, and the thing that's amiss is, the Commerce Department don't know he's doing or he don't know what they're doing. So I'm not sure exactly what's going on. 131 5/31/01 FINANCE - BILL 010373 And that's why I wanted to introduce the bill. We could have introduced the bill and hashed it out here and found out that's just what they had in mind.
That's exactly what I said. They haven't spoken yet. In order to develop that plan that they're supposed to present to us at one moment or another. It could be six months from now, it could be a year from now, but the CDBG money is going to be a part of that NTI plan.
I really feel left out of this dialogue. If I could just speak for a moment. I really, with respect, would not agree with your characterization, Councilman Ortiz. It's not really correct that the --
John, don't feel bad. The glass half full in his world -- or half empty. Mine's half full. It's just differences in people.
I wouldn't say that the block grant going into the Neighborhood Transformation Initiative. Clearly, the block grant is -- 132 5/31/01 FINANCE - BILL 010373
We agree. It's one part of the Neighborhood Transformation Initiative. At the same time, though, in terms of what's in black and white, here it is, and it's very similar to what has been presented in the past in terms of the range of activities. What's different -- and this is a critical issue -- is that we don't have the money that we used to have, we don't have enough money to pay for all of the preservation activities that need to go on citywide in the areas that we're concerned about, plus pay for --
You got ten 133 5/31/01 FINANCE - BILL 010373 District Councilpeople. If you're not asking us, who are you asking, who? The Mayor certainly knows that, he was a District Councilman. He sat in that seat, then went up there. He knows. Who are we asking? You didn't ask me 'cause I told you we wanted to do this one. Maybe you asked DiCicco, I don't know. Or maybe you asked Councilwoman Blackwell. John, you're doing a job, and I understand it. And if it looks like I'm picking on you, tough, you're a big boy, you're getting paid big money. I got to have these answers for these people. This isn't fun. You know, we do the same stuff all the time. Now we're changing the plan in the middle of the game without explaining the rules? Come on, if you can't tell us, who can you tell?
I'm for the program. I want to introduce it and hash it all here and start finding out what's going on 'cause I'm excited about it. I know the people in Frankford got plans and I know the people down here have plans in they're different from the ones in 134 5/31/01 FINANCE - BILL 010373 Frankford, and the people on Byberry Road have different plans. We understand all of that, but everybody around here is so afraid of everybody, they're afraid to say what they really want to -- what has to be said.
I understand. And if my top priority were making you happy, then I'd say --
Well, then I would marry you, John. (Unintelligible, parties talking over each other.)
Before that, I'd say we promise $1.5 million to WCRP. You'd be happy, we'd go on our way. that won't work, for a couple of reasons. The proposal that we have, that we received, that has legal standing that we got several months ago -- not several years ago -- conflicts with another community proposal for economic development in the same location.
And that's unacceptable. And we can't straighten that out on the fly. We've got to be serious about what the plan is. 135 5/31/01 FINANCE - BILL 010373 Secondly --
John what was the key word of that meeting? Who did we bring in there? We brought Patricia DiCarlo up and she told you there was certain people that were designated and they're the ones that want that here. I mean, I have nothing against the other group. Let's go on to other plans. That's what I don't understand.
Well, we'll get it done, and that's our commitment, to work with you.
It's the same commitment as we give every year. During the fiscal year, we're going to work with you and the developer to get this thing moving ahead.
And there's no 19 other problems with that that we need to know about? Could you call my staff and tell Huey anything that has to be cleaned up for that so we can do that?
There are really -- you can call them "problems," but there are two big issues we've got to address. One is, what is the plan for 136 5/31/01 FINANCE - BILL 010373 that area, where is the housing going to go, where is the commercial going to go, is everybody on board with the assignment of various land uses. We should be able to straighten that out pretty quickly. But can't have a situation in which the written proposal says one thing and the phone call tells me something different a little bit later. Secondly, we've got to have a funding approach. We don't have enough money to fund Third and Diamond and all of the other ventures that we've committed to. And that's really where the Neighborhood Transformation Initiative comes in. We've got to broaden resource case. In some cases, we can bring in other public agencies like the Housing Authority, to which Councilman Ortiz referred. But without that, we're not going to get anything done.
John, the Norris Square Civic Association supports this plan and they are the group of record in that area. I mean, we set up rules and then they go by 'em and then we change them. Am I wrong? Is Norris Square the group of record?
