COMMITTEE ON FINANCE, June 3, 2026

COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA COMMITTEE ON FINANCE Room 400, City Hall Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Wednesday, June 3, 2026 10:05 a.m. PRESENT: COUNCILWOMAN KATHERINE GILMORE RICHARDSON, CHAIR COUNCILWOMAN CINDY BASS, VICE-CHAIR COUNCILWOMAN NINA AHMAD COUNCILMAN CURTIS JONES, JR.

COUNCILWOMAN RUE LANDAU COUNCILMAN MARK SQUILLA COUNCILMAN JEFFREY YOUNG, JR. BILLS: 250915, 260299, 260507, 260508 260509, 260510, 260511, 260512, 260513, 260521, 260527, 260564 - - -

Good morning. Good morning. I now note that the hour has come to begin today's hearing. Clerk, will you please call the roll to take attendance. Members who are in attendance will please indicate that you are present when your name is called.

Councilmember Jones.

Present.

Councilmember Ahmad.

Present.

Councilmember Driscoll.

Present.

Councilmember Thomas. (No response.)

Vice-Chair Bass.

Present.

Chair Gilmore Richardson.

I am present. Thank you. A quorum of the committee is present and this hearing is now called to order. This is the public hearing of the Committee on Finance regarding Bill Nos. 260564, 260510, 260509, 260527, 260508, 260513, 260507, 260511, 260512, 260299 and 260521. And for the record, Bill No. 250915 is being held and will not be heard in today's committee hearing. And I wanted to make a very quick statement about Bill No. 23 250519. And let me just triple- check the bill number. Bill No. 1 250519 was introduced by Councilmember Thomas. It was listed for this hearing. That legislation would partially exempt some child care businesses from the Business Income and Receipt Tax we all know as BIRT. I wanted to ensure that we addressed some of the confusion that was noted by our Chief Clerk this morning prior to our committee hearing in the Committee of the Whole regarding Bill No. 251026, which was introduced by Councilmember Driscoll. That bill 16 would create exemptions to the BIRT tax, and that bill was not listed for a hearing today. However, over the summer, Councilmember Driscoll and Councilmember Thomas have committed to work on the legislation to sort of combine both bills to make the best bill so that we can hear that legislation potentially in the fall. And so, I'm committed to working with both Councilmember Thomas and also Councilmember Driscoll on their BIRT legislation. They have committed to continuing to do this work together, and I'm excited about the work that they will do that will positively impact our small business community here in the city of Philadelphia. So I wanted to state that for the record just in case anyone was here to provide public testimony regarding either Bill No. 250519 or Bill No. 251026 Okay. Thank you very, very much. Clerk, will you please read the titles of the bills.

Bill No. 21 260564, an ordinance authorizing encroachments in the nature of a sidewalk cafe in the vicinity of 2351 South Front Street, under certain terms and conditions. Bill No. 260510, an ordinance authorizing the City Treasurer, on behalf of the City, to enter into a provider agreement with Citizens Bank National Association for provision of payroll banking services to the City, under certain terms and conditions. Bill No. 260509, an ordinance authorizing the Commissioner of Public Property of The City of Philadelphia, on behalf of The City of Philadelphia and in cooperation with The Philadelphia Municipal Authority, to undertake a Project to promote the health, safety and welfare of the residents of The City of Philadelphia; authorizing and approving (i) a project including the refunding of bonds issued to refinance the New Youth Center Facility, (ii) one or more amendments to an existing Ground Lease, as previously amended, between The City of Philadelphia and The Philadelphia Municipal Authority, (iii) one or more amendments to an existing Prime Lease, as previously amended, between The City of Philadelphia and The Philadelphia Municipal Authority and the assignment of such amendments to a trustee and (iv) the obligation of The City of Philadelphia to pay rent under the Prime Lease, as amended, when due; approving the issuance by The Philadelphia Municipal Authority of bonds, in one or more series, from time to time, to pay the costs of such project; authorizing certain officers of The City of Philadelphia to enter into such lease amendments and to take such other actions as may be necessary or appropriate to accomplish the intent and purpose of this Ordinance; agreeing to be bound by each and every provision, covenant and agreement set forth in the Ground Lease and Prime Lease, each as amended; covenanting that The City of Philadelphia will make necessary appropriations in each of The City of Philadelphia’s fiscal years to provide for, and make, rental payments when due under the Prime Lease, as amended; all under certain terms and conditions. Bill No. 260527, an ordinance authorizing and approving the execution and delivery of a Service Agreement between The City of Philadelphia and The Philadelphia Municipal Authority relating to the financing of the acquisition of 400 North Broad Street and 1501 Callowhill Street (together with certain ancillary property rights), which premises the City has sub-leased for use as the City’s police headquarters and certain other uses; approving the issuance by the Authority of bonds, notes or other evidences of indebtedness (including reimbursement obligations related to lines or letters of credit) in one or more series to finance or refinance such acquisition costs and authorizing and approving the obligation of The City of Philadelphia to pay in full when due the Service Fee and other amounts payable under the Service Agreement; authorizing certain City officers to take certain actions required to issue such bonds, notes or other evidences of indebtedness; covenanting that The City of Philadelphia will make necessary appropriations in each of the City’s fiscal years to provide for, and will make timely payments of, the Service Fee and other amounts due under the Service Agreement; and authorizing and approving the Director of Finance of the City and other City officials to take other necessary or appropriate actions to effectuate the purposes of this ordinance; all under certain terms and conditions. Bill No.

260508, an ordinance authorizing an increase in the non-electoral indebtedness of the City within the Pennsylvania constitutional limit; authorizing the Bond Committee to sell bonds at public or private negotiated sale, to provide funds toward various capital municipal purposes; providing for appropriations to the Sinking Fund Commission for the payment of such bonds; and authorizing agreements to provide credit or payment or liquidity sources for the bonds in connection with issuance of the bonds, and certain other actions. Bill No. L. 1449, Section 4, as amended, to prevent and eliminate blight; authorizing the Director of Planning and Development and the Director of Commerce to file 24 applications to obtain other grants from the Commonwealth; authorizing the Director of Commerce to use the Section 108 Loan Guarantee Program; and authorizing the Director of Planning and Development and the Director of Commerce to enter into all understandings and assurances contained in such applications and take all necessary action to accept the grants; all under certain terms and conditions. Bill No. 260507, an ordinance amending Chapter 19-1200 of The Philadelphia Code, entitled "Parking Tax," to amend the definition of parking facility to exclude bus loading facilities from imposition of the parking tax, under certain terms and conditions. Bill No. 260511, an ordinance approving the Fiscal Year 2027 Capital Budget, providing for expenditures for the capital purposes of the Philadelphia Gas Works, including the supplying of funds in connection therewith, and acknowledging receipt of the Revised Forecast of the Capital Budgets for Fiscal Years 2028 through 2023 or 2032, all under certain terms and conditions. Bill No. 260512, an ordinance approving the amendment of the Fiscal Year 2026 Capital Budget providing for expenditures for the capital purposes of the Philadelphia Gas Works (including the supplying of funds in connection therewith) subject to certain constraints and conditions and acknowledging the receipt of the Revised Forecast of Capital Budgets for Fiscal Years 2027 through 2031, as amended. Bill No. 260299, an ordinance amending Section 9-803 of the Philadelphia Code, entitled “Fair Housing Commission,” and Section 20-304 of The Philadelphia Code, entitled “Compensation for Members of Boards, Commissions, Committees and Councils," to amend the compensation paid to members of the Fair Housing Commission and delete superfluous provisions, all under certain terms and conditions. And finally Bill No. 10 260521, an ordinance amending Title 22 of The Philadelphia Code, entitled "Public Employees Retirement Code, by modifying the circumstances when certain City of Philadelphia employees are entitled to service-connected death benefits, all under certain terms and conditions.

Thank you. Thank you very, very much. We will now call the first panel here to testify on Bill 24 No. 260564.

Will Noelle Marconi, Director of Legislative Affairs for the Department of Streets, make their way to the podium. (Witness approached witness table.)

Thank you. Thank you so much for being here again. Welcome home. Please state your name for the record and proceed with your testimony.

Good morning, Chairperson Gilmore Richardson and members of the Finance Committee. My name is Noelle Marconi, and I'm the Director of Legislative Affairs for the Department of Streets. I'm here today to offer testimony on Bill No. 260564, introduced by Councilmember Squilla. This bill authorizes 2351 Anthony Real Estate LLC, the owner, to install, own, and maintain encroachments in the nature of a sidewalk cafe at Walt's Restaurant, located at 2351 South Front Street. A total of seven tables and 28 seats for a sidewalk cafe will be located along the north sidewalk of Ritter Street, along the property line of 2351 South Front Street, and the east sidewalk of South Front Street along the property line of 2351 South Front Street, six tables and seats will be located adjacent 16 to the property line of 2351 South 17 Front Street, and one table and 18 four seats will be located adjacent 19 to the property line of 2351 South 20 Front, the Department of Streets is 21 not opposed to this proposed 22 sidewalk cafe as it will maintain 23 seven feet six inches of clear 24 unobstructed footway on both Ritter Street and South Front Street, making meeting the complete streets policy. This concludes my testimony and I'm pleased to answer any questions.

Thank you. Thank you very much for your testimony. Are there any questions or comments from the members of the committee for this witness? (No response.)

Okay. Seeing none, we thank you very much for being here today. There being no 18 additional panels for Bill No. 19 260564, we will please call any names that we have for public comment for Bill No. 260564. (No response.)

Thank you. Seeing none, we will now proceed with our next bill. Clerk, will you please call the first panel we have to testify on Bill No. 260510.

We have Jacqueline Dunn, the City Treasurer, and Shakina Clark, Deputy City Treasurer of Banking. (Witnesses approached witness table.)

Thank you. Thank you very much for being here. As you approach the witness table, please state your name for the record and proceed with your testimony. CITY TREASURER DUNN: Good morning, Chair Gilmore Richardson and members of the Committee on Finance. I'm Jackie Dunn, City Treasurer, and with me this morning is Shakina Clark, Deputy City Treasurer for Banking. I'm here to testify in favor of Bill No. 260510. This bill would provide authorization to the City Treasurer's office, on behalf of the city, to enter into an agreement with Citizens Bank for provision of payroll banking services from the period July 1, 2026 to June 30, 2027, under certain terms and conditions. This would be the first amendment of the current contract. For background, in June 2006 the city enacted legislation that required the Treasurer's Office to implement a request for a proposal process, seeking proposals from qualified institutions to provide banking services for accounts related to payroll disbursements that include payments to employees, payroll deductions, and payroll taxes. This legislation also required that no 2 contract amendment with a proposed recipient of payroll banking services be executed until it has been approved by City Council with an ordinance. In 2024, the Treasurer's Office issued a banking services RFP, which resulted in Citizens Bank ranking as the most qualified institution. Citizens Bank served as the city's payroll depository since 2017 when City Council approved the initial contract and was again recommended in 2021 through another RFP process and subsequently approved by City Council. Of the applicants for this most recent RFP, Citizens Bank had the most competitive fee proposal, provides superior service for the critical function of employee payroll and has an extensive branch network through the city, maintains an outstanding Community Reinvestment Act rating or CRA rating and regularly partners with the city on local priorities. The Administration respectfully recommends adoption of this ordinance and requests that the committee recommends the rules of Council be suspended so as to permit first reading of the bill at the next session of Council. Thank you for your consideration and the opportunity to testify. I'm happy to answer any questions.

Thank you. Thank you very much for being here. Will you be presenting testimony today as well or are you here for questions?

I'm here for questions.

I figured. Okay. Thank you. We appreciate both of you very much and thank you to our City Treasurer Jacqueline Dunn and to Shakina Clark, who's our Deputy City Treasurer for Banking for the city. I wanted to first notate for the record we always do a pre-meeting before we have this hearing, and I have reviewed the community investment reporting for Citizens Bank, continue to track the numbers for residential mortgages relative to census tract, which is how they are able to track the data, but particularly in our majority-minority census tracts, but also reviewing the low, mid and high residential mortgage offerings as well as the HELOCs, which we know even from the last time and the refinancing has decreased, and also all the community involvement, including the involvement with the Enterprise Center, with LISC and a number of our community organizations that are helping small businesses who need additional assistance with loan offerings, particularly during this sort of difficult economic period. And so, I wanted to just state that for the record that I have reviewed that information, that I continue to be in discussion with the city Treasurer's Office relative to, in specific, my expectations around how we are interfacing with the community and ensuring that we are providing necessary financial literacy, education and support not only for the Philadelphia community but also for those who are seeking homeownership in every corner of this city. And I just wanted to state that for the record. The Chair now recognizes Councilmember Jones.