Do I have to go up there and bring Patricia down here to tell you? She told you, right?
So then why is this happening? Why are we to this point? This should have been done two years ago, but it's not, so I want to do it this year.
That's great and we're going to work with you to achieve that.
Then why are you saying we got to straighten things out? We don't. We know who's in charge at that point, them. Why?
Can you tell me something outside off the record? You could tell me that.
This isn't a game with me. I want to make these people happy 'cause that's what I was elected to do and I want to do 138 5/31/01 FINANCE - BILL 010373 it. I mean, it doesn't matter if you like me or not.
You've done what you need to do. And as in every year, we're going to work with you to move this to implementation. That's all we need to say. What I need to do, though, with your support, is to sit down, not only with the civic association and not only receive, you know, the letter or the phone call, but look at the total plan for that community to make sure that one group's interest, WCRP's, isn't conflicting with some other interest. And that's the problem we've had. It's a solvable problem and we're going to work with you to solve it.
Somewhere along the line, you told Norris Square that they were the group of record and, you know, I didn't make that up, you didn't make that up, somebody's -- so why do we got to do that now?
Absolutely. They're the 139 5/31/01 FINANCE - BILL 010373 group we'll work with, and that's the only commitment we make to any group: We're going to work with you, we're going to collaborate with you.
Well, didn't they make that clear when we had that meeting at my office that that's what they wanted? I mean, Patricia stood there and told us, right?
Well, even at that meeting, I didn't have a clarification on the Commerce Department acquisition and the KOZ, which, apparently, they supported as well.
So I was hearing two different versions from the same source.
But you and I, we're clear now on what I want there and what Norris Square wants. Do we need to make anybody else happy there?
You and I, I think, are very clear, and I don't think it will be difficult to bring in the other parties that need to be part of a plan for that area and get this thing together.
Could you tell me who the other parties are on the record, or would 140 5/31/01 FINANCE - BILL 010373 you rather tell me --
Oh, absolutely. It's primarily the Commerce Department and the Planning Commission to make sure that we're all on the same page.
But there's no 8 other civic groups that's going to be mad at us, is there?
You're shaking your head, Rose. Stand up and tell me. Let's get this out 'cause I got all night. My pizza don't come till 6. Rose, come on and testify. (Witness comes forward.)
This is the stuff that drives me crazy. I want to know what goes on 'cause this is the only thing I get to do. And when I walk from here to the bathroom, a million people are grabbing me for other things and I only have so much left up here. Go ahead. Say your name for the record and who you represent. 141 5/31/01 FINANCE - BILL 010373
Rose Gray, Director of Development for Association Puerto Riquenos En Marcha. I'm here today, as I say, out of order, but I'll speak our piece. There is a conflict between Norris Square Civic and Association Puerto Riquenos En Marcha about boundaries, and it's been that way for the last ten years. We were not aware of the project at the beginning of it, and we work with the community group, and we're working with the Empowerment Zone to create an economic corridor so we support the separation of housing and industrial development along American Street. So if Miss DiCarlo or Nora (indiscernible) want to speak with me, that's fine. But our boundaries go to American to Eighth, York to Montgomery.
But the stuff that's boggling my mind is somewhere along the line, somebody told Norris Square that they were the boss of bosses here in that particular area. You know 142 5/31/01 FINANCE - BILL 010373 what I mean, they were the community group -- (Unintelligible, parties talking over each other.)
They were the civic group of record, but you understand that, right?
Yes. But, Councilman, whatever's good for the community, and we have a difference of opinion --
And we can try to work it out but I've not been contacted by either party.
Okay. We'll do that next week, but now that you've cleared that up, how does that happen, John? How does Norris Square get to the point where they're the civic group of record and she don't know it, but her group's the next one up.
I don't think it's the City, 143 5/31/01 FINANCE - BILL 010373 it's the community group to figure it out. That's my opinion.
But somewhere along the line, Commerce or John's group or somebody has to set up rules or we'd all just be free agents running around and it would be bedlam.
Our work in the Third and Diamond area, to the extent that any community group has been involved has been exclusively with Norris Square. And so we've continued to communicate with them. We really haven't had any activity with APM in the Third and Diamond area, but if they're an interested party, if there's a need to bring them in or any other group, we need to be open to that.
Rose, how does all that happen? Like, how do you -- like, you've been doing that stuff for a long time, as long as I've been Councilman, I know that. How does it get to the point where you find out that? Who do you call? I mean, do you -- how do you find out who makes the decisions? You know, you're fighting for projects, they're fighting for projects, and we're all driving Kromer nuts for money.