Thank you, Madam Chair. So I go back to the days when city employees were issued physical checks and the long lines on Fridays and Thursdays in order to get your check cashed. We have gone to a direct deposit system. What has that meant by way of profitability, by way of interest overnight that you now get as opposed to back in the day when we had physical checks? Are there any statistics on it? I would imagine it has made it more profitable for Citizens Bank. CITY TREASURER DUNN: Sure. Thank you, Councilmember. You're correct that there have been a significant shift over time away from physical paper checks to direct deposit and even products like pay cards, so otherwise electronic transfers of funds. Currently of the 27,000 approximately city employees, 96% are on direct deposit, 3% are on pay card. And so, that remaining 1% is still paper check-based. So the good news for employees is that they have immediate access to their funds once payroll is released and improved. And for our office and for Shakina's team that processes payroll, it really allows us to focus on other things because printing paper checks is very labor-intensive. Unfortunately, check fraud is quite common among financial fraud cases. And so, it helps also protect our employees and recipients of checks if we can get them onto an electronic means of payment.

Who receives -- based on a direct deposit method, do we get the benefit of those overnight interests or is it washed based on they make a direct deposit? I'm just curious. CITY TREASURER DUNN: Yeah, we've certainly had internal savings because it allows our employees to focus on other banking and treasury supports versus managing a larger inventory of paper checks, and also our partners in other departments that have to help print the checks so the Technology Office, for example. Payroll is unique because the funds, as you mentioned, go into the funding account and then immediately go out to the end recipient, in this case, our employees. And so, we've historically not received much interest or much earnings credit on the payroll accounts versus other accounts. So there hasn't really been a detrimental impact to the city in that way. But I think the big benefit to us is the ability to focus our staff, time and resources on other banking services.

And a lot of trees don't die because of the paper. CITY TREASURER DUNN: I'm sorry.

A lot of trees don't die because of the paper. CITY TREASURER DUNN: Yes.

All right. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you. Thank you very much, Councilmember Jones. The Chair notates for the record the presence of Councilmember Mike Driscoll and also our Council President Kenyatta Johnson. The Chair now recognizes Councilmember Dr. Nina Ahmad.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Good morning. Quick question. In your RFP process, was there some requirement to show how these banks treat small businesses who are coming in to open accounts? This is anecdotal from constituents about not getting treated very well by big banks and having problems in getting services. So I just wondered if that was part of your RFP process and how are you keeping an eye on that, in addition to what my Chair said around making sure getting stats on how they're investing in the community? CITY TREASURER DUNN: Sure. The payroll banking services RFP is specific to payroll so the internal city needs and processes, but our office does, as you're likely aware, perform the annual lending disparity study. And so, we look at small business applications and originations for those products on a couple different factors. So that is the way that Shakina and I keep track of how our depositories are doing, not just Citizens Bank, but all of the banks that are authorized to do business with the city. Citizens performs quite well on that, but especially on the home lending side. I know J.P. Morgan and Bank of America, two other depositories on the authorized list, in the last year of federal data that was released were quite strong among our depositories in that service area.

Thank you for that. Is there a component for public engagement in this process to actually hear directly from our small businesses to kind of line up with the data you're seeing? I just wondered because it seems like somebody has to call somebody to get attention. And I just wonder how we capture that so that that is part of this process. CITY TREASURER DUNN: Sure. I think that's probably a better fit under the annual lending study process because we're looking at federal data across a broad swath, not just the banks that apply for payroll depository services, which is a more limited pool, but we are always open to refining, you know, what that annual lending study examines, especially as there are trends in the marketplace with interest rates or, for example, during the acute COVID period when payroll protection loan products were the predominant product that banks and other institutions were offering, and they were pulling away from other areas. We wanted to retool our examination so we were focusing on what was relevant. And so, I think we're happy to talk with you on that.

Thank you so much. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you. Thank you so much, Councilmember Ahmad. Are there any further questions for these witnesses and for this panel? The Chair notates for the record the presence of Councilmember Jay Young. Thank you very much, Councilmember Young. Any additional questions for this panel? (No response.)

Seeing none, we thank you all so much for being here and thank you for your testimony. Is there anyone else here present to testify whose name has not been called? (No response.)

Okay. There being no 14 further panel for Bill No. 260510, we will now take public comment on Bill No. 260510. Clerk, will you please call the first set of names you have for public comment, if any.

Mitch Channin.

Thank you so much for being here. Please state your name for the record and proceed with your testimony. We're on 260510. This is the banking depository bill. Mitch, I think you usually come to testify on the PGW bills. Are you giving public comment on the bank depository bills?

Yeah.

Excellent. Okay. Please state your name for the record and proceed with your testimony.

I signed up for two bills so --

Received. Okay.

Thanks for the opportunity to testify. I'll be really brief. I just wanted to make Councilmembers and others present aware that there is a national boycott of Citizens Bank organized by Indivisible and a number of other organizations because of their financing of GEO Group and other for-profit companies that are providing these notorious ICE detention facilities like the one in New Jersey, where there's currently a hunger strike.

Oh, wow. Well, thank you very much for bringing that information to our attention. This is my first time hearing that, but we appreciate you being here to provide that information.

I can share more later if you'd like me to email you.

That would be great. Okay.

Thanks a lot.

Thank you, Mitch. Thank you very much for coming in. Is there anyone else here whose name has not been called to testify on Bill No. 260510? (No response.)

Okay. Seeing none and there being no further witnesses or panels for the bill, Clerk, will you please call the first panel we have to testify on Bill Nos. 260509 and 260527?

Jacqueline Dunn, City Treasurer; and Matthew Bowman, Deputy City Treasurer for Debt. (Witnesses approached witness table.)

Thank you. Thank you so much. Please state your name for the record and proceed with your testimony. CITY TREASURER DUNN: Good morning, Jacqueline Dunn again, City Treasurer. Good morning, Chair and members of the Committee on Finance. I'm Jackie Dunn, City Treasurer. And with me this morning is Matt Bowman, the Deputy City Treasurer for Debt Management. I'm here to testify in favor of Bill Nos. 260527 and 260509. Bill 260527 would authorize the City and the Philadelphia Municipal Authority, or PMA, to issue bonds to exercise its one-time purchase option on the police headquarters building at 400 North Broad Street and the accompanying garage at 1501 Callow Hill Street. The city has been subleasing the property since late December 2019. This purchase option was built into the sublease in December 2017. The sublease provides a formula to derive the purchase price for the premises, which compares the outstanding debt to the appraised value with the city paying the greater of the two. The city is presently conducting the due diligence related to the appraised value. This bill 9 authorizes up to 225 million in bonds to be issued for the purchase, plus related cost of issuance, credit enhancement and discount. The bonds would be secured by the city's obligation under the service agreement to budget and appropriate annual amounts necessary to pay the service fee, which would be sufficient to pay the debt service on the outstanding bonds. Bill 22 260509 would provide authorization for the City and PMA to refund previously issued bonds for savings. The city has 56.4 million in PMA Series 2017 bonds outstanding, which can be refunded to reduce overall debt service costs, or funding would be pursued consistent with the city's debt management policy as a part of this transaction. The Administration respectfully recommends adoption of these ordinances and requests that the committee recommends that the rules of Council be suspended so as to permit first reading of the bills at the next session of Council. Thank you for your consideration and the opportunity to testify. I am happy to answer any questions that you may have.

Thank you. Thank you very much for being here today. Thank you for your testimony on Bill Nos. 260509 and 260527. I'm sure Matthew, you're here, our Deputy City Treasurer for debt is here for questions if necessary, but thank you both. Are there any questions from the committee for these witnesses? (No response.)

Okay. I'd like to now recognize the District Councilmember for the properties notated in the bill. Councilman Young.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Good morning and thank you for your testimony. Can you tell us what type of bond this will be? What's the source of repayment for this bond? CITY TREASURER DUNN: Sure. Approved by City Council, this would be equivalent to the city's GO tax-backed bonds to be issued through our service agreement structure and then the debt service, which is estimated to be about $15.1 million annually, would be paid through the Class 200 structure through the sinking fund.

And how much are we paying in rent for this current facility now? CITY TREASURER DUNN: It would be equivalent to the debt service, so the annual rent is approximately $15 million now.

And how long have we been renting this facility? CITY TREASURER DUNN: We've occupied the property since December '19. I believe the lease was effective in December 2017.

So we've been paying rent for nine years. For the amount of rent that we have been paying for I guess the nine years, do we get any discount on the sales price of the property? CITY TREASURER DUNN: The city's existing rent goes to amortize the loan that the developer took out to purchase the property and to retrofit it into the police headquarters facility that the city needs rate based on our specifications. So the bond that the city issues is the remaining debt that's outstanding.

So that's new information to me, that it's going to amortize the loan that the property owner purchased the property for. But I know the property owner didn't purchase the property for the benefit of the city. So why is that going towards that? CITY TREASURER DUNN: That was the original structure put in place into 2017. It was a lease to own with the city having this one-time option that comes up and expires at the end of Calendar Year 2026.

And can you tell us when the bonds for the market is going to be a competitive or is negotiated process? CITY TREASURER DUNN: So we would pursue a negotiated bond sale, which is when we do an RFI to select a bank and then the bank helps us negotiate with prospective investors to get the lowest cost of capital for the city. That's consistent with our general approach for bond issuances, given our credit quality and the complexity of transactions like the service agreement structure.

And what's the total amount of the borrowing that this legislation will authorize? CITY TREASURER DUNN: The authorization is a maximum amount of not to exceed 225 million. We estimate that we'll be borrowing approximately 201 million. So we build in a buffer. We do not believe that we will need that amount, the full amount.

So just for the record, we're going to be paying $201 million for one property in the city of Philadelphia. Just to note that for the record. What is the total cost of the borrowing? Essentially, have you looked at where I guess the estimates of where the market would be by the time we conduct the transaction and what the total cost would be? CITY TREASURER DUNN: Sure. So the decision point for the city at this time, because we have that one-time purchase option, is either to continue renting for a 10-year term and the rent resets at a higher rate, which would be approximately 29 million annually versus the million we're paying 8 now, or to issue debt to purchase 9 the property based on current 10 rates, which we hope would hold, 11 the annual debt service would 12 approximate the rent costs at about 13 15 million annually. So purchasing 14 the building would be a savings 15 relative to continuing to lease at that higher reset rate, which would start in January 27.

Okay. Would the bonds be callable? Will we be able to refinance prior to the maturity date? CITY TREASURER DUNN: Yes, we typically have a 10-year call option.

years, okay. Thank you. And can you tell us what the appraised value for the property is? CITY TREASURER DUNN: The appraised value for just 400 North Broad, we just received that yesterday, but that's 21.5 million.

21.5 10 million is the appraised value and we're paying $201 million for the property. CITY TREASURER DUNN: Yes. I think the city in 2017, it was always contemplated that the outstanding debt would be higher and would govern in that formula because the property has a unique value to the city to be able to house our municipal police force. There's less value to other buyers who don't have a municipal police force of this size.

And if this legislation were to pass, when do you expect to go to market? CITY TREASURER DUNN: Our goal would be to go to market in late July, so we would go to the rating agencies in early July and we would like to try and price the bonds at the end of July.

Thank you. Madam Chair, I just want to note that we're borrowing money for a noble cause for our Philadelphia Police headquarters, which is something that we desperately need to have in our ownership. But for the record, we just need to note that there are other public facilities in our city that the city owns that could use $200 million worth of renovations. That could help keep and maintain our city in moving forward into the future. So I just want to note that for the record that, yes, the appraised value only has value to us. This property only has value to us. And I'm sure that was contemplated when the transaction originally occurred. When the transaction originally occurred, I was a staffer and we were negotiating -- I was negotiating the EOP for this particular project. We were spending as a city -- so we've already spent money on this project. Is this not going to be the first -- the rent is not the first time the city has paid money for this project. The renovations, the outfit of this particular facility, the city paid for. And that number was equivalent to the entirety of what Rebuild was, right. So just put that for the record. So we're spending a lot of money on this property, but it's a noble cause. Our police need a state-of-the-art headquarters in order to do 21st-century policing. So that's not the issue. But I think the issue is where do we as a city prioritize our spending. So I just wanted to note that for the record. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you. Thank you so much, Councilmember Young. Quickly, I need to notate for the record the presence of Councilmember Landau, who is now here for the hearing. Prior to recognizing Councilmember Jones, who has asked to be recognized and also Dr. Ahmad, help us with this because this is not making sense for us. Parse this out for us and take us on a timeline, because we're in the middle of a budget negotiation where we're being asked to do things for similar amounts of money. So walk us through this so we understand fully what is going on here and why we are in a predicament to pay almost a quarter billion dollars for one building. CITY TREASURER DUNN: Sure. In 2017, City Council passed the ordinance related to the master lease and sublease agreements, which contain in it the one-time purchase option that we're here today to recommend that the city pursue. And then in 2021, City Council amended the ordinance to allow the property to qualify for historic tax credit revenue, which the city then received back, a portion of that back.

Pardon me. We received part of it back by doing the historical designation? CITY TREASURER DUNN: Correct. Making changes to allow the property to qualify for the historic tax credits.

Received. CITY TREASURER DUNN: The city at this point has two options. The city can exercise its one-time purchase option, and the formula that was set in place in 2017 is that the city pays the higher of the outstanding debt because our rent has gone to pay down the debt that was previously issued to purchase and to retrofit the facility for the police headquarters or --

So walk me through. So the rent started at what time?

Fiscal Year --

Pardon me one moment. Just state your name for the record. The mic is not on. CITY TREASURER DUNN: Matthew Bowman, Deputy Treasurer. He had indicated Fiscal Year '18 was the first year.

Then for the record, how much was the rent?

It's $15.2 million annually. So to date, through a payment that was made two days ago we're up to 131.8 million.

So $131.8 million for rent up until two days ago?

Correct.

Okay. Please proceed. CITY TREASURER DUNN: Sure. So the city can continue renting the facility. And the way that the terms were set in 2017, the rent would reset if we don't exercise this purchase option to amortize the remaining debt over a 10-year period at a higher interest rate. And so, our calculation based on current interest rates would have that rent being $29 million annually versus the 15.2 that we're currently paying.

So -- CITY TREASURER DUNN: That would be a new cost that would be in the Five Year Plan that's not currently contemplated.

Received. But also, that would be a 10-year period -- CITY TREASURER DUNN: 10-year period. And at the end of the 10 years, the city would have to identify a new police headquarters facility and presumably pay an unknown amount related to that.

But with the new amount and the higher interest rate, it would be 290 million over the years, correct? 9 CITY TREASURER DUNN: 10 Approximately, yes.

Okay. So it would be approximately 290 million over the 10 years. But the option that you all are seeking to exercise would be 225 million. And the reason why this has to be done is because -- the reason why this has to be done is because we're already locked into the deal, so you have to take action on it. And what you all are seeking to do is try to get it at a lower option? CITY TREASURER DUNN: Correct. We're presented with these two decisions that the city could undertake, and we're recommending the lower cost option that would allow us to purchase the facility that the police are currently occupying.

Okay. Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilmember Young and then Councilmember Jones.

Thank you. Just for a point of information, in the original deal there was an escalation clause which is kind of handcuffing us right now which makes us purchase this property. Because if not, then after this year the rent will almost double, right. So I just want to put that on the record too. It's not our doing here. That deal happened in 2017, right. But we have to now do something about a deal that may not have been in the best interest of the city at that time.

Thank you so much. The Chair now recognizes Councilmember Jones.

Let me boil it down to simple math for me. How much is the appraised value of the building today? CITY TREASURER DUNN: 21.5 million just for 400 North Broad property. It does not include the garage at --

Throw in the garage, how much is it? CITY TREASURER DUNN: I would have to get back to the committee on that.

So let's give it another 10 million. Because of the land, let's go with 30 million. We're going to borrow 200 and what? CITY TREASURER DUNN: We would be borrowing approximately 201 million, which is the cost of the remaining debt on the facility.

And is that because we're locked into the lease? CITY TREASURER DUNN: We are locked into the formula that was set in 2017, correct.

So somebody was smart enough -- work with me. Somebody was smart enough to say, I'm going to give you a hamburger today and charge you 10 times more over the course of the amortization of this deal. Is that what we got locked into? CITY TREASURER DUNN: We're recommending what we feel is the best option based on the two choices that are available.

All right. We got took. Somebody fell asleep in the getaway car. There's somebody down in Atlantic City that's getting ready to profit from this mightily. And just -- I know it wasn't you, I know it wasn't you. But somebody set up somebody to benefit mightily on a real estate deal, because that was the same site that was supposed to be the stadium at one point, right. And so, there was another -- I think Member Young talked about other municipal buildings. There was one that comes to mind at 46th and Market that we were going to do because it was not Center City. It would increase the value of that property and give better utility. Somebody fell asleep in the getaway car and it wasn't you. But I remember Allan Domb raising a ruckus about this, who is arguably one of the better real estate people particularly in Center City. And I just think that we got took and we are paying the price today, and it's an opportunity cost that takes away from the school district and other places like that. So I'm baffled. I'm baffled by how we got in this position. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you. Thank you very much, Councilmember Jones. The Chair now recognizes Dr. Ahmad.

I am similarly baffled, but here we are today. I want to know who is the owner-landlord entity that we're dealing with? CITY TREASURER DUNN: 400 North Broad Partners is a Bart Blatstein predominantly-owned entity, and that's the current owner.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I just wanted that to be in the public record, who is going to benefit from this.

Thank you. May you repeat the answer. I'm sorry. We're trying to understand what's happening here -- CITY TREASURER DUNN: (Inaudible).

Okay. Thank you. Thank you very, very much. Are there any additional questions for these witnesses regarding Bill No. 260509 and 260527?

Sorry.

Chair now recognizes Councilmember Ahmad.

Apologies, Madam Chair. The other -- right now where we are versus what Councilmember Curtis Jones referred to, the property in West Philadelphia, there's no other option. Is that where we are right now? There's no other option for the police department to go elsewhere that would cost us much less? CITY TREASURER DUNN: We have two options here, to continue renting at the higher rate and then eventually determine a new site at the end of a 10-year period or to purchase this property. I'm not the best person to answer your question.

The question is can we actually consider a different property now before the years? Is there a penalty for that?

Under the 5 current documents, I don't think 6 that is an option we have. It is 7 either to pay a higher rate for 10 8 years or issue -- 9

I 10 wanted to see how locked in we are with all this. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair.

I think what I'm hearing is stuck between a rock and a real hard place. CITY TREASURER DUNN: We're trying to recommend the best option for the city to --

Received. Okay. Which is why the historical tax credit designation was helpful partially. But at this point and at this juncture in the road, we're in a circumstance where we have to make a determination on how best to move forward and how to be the best stewards of the city's dollars. CITY TREASURER DUNN: Correct.

Received. Councilmember Young.

I mean, at this time the information that we received I don't know if this deal was in the best interest of the city, right. And I think that's something that we as a Council need to contemplate. Unfortunately, we were dealt this hand almost 10 years ago. But we really have to look at what is in the best interest of the city here, and we have other, you know, $200 million, that would fix 27 libraries, right. So just think about that for a second. So just want to put that on the record, Madam Chair.

Thank you. Thank you very much, Councilmember Young. Is there anyone else here to testify whose name has not been called? (No response.)

Okay. Seeing none, are there any witnesses here to present public comment on Bill Nos. 260509 and 260527?

There are no 17 names for public comment for 260509 or 260527.

Okay. Thank you. There being no further witnesses for these bills, we will now proceed with the next bill. Clerk, will you please call the first panel we have to testify on Bill No. 260508.

Tavare Brown, Deputy Budget Director for Capital. (Witnesses approached witness table.)

Thank you. Thank you so much for being here. We appreciate your presence. Please state your name for the record and proceed with your testimony.

How's everybody doing. I'm Tavare Brown, Deputy Budget Director for Capital. All right. All right. Good morning, Chair Gilmore Richardson and members of the Finance Committee. My name is Tavare Brown, Deputy Budget Director for Capital. I'm joined by Matthew Bowman, Deputy City Treasurer. And we're here today to testify on Bill 1 No. 260508. This bill would authorize an increase in the non-electoral indebtedness of the city in the amount not to exceed 578 million. The total reflects both the FY27 loan authorization amount, which is 293 million and a technical fix to the existing FY22 loan authorization amount, which was approved by City Council in 2021, but was later determined to be invalid, as outlined later on in the presentation, and that was 285 million. The increase will leave the city within the Philadelphia Constitution debt limit. As of May 29, 2026, the city's legal debt limit is 19.68 billion. And the amount of debt applicable to that limit is 2,917,000,000. As a result, the city has a debt margin of about 16.8 billion. The FY27 capital budget for new general obligation bonds is approximately 28 -- I'm sorry, 281.17 million. The proposed ordinance includes the new general obligation loan amount plus an additional 4% for cost of issuance fees, bringing the total for FY27 in this loan authorization to $293 million. This bill also includes a section regarding the FY22 loan authorization, which was not advertised in the manner required by law and was subsequently determined to be invalid. At the direction of the city's bond counsel, we included a distinct section to the FY27 loan authorization as a technical fix to advertise an issue from several years ago. This will enable us to borrow the supported capital borrow to support the capital projects that were previously approved in FY22 as originally intended. The remaining 285 million in this loan authorization corresponds to the FY22 figure. If approved, the loan authorization would finance capital projects classified for the following purposes in the following aggregate amounts. So for this portion in my written testimony, I broke it out by each year, but I'll just refer to the new borrowing, which is FY27's amount. So for transit-related improvements, 11,261,000. For streets and sanitation improvements, 77,843,000. For municipal buildings, 147,520,000. For parks, recreation, and museum improvements, 41,266,000. For economic and community development capital improvements, $15,110,000, for a total of 293 million. And like I said, the rest of the portion is prior already-approved authorization. I respectfully request that Bill No. 260508 be reported out of committee with a favorable recommendation. I further request that the rules of Council be suspended so as to permit first reading at the next session of Council. The FY27 loan authorization will be amended to reflect any applicable amendments to the FY27 budget, which should be coming shortly. And this concludes my testimony and I'll be happy to answer any questions you might have at this time.

Thank you. Thank you both so much for being here. The Chair notates the presence of Councilmember Jim Harrity for the record. Are there any questions for these witnesses regarding Bill 2 No. 260508? (No response.)

Okay. Seeing no 6 questions, are there any other witnesses whose names have not been called? (No response.)

And is there anyone here to provide public comment on Bill No. 260508? (No response.)

Okay. Seeing none, we thank you so much for your testimony. We appreciate your presence here today and we thank you. We will now proceed with Bill No. 260513. Clerk, will you please call the first panel we have to testify.

Mark Dodds, Deputy Director, Division of Housing and Community Development. (Witness approached witness table.)

Thank you. Thank you very much for being here. Please state your name for the record and proceed with your testimony.