This is the first time we've 144 5/31/01 FINANCE - BILL 010373 ever stumbled onto an issue like this.
Usually it's pretty clear-cut. So this is an overlap of a project, it's an overlap.
She was jumping up and down back there and I had to --
I'm glad, I'm glad. So, John, what did we learn here today? Run everything past Councilman Mariano and his district so he knows. Don't listen to the at-large people, they're not interested, right guys? They're not saying nothing. Wilson's laughing. Angel, he's throwing stuff at me. We're going to do this, right? How many times did I ask him Wilson, ten? All right. Wilson's got my back over there. Thank you, Mr. Kromer. 145 5/31/01 FINANCE - BILL 010373
Thank you very much. Mr. Kromer, on , under Employment and Training, only a handful of employment and training providers are identified and none in West Philadelphia are identified. Is it possible for us to include -- for example, we have -- in fact, we someone who's here, Jean Bunn, who does the Hospitality Institute that we're trying to get. We have a commitment from Penn to use their hotels and she could provide the training. Is there some way we could expand that program to include something for west and southwest?
We'd like to do two things. One is expand the effort, but secondly, to the extent possible, just take it out of the CDBG funding stream and get more activities funded through the workforce development programs that were intended to fund them. So we'd be glad to look at that programs and others in West Philadelphia as part of an effort 146 5/31/01 FINANCE - BILL 010373 to increase the funding resources for that.
Thank you. I'll send you a memo -- I'll send you a letter with that regard.
Also, let me ask you about jobs. I know on , is it? 70, PHDC refers to jobs. I know we've referred people to them in the past, although we don't get feedback. How does that work? I mean, I came up with a flyer that we had from, like, 1999 and some of the things they list are carpentry, electrical, wiring, etc., etc., life skills readiness, driver education, and a coupled with that, maybe this is something that can be done in conjunction with the unions and their new added emphasis in our city today. (Witness comes forward.)
My name's Anthony McIntosh, the Executive Vice President of the Philadelphia Housing Development Corporation.
Yes, good evening. 147 5/31/01 FINANCE - BILL 010373
Good evening. In response to your question, the Job Center assists in identifying employment opportunities for residents throughout the City of Philadelphia. With respect to the maintenance, mechanics and things of that nature, we're no longer directly involved in that activity, but we are assisting people in identifying the various opportunities throughout the City.
So you don't have the Job Center that you once did?
No, we do not. The level of funding has been reduced over the years, and right now, the only funding that we still have in place is the funding that's made available through the Office of Housing and Community Development.
Again, I think this is an opportunity to tie in the workforce development programs and have them funded from the sources which were intended for that purpose.
Okay. Thank you very much. 148 5/31/01 FINANCE - BILL 010373 Do you know how far behind and what the backlog is for weatherization and basic system repairs and generally where we are and what we can do in that regard? I know there's never enough money for anything in life, but what we can do. So many people require these services.
Again, not to belabor the point, but as you're fully aware, the demands on the program far outweigh the resources available to serve the needs of the people. With respect to the weatherization program, right now, we're in a very fortune situation in that we were recently awarded additional funding from the State to provide weatherization assistance. And right now, there is not a waiting list to assist people in addressing weatherization needs. With respect to the waiting list for the basic system repair program, it varies, depending on the trade. For example, heating assistance, right now today, there is not a delay in getting assistance to people in need of heating repairs. However, as it relates to some of the other trades, on an average, I would say we have 149 5/31/01 FINANCE - BILL 010373 about a nine- to ten-month -- and that's average. For example, our plumbing waiting list is well over a year. But in some of our other areas, the time is less than that. For example, roofing, it's short of six months.
What area? Oh, you said roofing. I'm sorry, I didn't hear you.
Okay, thank you. I'll tell my folks who call you every day.
The VSRP is another example of the resource problem, where we can't simply come in and say, you know, we wish we had more money. We've got to find other resources and bring them into play. And I've cited the West Oak Lane program as one example of that, that leveraging. We really flood to do a lot more so that we're servicing the people that need repair work.
Thank you. Do you know about some disability advocates that are worried about the adaptive modification program? And they claim they have a backlog as high as seven years for disabled residents. That may be Scott Wilds's area. 150 5/31/01 FINANCE - BILL 010373