Good afternoon, Mark Dodds, Deputy Director of City of Philadelphia Division of Housing and Community Development. Good afternoon, Councilmember Gilmore Richardson, and members of the Finance Committee. I am Mark Dodds, Deputy Director of the Division of Housing and Community Development. I will present testimony on behalf of the Administration on Bill No. 260513, which permits the city to apply for Federal Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), HOME Investment Partnership or HOME, Emergency Solution Grant or ESG and Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS or HOPWA funds, and for state funds from the Department of Community and Economic Development or DCED. E. bond. 9 million in ESG for the upcoming fiscal year. E. housing plan. The Annual Action Plan goals are to create affordable homeowner and rental housing opportunities, preserve affordable homeowner and rental housing, reduce homelessness and expand special housing opportunities, foster open access to all housing and community development resources and programs, address economic, education and income needs of people and communities, strengthen community assets and manage vacant land, promote fair housing and access to opportunities. Approximately two-thirds of our total funding will go to putting and keeping people in homes. This work includes production and preservation of rental housing, mortgage foreclosure prevention and eviction prevention programs, rental assistance, home repair programs such as Basic Systems Repair and Heater Hotline. We will continue programs that prevent homelessness and support people with special needs. These programs include rental assistance through HOME Investment Partnership and HOPWA programs and the Adaptive Modifications Program. We remain committed to organizations and programs that meet our residents where they are, serving them in their own communities. These include our housing counseling agencies, our Neighborhood Advisory Committees or NACs, our Neighborhood Energy Centers. We will also continue expansive cleaning and greening efforts through the PHS Land Care Program. Vibrant commercial corridors are important for safe and healthy communities that help provide economic opportunity for all. Accordingly, significant resources are invested in community economic development opportunities. The plan includes funding for business loan programs, commercial- oriented real estate grants, corridor management support, and building improvement support. We are excited to launch several new initiatives in Fiscal Year 2027, including the One Philly Mortgage Program, Curbside Appeal program and a Facade Repair program. We also look forward to the continuation of many longstanding, successful programs and services, many of which I referenced earlier. Please know that we are relying on City Council to approve this plan expeditiously because the city will forfeit its funding from HUD unless the city submits an approved Annual Action Plan no 12 later than August 15, 2026 to permit expeditious transmittal of the Annual Action Plan to HUD. Suspension of the rules to permit the first reading at the next Council session is requested. In closing, the Division of Housing and Community Development is grateful to Council for its sustained commitment to housing and neighborhood infrastructure. E. initiative to address Philadelphia's housing crisis, and thank you for the opportunity to present this testimony. I'm happy to answer any questions.

Thank you. Thank you very much for your testimony. We appreciate you being here and for all the work that you do with our offices. The Chair will recognize Councilmember Jones.

Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. And bear with me on the math stuff. This is math day, I guess. So over the last 10 years -- I'll phrase it this way: Have we received a reduction of federal funding from HUD for various programs?

I would say over the last years it's pretty much remained level. So with that being said, it hasn't risen to meet the increasing demands that we face and it hasn't risen to help accommodate things like increased cost and salary increases and things like that.

So I would agree with that. The second thing that I would ask is, what is the percentage of the money we are requesting that will go for economic development as opposed to poverty and housing?

So I probably couldn't provide specific breakdowns right at this moment. I could get that --

It used to be about 7%.

I would think that -- so this plan does contain CDBG dollars for economic development activities that the Commerce Department helps administer. It is a small portion of our overall allocation.

And then finally, this is a compliment to you and the Mayor for your administration. I would say the H.O.M.E. program, because we have a responsibility to submit to HUD an annual plan on how we're going to deal with affordability when it comes to housing; is that correct?

Yes, that's essentially what this plan does.

So the H.O.M.E. program is probably in my memory the most comprehensive housing affordability plan this city has ever offered. Would you agree?

I would, yes.

And I mean, that's a big deal.

It's a tremendous investment in affordable housing.

So compliments to the Mayor. Compliments to you. Because in years past, Madam Chair, how are you going to deal with gentrification, how are you going to deal with affordability for new homeowners, how are you going to deal with rent and its fluctuations. The H.O.M.E. program speaks to each and every aspect of that. And that is a job well done.

Thank you, Councilmember.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you. Thank you very much, Councilmember Jones. And I echo the sentiments relative to the Tangled Title programming in particular, and also more specifically now the pre-planning relative to the Wills program. I know we have a second panel for this bill, but I just wanted to notate for the record in reviewing prior to the hearing all the testimony that was submitted, I stayed up as late as I could last night to read every single thing, I want to notate for the record that I did read the concerns from PACDC and wanted to ask about why the funding was not in the proposed budget that we received regarding the PACDC request?

Could you elaborate on that please?

And so, per the testimony that we have received in advance, they were specifically talking about the community capacity building fund, I believe, and making it a permanent multi- year program. I think that work started in a previous fiscal year or was at least addressed by another member. I think in the budget last year, but I wanted to notate that on the record while you were here that we did receive that testimony. I'm going to ask for Panel 2 to please approach the witness table, state your name for the record and proceed with your testimony. Clerk, can you just call that second panel for the record.

Garrett O'Dwyer, Policy Director, Philadelphia Association of Community Development Corporations. (Witness approached witness table.)

Okay. Thank you. Please state your name for the record and proceed with your testimony so that we can have clarity on this specific request.

Sure. Good morning, Chairperson Gilmore Richardson and members of City Council's Committee on Finance. My name is Garret O'Dwyer and I'm the Policy Director for the Philadelphia Association of Community Development Corporations. Thank you for the opportunity to offer testimony on Bill 260513, which will adopt the Annual Action Plan. We want to extend our gratitude to the city agency staff from Planning and Development, Commerce and other city offices and departments who composed the Annual Action Plan and for their tireless efforts on behalf of communities and residents of our city. PACDC is the leading voice of nonprofit community development corporations in Philadelphia. Our 60 CDC members and over 90 additional associate members are responsible for addressing key affordable housing, economic development and social service needs across the city. Our members play a central role in the equitable revitalization and stabilization of their communities and are the on-the-ground partners that the city relies on to provide services and act as catalysts for community change. It is Philadelphia's CDCs who will be determinative in achieving the goals in the Annual Action Plan before us today. I draw your attention to this fact because it underscores the importance of strategic investments in CDCs to ensure the successful implementation of city plans. This is nowhere more true than with the H.O.M.E. Initiative, which will direct unprecedented new resources to address housing needs, but requires high-capacity community partners if it's going to maximize the affordability returns on this substantial public investment. Articulating the goals in the Annual Action Plan is important, but we need commensurate support to scale the capacity and organizational infrastructure of our nonprofit partners that are actually doing the work. At the end of last year, the Community Capacity Building Fund launched to do just that. It has provided organizations with flexible funding that they can use to enhance their work in affordable housing and economic development and create innovative solutions to emerging neighborhood needs. Unfortunately, legislation that would have made the Community Capacity Building Fund a permanent multi-year program will not be heard before the summer recess. Therefore, we implore City Council to ensure that additional funding for another year is included in the city's FY27 budget, which is currently being finalized. The goals laid out in the Annual Action Plan are ambitious. Let's make sure that we provide the necessary supports to make them achievable. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you very much for your testimony. Thank you for being here. The Chair recognizes Councilmember Jones.

And what would that needed appropriation be? It was told to me before, but put it on the record.

So in the legislation that was introduced, that would be 6.25 million last year. To begin to make the fund in earnest, there was 3.5 million appropriated.

Thank you.

You're welcome.

Thank you very much, Councilmember Jones. Are there any other questions for these witnesses? The Chair now recognizes Councilmember Dr. Nina Ahmad.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I just had a question to understand the process of intersection of this money and particularly the HOME here with the H.O.M.E. that we're authorizing for the entire thing that the Mayor has done. And in that, I had put an amendment for 8.8 million for homeless issues, and that impacting those in foster care and the child welfare system. I just wanted to understand how this money intersects with that in terms of delivering those services?

Yes, that's a good question. So the H.O.M.E. bond or the local funding requires an annual program statement and budget that's approved by City Council. We've gone through that process essentially. And this is our application to HUD for federal funding. We've traditionally referred to this document as a consolidated plan. And the reason we do that is because it contains a consolidated budget that shows funding from all sources. That way Council and other interested parties can get a full picture of how we're funding these items. So HOME Investment Partnership or traditional HOME federal funds is a portion of this plan that we'll submit to HUD for approval. That funding -- typically, we spend that in two different ways, for tenant-based rental assistance and for the production and preservation of affordable housing, those large- scale multi-unit buildings. Traditionally, that's what it goes towards. The H.O.M.E. bond this year, that contains, like you mentioned, 8.8 million that will go specifically towards a wide array of homeless services as it's written in the resolution. And we're working with the Office of Homeless Services on how exactly that will be allocated. We have had cross-departmental meetings to talk about that. Right now NPI funds have supported a Shared Housing program, which is operating in conjunction with the Housing Authority. That's been very successful and I think we hope to continue that work as to spend a portion of those H.O.M.E. bond funds, which leaves a sizable balance. And I think the Office of Homeless Services could probably answer it better. But I think they're exploring options around perhaps a single SRO building that that may address some of the issues that you've raised.

Yeah, we had put in that amendment engagement with DHS clients, and that's where that rental assistance can be of much importance. We can avoid families being put into the system at all, if that is the real reason why they're in it in the first place. So I just wanted to publicly put on the record that we are looking for that type of engagement because it can go into this big morass and we don't see disaggregated data around how it's actually impacted, the issues that cause us both DHS engagement and homelessness as a whole. So maybe we'll follow up to see. I've been trying to find out how will that actually happen. And I haven't gotten an answer yet. But we'll talk further. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you for your testimony.

Thank you.

Thank you very much, Councilmember Ahmad. Are there any further questions for these panels for Bill 6 No. 260513? (No response.)

Okay. Seeing no 10 additional questions, we thank you very much for being here today and thank you for your testimony. Are there any further witnesses whose names have not been called for Bill No. 260513? (No response.)

Okay. Seeing none, is there anyone signed up for public comment for Bill No. 260513? (No response.)

Okay. Thank you. Seeing none, we appreciate you all being here today.

Thank you.

We're good. Thank you so much. All right. We will now proceed with our next bill. Clerk, will you please call the first panel we have to testify on Bill 10 No. 260507.

Nicola Mammes, Director of Strategic Programs in the Office of Transportation and Infrastructure Systems. (Witnesses approached witness table.)

Thank you. Thank you very much for being here. You can state your name for the record and proceed with your testimony. I was expecting Michael Carroll based on the testimony I read last night, but I'm glad that you were able to make it here with us today. And I am going to say for the record because I know Mike will either go back and watch or listen or hear, Mike, we are still waiting to hear back on that very challenging issue that we have relative to parking on the circle with PennDOT. And I'm going to put that on the record today. But please state your name for the record and proceed with your testimony.

Good morning, Chair Gilmore Richardson and members of the Committee on Finance. My name is Nicola Mammes, Director of Strategic Programs in the Office of Transportation and Infrastructure Systems or OTIS. I am here to testify on behalf of Michael Carroll, Deputy Managing Director of OTIS. He unfortunately was not able to make it today, but I am the one who's working on the project so I can certainly speak to it, in strong support of Bill No. 5 260507. This proposed legislation amends the definition of a parking facility to explicitly exclude the newly revitalized intercity bus facility, also known as the PPA Transportation Center, located at 1001 Filbert Street in Center City. To provide some context, Section 19-1201 of The Philadelphia Code currently defines a parking facility as any space where more than three motor vehicles park for a fee, triggering a 22.5 percent city tax on those transactions as of July 1, 2021, with an exemption for parking spaces used exclusively by unit owners or tenants of condominium buildings, whereas Section 12-927 specifically dictates that fees collected at intercity bus facilities cannot exceed the actual cost of providing, maintaining, and managing those services. Under the current code, this new facility is subject to the 22.5% parking tax. However, the intercity bus facility is designed with a public purpose, with all fees collected from intercity bus operations directly reinvested into managing, maintaining and operating the facility itself. This legislation creates a clean, intentional exclusion for the intercity bus facility, supporting streamlined management and ensuring the fees collected support the facility and providing high-quality customer service experience for Philadelphia residents and visitors alike. Thank you for your time today. We are available to answer any questions you may have.

Thank you. Thank you very much for your work and for your leadership on this issue. Are there any questions for this panel and for this witness? (No response.)

Okay. Chair recognizes Councilmember Mike Driscoll.

Unrelated to this specific tax, how's 10th and Filbert working out?

It's really great. We've gotten a lot of really positive feedback. Anecdotally, we've been told that it's one of the best bus stations that provides intercity bus service. The staff who work there feel that they're working there with dignity, and the passengers continue to rate it very highly for the customer service experience. So far it's going great. Really glad that we have that, especially as all these summer events are coming and we're seeing a lot of people using the station to come visit Philadelphia and also just to travel to other cities for work or other reasons. So, so far so good.

Excellent. Thank you and thank you very much for your leadership, Councilmember Driscoll. We appreciate you as our Chair so thank you so much. The Chair now recognizes Councilmember Dr. Nina Ahmad.

Thank you for your testimony. Just following up on what my colleague stated, that this is a bus station that is going to get a lot of foot traffic and people coming through, particularly as we have our FIFA events unfolding. We have a campaign going on in the city, a half a million dollar campaign around human trafficking. I just wanted to make sure that this bus station is connected, and I just wondered if you are already because the RFP has been given out to three entities we're working on. I just wanted to know if you guys are engaged in that and what are you potentially going to be doing around that issue?

Yeah, that's a great question. Thank you. So we are connected with Chatterblast. They're doing a virtual training for the staff that work at the facility to do training around human trafficking coordination and support, and also the PPA folks who manage the station have done an initial training around human trafficking before the station opens. So there's certainly engagement in that space and connected with Dr. Ugarte and Chatterblast to make sure that those folks are getting the training that's needed.

Thank you very much. I just wanted to make sure all the dots are connected.

Yeah, absolutely.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you so much, Dr. Ahmad. You've been working on that issue for a very long time. Thank you too for your leadership. Thank you. Thank you very much for your testimony. There being no 3 additional panels to testify, are there any additional witnesses here whose names have not been called? (No response.)

Okay. Seeing none, are there any witnesses here to provide public comment on 260507?

Yes, there are names for public comment. Will Tanya Moores, Jigga Mehta and Erica Chung please make their way to the podium.

On 507 -- I just wanted to say for the record I know that we talked about this with our Chief Clerk prior to the hearing. There are many individuals here or are there many individuals here to testify on the BIRT legislation? UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Yes. We're going through the gas --

Okay. Hold on one second, because I have to keep the order here because we have technically two additional hearings today. And we're going to reconvene at 5 o'clock on the Committee of the Whole, which we recessed from starting at 9 o'clock. 260507 is germane to the parking tax, not the BIRT tax. And that's why I made that announcement at the beginning of the hearing. I think there was some confusion regarding which bills would be listed today and what was being held. I did notate that for the record and I did confirm that with Councilmember Driscoll and both Councilmember Thomas. So I just wanted to reaffirm that to make sure everybody understood that's where we are. Okay. Please, you wanted to say something in response to that. Please state your name first and then respond.

Sure. My name is Jigar Mehta. We had originally told people to come out to speak because we thought the bill was going to be scheduled today. And then when we recently heard that it was not, it was taken out the session, then at that point people still wanted to have their voices heard. So we're speaking now to just basically -- one, thank you --

Hold on one second. I just need to get this straight for the record. Okay. Because this is important to me not only as Chair of this committee, but also as the Majority Leader of this Council. From a process perspective, because I do not believe in wasting people's time, so I apologize that you had that information. May I ask for the record who invited or told you to come to the hearing today? So who invited you or told you to come?

So originally, there was a hearing where Councilmember Thomas said that we were going to -- made a commitment to give us a Finance Committee hearing publicly, and that was on May 6. And then from there, this was supposed to be the last hearing. And so, we were expecting to see this on the schedule. And then we had a conversation with several people within City Council, thinking that would get through. And then we were told the last minute that the bill got pulled.

Okay. I just want to say for the record, because I'm Chair of the Finance Committee, meaning that I'm in charge of the scheduling for this committee, the original bill for the Child Care BIRT was scheduled. That is Councilmember Thomas's bill that was introduced in 2025, which is why that one started with 25. Councilmember Driscoll's bill was introduced in '26, right?

'25.

'25 as well. So one was listed, one was not. In order to ensure that those bills are as strong as they can be together, right, and that they're not in conflict with each other, because the way bills are written is that you have to take it from a certain section of the code, right. We don't want them to be in conflict when we are seeking to achieve the same goal, right. And so, we are committed to working together in order to achieve the best bill possible that will best be of support for our small business community. We were not going to hear that legislation today because we are committed to working on the best bill possible for the small business community. I've spoken with both of my colleagues. The commitment is there. As Chair of Finance, I'm telling you that I will work with them. And as soon as they want it scheduled, I will send the request to the Council President for his approval and we will get it scheduled. But I just wanted to notate that for the record. I don't want anybody to think that there's anything nefarious happening here. Okay. Secondly, I'm going to respectfully request, based on the schedule that we have today, we want to hear from each of you who have come, but I will ask if you could give please an abbreviated version of your testimony because we are also in the middle of budget negotiations. Okay. Is that all right with everybody that came? And I apologize for any miscommunication that may have occurred regarding this, but I take full responsibility as Chair of the committee. Okay. Thank you very much. Please state your name for the record and proceed with your abbreviated testimony.

My name is Jigger Mehta. What we're asking for obviously is the hearing. But in that as well, we want to make sure that the analysis that's going to be provided by Revenue is transparent, that it actually reflects the group that we're talking about so the spirit of it is intact. So who we are talking about are sole proprietors and single-member LLCs that are owned by individuals. That's an important distinction. Single member LLCs can also be owned by partnerships. They can be owned -- they can take an S Corp election, they can be owned by corporations. They can be owned by trusts. We're not interested in those. Those are not in our bill. So when Revenue does provide data and starts saying that these are the people that are going to be affected, we just want to make sure that the scope is correct, that it's tied to sole proprietors and single member LLCs owned by individuals. That's it. That is the defined class that we're talking about. In addition to that, when we're talking about our belief in fiscal analysis, it is not just the city's view. What we're saying is that we should also look at what's called a multiplier effect in our communities. So when you take $30 million out of communities in Philadelphia, they're no longer able to spend that money for the 250-year celebration. Basically, what happens is that that money gets sucked out of our communities. The local grocery store doesn't get the same amount of business. You have the babysitter, the child care person who basically is not going to be able to get paid for their child care. So the impact of the BIRT exemption going away has not just affected the individual. It has affected the entire community. So we want to make sure that whatever analysis is done, that we also look at the multiplier effect, the impact on the community as well. So that's basically it. But thank you very much. And now the folks here, you know, their passion is there. They're suffering and we greatly appreciate the opportunity to speak from their heart and we look forward to the fall. And if there's anything that we can do to provide data, to provide analysis, we are prepared and ready. You need experts; we'll bring experts. But we're just asking for a fair hearing where Revenue is fully transparent with the data and it's defined with the class that we're talking about. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Thank you very much for coming in. And I can assure you as Chair of Finance, you will receive a fair hearing and we will request whatever information you all are seeking to be provided. Okay. Thank you very much. Please state your name for the record and proceed with your testimony.

Thank you so much. Good morning, Councilmembers. Thank you for the opportunity to share public comment. My name is Dr. Erica Maria Chung. I am the Communications Director at the Asian Pacific Islander Political Alliance. I'm here to read some statements that we've collected from Korean American business owners along 5th Street and East Oak Lane and Olney. We have been going out and speaking with Asian American small business owners for the past couple months to hear from them, how they're doing and how increased taxes are impacting them. And I am going to read portions of what we had gathered. This is from Song Si Mun, from owner of Asia Barber Shop. I've been in business for 30 years and things in the U.S. have never been as tough as they are now. I used to cut hair for about people a day. These days I 20 don't even get seven. I stay at the shop all day long, only to make maybe 30 or $50 a day. It's a real struggle to survive. We're supposed to pay taxes, but we can't because we are not making any money. It's just so incredibly hard for people like us to make a living. This is from the owner of Fern Rock Hardware at 5957 North 5th Street. I've been running a business in here in Philly for 30 years. The economy is terrible. It's been especially bad since Trump, starting from last year. The number of customers has dropped. There's barely anyone walking on the streets and there's no foot traffic. Over the years there's been so many new taxes, like the soda tax and the trash tax, and it's been very difficult to figure out how to stay in business. I have two more, one from a Korean restaurant owner named Kim Suk Lim from Jonggah Gym. Business is so tough these days. Prices have gone up so much. I'm actually scared to go grocery shopping. Everything is more expensive. We should be raising our prices too, but we can't bring ourselves to do it because all of our customers are struggling. I've been in business for over years. I've never 10 asked City Hall or any government 11 office for help or support because 12 I don't know how and I don't have 13 the information. Prices need to 14 stabilize. This is a nationwide 15 problem. But on top of that, 16 Philly has certain taxes other 17 states just don't have. I really 18 wish they would look into it and do 19 something about it. 20 My last one is from Kim's Restaurant, 5955 North 5th Street. I've been running my business for 16 years. My place is pretty big. But after running the business for a year and paying all the taxes, there's basically nothing left. We used to have tax break benefits before, but suddenly they cut taxes for big corporations while burdening small businesses with more taxes. It just seems so unfair. Thank you so much for the opportunity to share these stories from people who can't be here today because they're trying to run their businesses, and we really appreciate the opportunity to share. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you very much for sharing those stories with us. And please recognize that we received that feedback and are committed to working on this issue. And I'm very proud of the leadership of Councilmember Driscoll and also Councilmember Thomas on this issue. Are there any further witnesses to give public comment today?

Yes. We have Alex Haynesworth, Leah Yeager and Patricia Rodriguez. (Witnesses approached witness table.)

Please state your name for the record and proceed with your testimony.

Thank you. My name is Alex Haynesworth. I'm a constituent from District 3. I'm here to speak about BIRT relief as well. I'm a young professional. And for the past four years, I've been a contractor for the National Museum of American History while living in Philadelphia. The work I have done is that of a standard employee. Yet I have paid for my own health insurance and only had guaranteed income for six months at a time. This year I paid $6,880 towards the BIRT tax and the mandatory estimated BIRT tax. Throughout the nonprofit sphere, these kinds of contract positions are common as a way to offload the insecurity of the funding landscape onto the workers. And now, the city is offloading their funding crisis onto me as well. That nearly $7,000 is almost eight months of rent for me or a year of private health insurance payments. It is by no means a small amount. Where are the progressive taxes? Why in such a funding crisis are corporations paying less in taxes than gig workers, freelancers, artists, Uber drivers, nannies and small businesses? How can we equitably fund the programs that this city desperately needs? By introducing progressive tax bills that will equitably share the load of the city's expenses between its citizens and corporations. I urge you all to propose a hearing for Councilmember Driscoll's bill to exempt sole proprietors from the BIRT tax as soon as possible. Thank you.

Good morning, Councilmembers. Thank you so much for hearing our testimony today. I'm the owner of a small business. It is a fitness and wellness studio here in Center City. My clients make it clear to me that --

Please state your name for the record.

My name is Leah Yeager. Thank you. My clients make it clear to me that our work impacts their lives positively. Additionally, I also make space for other practitioners in my field to run their small businesses from my physical space. And I really believe that small businesses are an important part of what makes Philadelphia a vibrant, interesting, colorful place to be. Even just riding my bike here, I was keenly aware of all of the businesses dotting the streets, you know, the nail salons, the restaurants, the sandwich stores, Danny's Midnight Confessions, you know. It really makes our city an interesting and wonderful place to be. And I'm a lifelong Philadelphian so I love this city. And I would love to be able to afford to continue to have a small business here. It's a precarious endeavor, undertaking a small business. That's the nature of the beast. It is also already an onerous process to organize finances, taxes, save independently for retirement, licenses and the like. So this BIRT tax, after personally coming to the third year of this iteration of my business where I felt like I was finally getting my feet on the ground, this was a smack to the back of the head. And I know that not just for me, 2,000; 3,000; 4,000; 5,000 is material for people with small businesses. And I know that we got grit, but don't make us grind for peanuts. We're not all going to make it. So I love this city. And I hope you will consider this testimony. Thank you so much.

Thank you. Thank you very much for your testimony. Please state your name for the record and proceed with your public comment.

Hi. My name is Patricia Dominguez. Thank you for listening to me. I came here a month ago when I talked and I just wanted to come back and ask again like -- well, not even ask. I'm begging if you could please consider changing the sole proprietor LLCs out of the BIRT, exempting them. I'm just two-and-a-half years into my business, and hard to get the new business off the ground. And I'm in a vicious cycle. Like, last year I didn't couldn't afford to pay my estimated, so I'm getting hit with fines and I'm paying it all. And this year, again I've got to pay for daycare. So I'm not paying my estimated so I'm going to get hit again next year with my fines. And I'm like, this is really -- we're going into summertime. And so, I'm like it's real light during the summertime, so I'm biting my nails. And, yeah, I would like so appreciate if you could reconsider it. My business also includes people that work also as 1099, they're 1099 workers. And, yeah, so we're all like feeling it.

I see that.

Thank you so much for listening.

Thank you and thank you for coming in again. Please state your name for the record and proceed with your testimony -- hold on one second. You good?

Patricia Dominguez.

Yep, we got you.

Okay. Thank you.

Thank you, dear, and thank you for coming in.

My name is Laura Hawley. I'm a licensed social worker. I've been working as a sole proprietor in this city for about years. I worked first 12 as an acupuncturist and then as a 13 psychotherapist. During the 14 pandemic, I started working from my 15 house. It would have been a lot 16 cheaper to stay there. 17 And then as I noticed 18 what was happening to my city, as 19 we all sort of contracted and went 20 home, I thought let me just make a 21 commitment, let me come back into 22 the city. Let me have an office 23 here. Let me go to Bill's for 24 lunch, go to the gut trucks, meet friends after work. Just be part of the blood flow of this city. This is humiliating to me. This is like two months, more than two months of rent to me. And I haven't prioritized making money. I've always said I make two kinds of profit. I make money and I make the contact with other people. This is crushing me. I had a man come in the other day that I used to treat, a man who lives with HIV and AIDS and he asked me to see him as a therapist because frankly, he loves me, we love each other and he has to have a sliding scale. It's just so nerve- wracking and exhausting to be squished like this. That is the end of my very rational, calm testimony. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you all very, very much. Are there any other witnesses to give public comment?

Dominic Brennan, Mindy King and Minda Reeves, the last three.

Okay. While we're receiving the last three witnesses for public comment, please know that we are hearing your public comment. Not just from each of you, but from so many small business owners and sole proprietors who have been contacting us. Full disclosure, I had to pay BIRT this year so we are feeling it. And so, we are listening. And I know under the leadership of Councilmember Driscoll working with Councilmember Thomas, that they will come up with the best bill to address what we are hearing today. This is not something that we wanted. Okay. We got to be very clear about that. This is not something that we wanted. So we appreciate you all coming in. So please state your names for the record and proceed with your testimony.

Hi. My name is Dominic Brennan. I am the community building coordinator for CMAC. Chair, Committee, thank you so much for your time today. Much like Erica earlier on, I have been collecting stories of the small business owners on the South 7th Street commercial corridor. I'm the corridor manager for the corridor there. There are 76 businesses on the South 7th Street commercial corridor. They're almost exclusively immigrant and refugee- run businesses, and almost exclusively making under $100,000 in gross revenue. So they have been hit heavily by BIRT this year. Because with that area, there's over 55 languages spoken and tax is not one of them. So people were very surprised by having to pay this big amount. So again keeping it quick, we've had as much as businesses paying 5600 in their taxes this year in extra. We have businesses who are not paying themselves out. They're mostly single-family businesses, husband and wives running ethnic grocers or nail salons, corner stores, so not paying themselves out, and a lot of businesses who are considering selling their stores. It's very devastating for the corridor, for the small business community and for the surrounding community as well. Because we have a lot of people who treat these businesses as community hubs. They get all of their resources there because these are the groceries within walking distance. South 7th Street in particular, would otherwise were it not for the small Burmese grocer, the small Honduran grocer would be a food desert. So thank you for your time. I really appreciate you squeezing us in and thank you for the consideration.

Thank you. Thank you so much for sharing the stories from South 7th Street. Please state your name for the record and proceed with your testimony.

I'm Minda Reeves. I am a writer. I'm heading into my third year as a citizen of the city of Philadelphia. Last July I was among the more than 600,000 Black women who were forced from the workforce. I was laid off. Unfortunately, I lost about 90% of my income, and unemployment benefits maxed out at less than $2,000. So as not to be a burden to the great state of Pennsylvania, I focused my time on freelancing, and it takes a while to ramp up your freelance income. And I was barely eking out more than I was making on unemployment, but I was very proud of the work that I was doing and making my own way. So you can imagine my shock when I got hit by the BIRT tax this April, and it basically wiped out the difference. So I actually made less money than I would have if I just stayed on unemployment. The job market is terrible so there are not really many options. My tax service provider, I work with a national company, and they were like, look, we've been informing all of our Philly clients about how unfair this tax is and you all got to get active. So here I am at City Council because it just really feels like I'm running out of possibilities. And I was under the impression that Philadelphia was a city of possibilities. So I really appreciate you all taking the time today and listening to us because this is an undue burden, and it feels really unfair that not only are we being hit with this tax, but that it's also a gross tax. So I'm basically being taxed on top of the 30% I'm already paying in taxes to the federal government, the state government and the City of Philadelphia. So there are just so many different aspects that are incredibly unfair. I'm really nervous about the next year of this tax because even though I will be making significantly less money than I did last year, more of that income that I'm bringing in falls underneath the BIRT tax. So I'll be paying greater taxes despite making less money. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you for your testimony and we are happy to have you in Philadelphia, and we'll be continuing to work on this issue. Okay. Please state your name for the record and proceed with your testimony.

Hi. My name is Mindy King. I'm a pediatric occupational therapist. I work in Philadelphia's early intervention system. I'm here as a 1099 worker who's impacted greatly by the removal of this exemption, as are most of my colleagues in early intervention. It is primarily run by 1099 workers. These are occupational therapists, speech therapists, physical therapists, special instructors, workers for the blind and deaf, providing vital services to our youngest and most vulnerable citizens. This kind of burden makes it more difficult to draw in new therapists and more difficult to retain our therapists in a system that's already hurting and already struggle to meet the needs of our city. I just wanted to come to say my piece for myself and for my fellow 1099 early interventionists, and to urge you to please bring this before the Council and work with us.

Thank you. Thank you. You have the commitment from me as the Chair of Finance, but particularly the leader on this issue for this bill, Councilmember Driscoll and also Councilmember Thomas. And so, I know that they've committed to work again over the summer. As Chair, I'll be prepared and ready to go in the fall. So we thank you very much and I specifically thank you and your team of comrades as a mother of a child who benefited from speech therapy. Thank you very, very much.

Thank you for your time.

Are there any further witnesses to provide public comment on Bill No. 260507? (No response.)

Okay. And I want to be very clear. We heard each of you who are here today and we are working on it. And the commitment is there. I don't want you to think that you have gone unheard. Okay. All right. Thank you so much. Seeing no additional witnesses to testify or panels to give public comment, clerk, will you please read the panels for Bill 15 Nos. 260511 and 260512.

Will Melanie McCottry, PGW Senior Vice-President of Corporate Affairs and Chief of Staff as well as Gemela McClendon, Executive Director of the Philadelphia Gas Commission, please make their way to the podium. (Witnesses approached witness table.)

Thank you. Thank you. Please state your name for the record and prior to your -- oh, okay. Please state your name for the record and proceed with your testimony. MS. McCOTTRY: Good morning, Chair Gilmore Richardson and members of the Committee on Finance. My name is Melanie McCottry and I am Chief of Staff and Senior Vice-President of Corporate Affairs for the Philadelphia Gas Works. I am joined today by members of PGW's management team, Dan Cassidy and Bill Gallagher and I am here to testify in favor of Bill No. 260511 regarding PGW's FY27 capital budget and Bill No. 260512 regarding amendments to the FY26 capital budget. I have submitted written testimony on both bills, but would like to provide some brief comments on both pieces of legislation. Through Bill No. 260511, PGW seeks approval of its FY2027 capital budget in the amount of $208,010,000. This capital budget will enable PGW to replace existing facilities and acquire additional assets to ensure safe and reliable operations, maintain our existing customer delivery infrastructure and support revenue opportunities, which will help maximize the need for future rate relief. 90% of this year's capital budget focuses on core functions in PGW's gas processing, distribution and field services departments. The remaining 10% is focused on fleet facilities and information technology investments. Among the projects funded through the FY27 capital budget include a new odorant system at PGW's Penrose station and new station modifications --

Pardon me one moment. I apologize for the very brief interruption. I'd like to notate for the record that the Council President has appointed temporarily Councilmember Young to the committee so that we can continue. Thank you very much. Please proceed. MS. McCOTTRY: Thank you. This year's capital budget also includes provisions to provide meter and regulator facilities to support revenue opportunities from new customer requirements and replacement meters and regulators. This infrastructure supports the initial implementation of PGW's Advanced Metering Infrastructure Program, otherwise known as AMI. Additionally, PGW is seeking funding for its commercial and industrial telemetering program. Through Bill No. 260512, PGW seeks a third amendment to its FY26 capital budget. This amendment would provide lifespan extensions for three previously approved projects that will not be completed within their approved two-year lifespans. These projects would bring PGW's total amended request to 204,855,000 from its original 229,985,000 authorization. The projects include replacing the main electric switchgear at PGW's headquarters, a project which 200,000 has been spent through 2026, construction cost for PGW South Operations Center, which does not require any additional increases in spending. In conclusion, PGW respectfully requests that the committee provide a favorable recommendation on both bills and suspend the rules of Council so as to permit the first reading of these bills at the next session of Council. On behalf of PGW, I would like to express my thanks to the Philadelphia Gas Commission and Commission Chair Christy Brady and its staff, with a special acknowledgement given our venue to Councilmembers Mike Driscoll and Curtis Jones, Jr. for conducting an efficient and comprehensive budget review. I am also very grateful to City Council for its support of the work of PGW, as we carry out our mission to enhance the quality of life for all by delivering safe, reliable, and affordable energy in an environmentally responsible way. And we look forward to your continued support. Thank you for your time and consideration on these matters and I'm happy to answer any questions you may have.

Thank you. Thank you very much for your testimony and for being here today. Please state your name for the record and proceed with your testimony and then we'll take questions. MS. McCLENDON: Good morning, Chair Gilmore Richardson, and members of the committee. My name is Gemela McClendon and I'm the Executive Director of the Philadelphia Gas Commission. The Gas Commission appreciates the opportunity to testify in support of Bill Nos. 260511 and 260512, both of which embodies the recommendations of the Commission's recommendations to City Council regarding the approval of PGW's Fiscal Year 2027 capital budget and the amendment of PGW's FY26 capital budget. I will address Bill No. 5 260511 first. 21 billion. The Commission performed its due diligence review and evaluation of PGW's proposals in accordance with the applicable legal and governance standards, considering PGW's finances, operations and core operating purposes. The proceedings undertaken by the Commission in reviewing PGW's FY27 capital budget were completed in full compliance with Pennsylvania's Sunshine Act. Members of the public were allowed to testify at the Commission's public hearing held on this matter on February 19, 2026. The full transcript from that hearing, along with the public record developed during the proceedings, may be found on the Commission's website. During the hearing, eight members of the public attended in person and an additional 35 members of the public attended virtually. All were offered the opportunity to offer testimony on the record, either via inperson testimony or the submission of written testimony for those who participated virtually. All testimony received was considered by the Commission in rendering its decision. At the conclusion of its proceedings on May 12, 2026, the Commission voted to unanimously endorse an FY2027 capital budget and the not-to-exceed amount of $208,010,000 with related constraints and conditions for said budget. The Commission respectfully recommends that Commission approve Bill No. 260511 in the amount endorsed by the commission. Turning next to Bill No. 9 260512. On December 12, 2025, PGW requested an amendment to its Fiscal Year 2026 capital budget that would reauthorize and extend two previously approved capital budget line items originating in PGW's Fiscal Year 2021, '24 and '25 capital budgets, with no additional spending authority beyond those amounts that were originally approved by City Council in those respective fiscal years. PGW's requests were accompanied by appropriate PFMC resolutions authorizing the amendment to the FY2026 capital budget to reflect these requested changes. After completing its standard due diligence review of PGW's requests, the Gas Commission's professional staff showed that these requests were reasonable. The commissioners agreed and voted to approve commission staff's recommendation to approve PGW's requested amendments and recommend approval of the same to City Council. The Commission's specific recommendations to City Council are detailed in the Commission's resolution and order dated April 14, 2026, which was attached to my submitted written testimony. I would like to emphasize that the requested amounts of PGW's FY2026 capital budget before you today does not increase the dollar amount of approved for these line items. However, the capital program protocols, as enacted in prior fiscal years, require that unspent funds from those years be transferred into the FY2026 capital budget to effectuate these lifespan extensions. Put plainly, the ordinance before you today effectively transfers unspent funds into the FY2026 capital budget without impacting the overall costs of these line items.

We thank you for the opportunity to testify in support of both of these ordinances and respectfully request that this committee report these bills out with a favorable recommendation together with the suspension of rules so that they may have their first reading at the next Council session.

Thank you. Thank you very much for your testimony and thank you for your work not only with the Philadelphia Gas Works but also with the Gas Commission, and must recognize Councilmember Driscoll both and Councilmember Jones, who serve on our Gas Commission. We thank you for the work that you all do in advance of these hearings and appreciate and uplift that work. Are there any questions for this panel? (No response.)

And I know that we had a few background things that we worked on. And I also wanted to notate for the record the constituent cases that you all have been working on with us. One in particular in Councilmember Jones's district. So thank you to the two of you, but also to Ken Anderson who's here and present for the hearing and also Nyesha Chapman. Thank you very much for your responsiveness on those very complicated constituent issues, particularly the one that's in Wynnefield 5800 block. I'm forgetting which -- it's in the 5800 block. So thank you very, very much for that. Seeing no questions -- you have a question? Okay. The Chair recognizes Councilmember Ahmad.

Thank you so much, Madam Chair. It is somewhat unrelated. This is about the operating budget, but I'm asking you probably have the information. It is about in 2022, $500,000 was allocated in PGW's operating budget for a geothermal feasibility study. And in March in 2025, PGW issued an RFP for a consultant to complete the study. So that's $1 million rounded. It's been four years since the first 500,000 was allocated for the completion of the study. The utility has not delivered on the study and updates have been infrequent. So I just wanted to know the status of the study and will PGW dedicate more funds to advance faster timelines and move from studies to implementation for energy alternatives? MS. McCOTTRY: Yes, Councilmember. Appreciate the question. We are very, very close. We have been working with Alderson Engineering, which is the consultant firm who's done I think an excellent job of really looking at the feasibility and the technical accessibility. Part of what we did with this study, and just to set expectations, it's a feasibility study so it's taking a look at the site location, if it's a good location for geothermal. And so, we've partnered with the school district and we're also working with Parks & Rec because the location we selected, which is in the 9th District, is McCloskey Elementary, and right next door is Dorothy Emanuel Rec Center. So we have a working committee that includes the Parks & Rec and also the Office of Sustainability along with the school district. The final draft is complete. We have reviewed it technically, and we've shared it now with the school district and also with the city. And so, as soon as they turn around their review, we are looking forward to releasing this study, and then there will be next steps after because this is only the first step. And so, then it is taking a look at what funding might be available. Geothermal is expensive. And so, there are federal grants that we've already identified that would have to be pursued, and those are in some cases tens of millions of dollars. But as PGW, we're dedicated to seeing this process through and continuing to work with our partners. Because as we've shared in other venues, it's our job with others to think and look down every potential pathway that's available, while continuing to be able to provide service the way we do because of the fact that 90% of the city relies right now on natural gas to heat their homes. So we have to be able to do more than one thing at one time.

I appreciate that. Thank you. The reason why it's important is because this will impact your capital budget, depending on what other alternative sources we choose to go down. And so, we need to do it sooner than later and to understand what the benefits are in terms of how that impacts the overall economic structure, because there is a benefit which also has health benefits and all of those. So when you do that, I hope you're going to include the indirect impact that transforming our sources of energy do. And you know and I know you have to change your business model and we have to move from natural gas at some point, and -- (Applause.)

-- the more you do it, the faster we will be. So thank you for that. I look forward to the report and I really look forward to how soon we can go into the implementation phase. MS. McCOTTRY: Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you. Thank you so much, Dr. Ahmad. We thank you very, very much for all of your work. Pardon me one moment. Notating for the record that Councilmember Rue Landau has been temporarily appointed to the Committee on Finance hearing today with the approval and permission of the Council President. Are there any further questions for these witnesses and for this panel? (No response.)

Okay. Seeing none, we thank you very, very much for your testimony. Are there any witnesses here to provide public comment?

Yes. We have four names: Mitch Channin, Patrick Houston, Eric Stowers and Emily Davis.

Thank you. Please approach the witness table. You can state your name for the record and then proceed with your public comment. (Witnesses approached witness table.)

And again, for the record we have Councilmember Young, thank you very much, and Councilmember Landau. Thank you both for being temporarily appointed to City Council's Committee on Finance. Hey, Mitch.

Hey.

You got me at the beginning.

Sorry about that. One bill is not enough for me.

Not today. So thank you. I appreciate you being here. Just state your name for the record.

Mitch Channin, PGW ratepayer, Northeast Philly resident, also a 1099 worker and really appreciated the testimony earlier and agree with what was said there. I'm here to speak on 260511, which is the FY2027 PGW capital budget. As I think Councilmembers know, I'm a volunteer with a number of organizations that fight for environmental, climate, racial, economic justice. Though today, I'm just speaking as an individual. In two sentences before I speak about the capital budget, I do want to say I appreciated the hearing yesterday about the Water Department's low-income discount program TAP and the urgent necessity to improve and expand access to that. And I think the same conversation needs to happen about PGW. There are tens of thousands of people, from what I understand, who are eligible for PGW's low-income discount program CRP who are not enrolled, and that means many thousands of people who are very economically challenged are overpaying their gas bills and we need to do much better. In terms of the PGW capital budget, so I think all of us who are speaking today want everyone to be able to afford their energy. We want energy to be reliable. We want clean air and a livable climate and good jobs. And the capital budget for PGW that Council is considering does not advance those values. Basically just doubles down on fossil fuel infrastructure at a time when we are supposed to be moving away from that. I appreciated the questions about the geothermal feasibility report. Four years is just an extremely long time to wait for a report, and I really would like to see progress on that. I hope Councilmembers will consider holding PGW accountable. The main thing I wanted to say was about a project that was originally part of this capital budget proposal and then was removed by the Gas Commission temporarily. But we expect City Council to have to consider it again in the coming weeks or months. As Councilmember Driscoll is aware, there was a proposal for $180 million-plus to replace PGW's liquefied natural gas facility in Port Richmond. Due to advocacy from the public advocate, residents of Port Richmond, a variety of organizations and then also State Rep. Joe Hohenstein, the Gas Commission did elect to delay approval of that project pending further study. I was one of the people who went to multiple hearings and meetings asking for that to happen. However, the Commission did not direct PGW to study potential alternatives to the project, and I think that is a glaring gap in what has been done. And if there is not an examination of alternatives, I think what's most likely is that Council will be asked to approve a project for $180-plus million with no 10 consideration for alternative options that would be better for affordability, for clean air, for jobs of the future and for our climate, and that's just not okay. In a number of jurisdictions across the country, regulators and legislative bodies are directing gas utilities to provide thorough examination of alternatives before seeking approval for large-scale fossil fuel infrastructure investments. That's really important in Philadelphia, especially given that gas consumption is declining and has to decline dramatically in the coming years. So before Council considers approving spending almost $200 million on a fossil fuel infrastructure project, we really need a thorough examination of alternative strategies for making sure that people have reliable heat in the winter. We're going to raise this again before the Gas Commission in terms of the operating budget, but we would really like to see City Council direct the Gas Commission and PGW to provide that kind of thorough analysis of alternatives. Thank you very much.

Thank you and thank you very much for your work, Mitch, and really appreciate you. I'm just thinking back to those really hard COVID years when you were one of our most trusted committee members for City Council's Committee on the Environment. And I really want to uplift your work and your advocacy and just years of work on this issue and just continue to ask the Philadelphia Gas Works and also the Gas Commission to please review the requests and recommendations as notated in the previous testimony. Okay.

Thank you.

All right. Thank you. Please state your name for the record and proceed with your testimony. The next person can approach.

Patrick Houston. Good afternoon. Thanks for this opportunity to testify today. I'm a member of the Here for Climate Justice Coalition, testifying on my own behalf today in regard to Bill 260511, the Fiscal Year 2027 PGW capital budget. I'm going to add onto some of the things that the previous testifier Mitch just named, but I really want to emphasize for the Finance Committee for Council this opportunity that Council has every single year with the capital budgets and with the operating budgets to really help our city advance towards our affordability needs and towards our climate pollution goals. As Mitch just mentioned, the Commission heard advocates and delayed -- is not currently allocating the $180 million for that plant in Port Richmond. We commend that decision. We commend that type of scrutiny from the Commission, and would ask the City Council to carry that forward. Particularly the way that this can be done right now before next year's capital budget comes right back, is as has been mentioned, looking at alternative studies and alternative energy sources that can still meet energy need affordably and in an environmentally sustainable way in our city. Right now PGW is not on track to do that, not in the near term. And then also, I say that in the Commission hearings there were no proposals about alternatives that were being explored to the LNG plant that was proposed for Port Richmond. So that's in the near term. In the long term, the utility is still planning to spend $8 billion between now and 2058 on more gas, gas pipelines. And so, when we have from PGW themselves, this dwindling rate base, people having to pay into this system, but these least sustained costs, that's just going to create more energy in affordability for our city. So we really are calling on City Council to see these capital budgets as an opportunity to each year nudge the gas utility to explore affordable environmental sustainable alternatives. And the way that City Council can take action on that right now over the next few months is by making sure that when PGW comes back to the Commission for the Fiscal Year 2028 budget, we're not looking at this same proposal for more gas without clean energy alternatives. Last thing I'll mention is just to name a specific example of how other municipalities and states are taking action, in Massachusetts they worked on a DPU Order 8020, which sets a model that Council could follow. And in this case, Council has that authority. It does not have to wait for the state to act. City Council could have that authority. So that order, DPU 8020 in Massachusetts, in addition to the work that Here for Climate Justice is doing, working in communities, helping people get their energy needs met and push for larger change, are just two ways where we would want to support being in communication with Council to push for alternatives. Thanks for your time.

Great. Thank you. Thank you very much for being here. We truly appreciate your public comment. Please state your name for the record and proceed with your public comment. And the next witness can please approach.

Thank you. My name is Eric Stowers. I am a resident of Port Richmond. And thank you, Councilmember Richardson, for letting the people speak earlier about BIRT. I'm a fan of not wasting people's time either, so I'm grateful that you gave them the chance to and they showed up to give their testimony. Since I was here to speak against the LNG plant, which has been removed from the budget, I'm going to make this quick since that doesn't seem to be relevant today. But I just wanted to emphasize, I was here a couple weeks ago when Councilmember Thomas had, we'll say, a hearing or like a day related to affordability, specifically for utilities. And during that, we had PGW talk. And then when I was making a comment, Councilmember Thomas said, I'm so glad that PGW is here, you can connect with them and you two can connect on those details after. So I was expecting to hear back from PGW and I still haven't heard anything from them. And that's been the whole thing about this process, is that PGW has been pushing their agenda on what they see as what's best for the city. And when communities come and ask for more transparency, more details on what they are trying to do, we are just not receiving that. So that is the main thing that we've been pushing for, is just to know what's going on, to know what the details are. We heard a bill earlier where Councilmember Jones was talking about somebody like the getaway car where people just there -- where there was a deal with the housing. I think Councilmember Young was addressing that, where just the math doesn't add up for what the city is going to be paying for what the deal is, and somebody is getting way more than they should. Well, the LNG plant was like a similar thing where we just don't have the details of what the deal is going to be with a private partner. And so, we deserve to know those details before things get approved. So I'm going to leave that right here today. But please, this is something the LNG plant is not just like -- it's not just like a one-time thing. This is a big investment in our community that affects our community's health and how it's going to affect our city's ability to address affordability in the future. So thank you so much for hearing us today. And when we do come to that time to address it, that is something that we should look into scrutiny in the same detail that Councilmember Young and the Finance Committee were asking questions on how did this deal come about. We need to take that same approach now.

Thank you. Thank you very much, dear. Prior to your departure, may you please write your information down on this sheet of paper. We're going to give it to the representatives who are here from the Philadelphia Gas Works.

Thank you.

All right. Thank you, dear. Please state your name for the record and proceed with your testimony.

My name is Emily Davis --

Pardon me. Are you providing public comment as well? Can you please approach the witness table because I think we missed you twice now. Please state your name for the record and proceed.

My name is Emily Davis and I'm here again to talk about the gas company, which I don't trust. As members of City Council, you represent the citizens of Philadelphia and our interests. And budgets are a great way to see what an organization is doing. So it's important to take a good look and I'm glad you're here to do it. Also, 10 years ago you guys passed a resolution that said we're going to be carbon neutral, so every budget should reflect that and show the path. PGW has not, with maybe a little exception because they did have the diversification study, but I think OS(ph) was more responsible for that. And then we've got this study that they of course was forced to do, which was really, really exceedingly inadequate. 95% of PGW's customers are commercial. Yet none of them were engaged in this study. And actually, there were no PGW customers engaged in the study. It was only non-PGW customers, which is kind of interesting. At any rate, I'm glad that the funding for the LNG for next year is gone, but it should be gone forever. That's going to be a stranded asset. It's a plant that could last a long time and it will be well past 2050 before it's gone. The other problem with that is just like the pipe replacement that customers are paying for now on their bills, there will probably be an addition to their bills to pay for this plant, so we don't want to add any extra bills. Please make sure that future budgets don't include only infrastructure that supports the city environmental goals. Thank you.

Thank you very much for your testimony. We appreciate you being here. Thank you for coming in. Okay. Please state your name for the record and proceed with your testimony. Apologies for missing you that last round.

No, no. My name is Linnea Bond. I'm the Health and Environmental Education Director for Physicians for Social Responsibility Pennsylvania. PSRPA's focused attention on PGW because the use of gas has a huge impact on the health of Philadelphians. And of course as Councilmember Ahmad said, those all have costs too. Petrochemical operations increases mortality and morbidity for those living near it. Explosions, there have been four home explosions in Philadelphia in the last eight years, plus a small business that just exploded twice due to gas in Overbrook. Respiratory issues, 12% of childhood asthma can be attributed to gas stoves. And of course, global warming, the main ingredient in gas has 80 times the global warming impact of carbon dioxide in addition to the carbon dioxide that is emitted when gas burns. According to the DEP, historically Philadelphia has had six days per year with temperatures over 95. By 2050, that number is projected to be to 34 days over 7 95 annually. There are about four 8 leaks for every mile of PGW 9 pipeline, and intentional releases 10 are an essential part of the gas 11 system and have a huge climate 12 impact, not to mention accidents. 13 One in Pennsylvania in 2022 14 accounted for 10% of our year's 15 emissions. 16 Energy affordability is 17 also of course a serious health 18 issue, and gas is getting more 19 expensive for several reasons. 20 Demand for gas, as mentioned by 21 others, is decreasing, and PGW's customer base is shrinking with infrastructure costs skyrocketing, which led to a rate case a year ago, which PSRPA intervened in. We opposed both PGW's proposed weather normalization adjustment increase, which has already led to very high bills in the past. And they wanted a revenue guarantee, which would have allowed them to charge more even when we were using less. In settlement, they agreed to throw out the revenue guarantee. What I would ask for Councilmembers going forward is beyond these committee conversations, we have a lot of expertise to share. We intervene in PUC cases. We study the future of gas proceedings across the country. We see huge potential in geothermal and we're talking with neighbors who are asking questions about their health. And I ask you to demand transparency and accountability from PGW, especially as PGW's answer to its crisis has not been to think proactively about either shrinking with demand or transitioning to a non-gas alternative business model. Their plan is to expand gas operations industrially. In this budget, they were asking for, like we talked about, 182 million replacement of the Port Richmond LNG facility that would have increased capacity by 30%. I appreciate Dr. Ahmad's question today and the conversations we've had with you, Councilmember Driscoll. We hope you will all engage with deep oversight in the fall when they'll propose a public-private partnership for this facility. Residential customers, residents impacted by gas, and workers whose pensions must be secured should be at the center of this conversation. Thanks for your time, and I hope that we can continue these conversations over the summer for more opportunities for oversight in the fall and beyond. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you very much for your testimony and we appreciate you coming in this afternoon. Are there any further witnesses to provide public comment on Bill Nos. 260511 and 260512? (No response.)

Anyone here whose name has not been called? (No response.)

Okay. Seeing none, we thank you also very much. Pausing to notate for the record the presence of Councilmember Jim Harrity, who has also been appointed to the committee temporarily for today by Council President Johnson. We thank you very much for your flexibility. Thank you also very much. Clerk, will you please call the next panel we have to testify on Bill No. 260299. And prior to that, I'd like to recognize my colleague Councilmember Rue Landau for remarks.

Thank you. Thank you, Chair, and thank you, everyone. Just a few points. Thank you for being here today. Many of you know that I served as the Executive Director of the Philadelphia Commission on Human Relations and the Fair Housing Commission for more than a decade. While there, I saw the profound impact the agencies had on thousands of families and individuals throughout the city. That would not have been possible without the tireless efforts and intentionality of commissioners who do the work to steer the Commission and the dedicated staff. The Fair Housing Commission serves as one of the city's most important safeguards for renters, investigating complaints, enforcing housing protections, and providing many tenants with a lifeline to challenge unfair rental practices before seeing a courtroom. When rights are violated, people turn to the Fair Housing Commission. The sole four employees there take on a larger and larger workload every year. This year they've handled 600 cases. Next year, they expect this number to grow even more. With Councilmember O'Rourke's new Safe and Healthy Homes bill in effect, that number is likely to reach 700 or higher. By better supporting the commissioners who hear cases, my legislation to increase the commissioner's stipend to $100 per meeting and a $14,000 annual cap will reduce wait times and increase the number of hearings the commissioners can hold. It's just simple math. More hearings and meetings mean lower wait times for cases to be heard, more cases being closed and more Philadelphians' rights protected. As you all know, I've spent my career rooted in fair housing and tenants' rights. And in honor of my dear friend Dave Ramler, the former Chair of the Fair Housing Commission, who passed away in 2024, I'm working as hard as I can to support the Director of the Fair Housing Commission to get a full complement of commissioners and to get a new budget funding for staff that will be able to do the work of the Commission, and with this legislation to increase the stipend for commissioners and expand the annual cap to cover all the necessary meetings to do the work of the people. Dave and I talked about this many times when he was alive, that they are doing this work from their hearts and for peanuts, and now that the volume is so high that the caps have to be extended. I'm excited to move forward with this today, and I urge the Finance Committee to support this bill. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Thank you very much, Councilmember Landau. So glad that you are here and notating your support for Bill No. 4 260299. Clerk, will you please call the first panel we have to testify on Bill No. 260299.

Will, Renee Chenault Fattah, Executive Director, Philadelphia Commission on Human Relations and Philadelphia Fair Housing Commission. (Witnesses approached witness table.)

Thank you so much for being here. Please state your name for the record and then proceed with your testimony.

Good afternoon, Chairperson Gilmore Richardson and members of the Finance Committee. My name is Renee Chenault Fattah, and I'm the Executive Director of the Philadelphia Commission on Human Relations, PCHR and the Fair Housing Commission FHC. I am here today in my capacity though as the Executive Director of the Fair Housing Commission in support of Bill No. 260299, which was introduced by Councilmember Landau. Thank you so much for your support in this. Thank you. A little bit of history: The Fair Housing Commission was founded in 1962 to enforce the city's fair housing ordinance. In the early '90s, PCHR was asked to staff the Fair Housing Commission to save money to address the city's financial crisis. Since that time, we have operated under one budget but separate commissions. The commissioners of the Fair Housing meet twice a week to conduct public hearings on properties in which tenants allege are unsafe or in bad condition. Our commissioners hear testimony. They examine evidence to determine whether an unfair rental practice has taken place. They verify that landlords have necessary rental licenses and certificates and are meeting other requirements ensuring habitability. If there is a violation, commissioners issue orders and it's all to enforce the fair housing ordinance. Despite the volume of work, which you heard Councilmember Landau refer to, and the fact that they meet twice a week, the stipend for housing commissioners is $85 a day, while Human Relations commissioners, who meet only twice a month receive a $100 a day stipend. Under the code, both commissions right now are capped at $8,500 a year. Today I am overjoyed to support Councilmember Landau's bill, which amends the code section 5 entitled "Fair Housing Commission" in Section 20-304 of The Philadelphia Code, entitled "Compensation for Members of Boards, Commissions, Committees, and Councils." This bill would raise the compensation paid to members of the Fair Housing Commission to $100 a meeting. This increase puts the Fair Housing Commission per meeting in line with comparable boards and commissions throughout the City of Philadelphia. The total compensation, as you heard, would be capped at $14,000 a year, and that's just for the Fair Housing Commissioners. The increase in the yearly stipend is necessary to accommodate the number of meetings the Fair Housing Commission holds as well as to address the high volume of cases the Commission considers. The caseload is, as you also heard, likely to increase because of additions to important protections afforded to tenants under recent changes in the fair housing ordinance. I'm happy to address any questions you might have.

Thank you. Thank you very much for being here and thank you for your testimony. Are there any questions for this witness and for this panel? (No response.)

All right. Seeing none, thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you very, very much for your patience and thank you for being here this afternoon.

I would have waited all day for this stipend, so thank you.

Thank you. Thank you, thank you so very much. Are there any further witnesses here whose names have not been called? (No response.)

Is there anyone else here to provide public comment whose name has not been called? (No response.)

Okay. Seeing none, we thank you very, very much for your testimony. We will now proceed with our last bill. It is our last bill for colleagues who are listening, Bill No. 260521. Clerk, will you please call the first panel to testify on Bill No. 260521.

First panel, Sharolyn Murphy, Risk Manager. (Witnesses approached witness table.)

Thank you so much for being here. Please state your name for the record and then you can proceed with your testimony. And I also just wanted to recognize again that our Council President was here earlier in the hearing I believe for this legislation. So please proceed. Thank you.

Sharolyn Murphy. Good afternoon, Chairperson Gilmore Richardson and members of the Finance Committee. My name is Sharolyn Murphy, and I serve as the Risk Manager for the City of Philadelphia. I am here to testify on Bill No. 260521. This bill would create a presumption that the families of a certain class of employee who commit suicide are entitled to pension benefits. Because the city prioritizes prevention programs, it opposes this bill. Background: The Pennsylvania Workers' Compensation Act specifically precludes benefits for intentionally self-inflicted injury or death. Historically, Pennsylvania courts treated suicide as a voluntary, intentional act that severed the workplace causal relationship connection. Over time however, Pennsylvania courts adopted a more nuanced framework that was more beneficial to grieving families, namely the chain of causation test. The chain of causation test provides that if a workplace injury leads to a severe mental disturbance, the worker's rational judgment becomes obscured. Because the individual lacks normal rational control over their choices, the act of suicide is legally viewed as involuntary, rather than intentionally self- inflicted. This framework has led to an increased recognition of suicide deaths while maintaining an emphasis on work relationship. Bill 260521 would create a presumption that first responders who commit suicide did so as a result of vague criteria that hardly touches upon the complexities of the causes of the illness. Research consistently demonstrates that suicide is multifactorial and may involve many personal, socio-demographic, medical and economic factors. Frequently, factors associated with suicide include intimate partner problems and physical health problems. Those other factors may be a bigger factor than events at work. Preserving human life and health is a shared and fundamental value. The city fully embraces this responsibility and remains committed to supporting the mental health and well-being of its employees. The city supplies a number of supports in this regard. I'll start with the medical examiner's office. The city's medical examiner's unit is a fully equipped unit that is very capable of managing medical and psychological matters that may impact our sworn officers. They have a unit that includes a medical director who is Dr. Jordan Burnett, Barnett rather. He is a Board- Certified emergency medical physician who has extensive experience in emergency medical services and peer-to-peer support. We also have a clinical psychologist, Dr. Keyoni Rogers, who specializes in mental health illness and the police community. The fire department has a peer support team that responds to critical incidents and provides outreach to personnel following traumatic events. Peers often follow up later with a visit to the firehouse in the following days to ensure continued support. In addition to peer support, which is available 24/7, the fire department also offers inhouse initiatives that address substance use awareness, trauma recognition and suicide prevention. And Local and the fire department have an employee assistance program that offers a wealth of behavioral health resources focused on ensuring members and their families have confidential, professional and accessible support when they need it. The police department's mental health response prioritizes prevention, resilience, and long- term wellness as critical elements of effective law enforcement. Dr. Andrew Best, Jr. is the Director of the Health and Wellness Division for the police department. He leads the department's efforts to support the physical, mental, and emotional well-being of sworn and civilian personnel.

These efforts include the completion of the police department's suicide investigation protocol, the strengthening of the internal employee assistance program, establishment of an external employee assistance program through Penn Medicine, and supporting a dedicated peer support program. At the federal level, the Public Safety Officer Benefit Program provides death and disability payments for first responders, and it has expanded its coverage to include suicides, PTSD, and other mental health conditions resulting from traumas. Eligible survivors get a lump sum payment of more than $460,000 in 2026, plus educational assistance. Notably, the state of Pennsylvania has not passed legislation extending benefits to first responders who commit suicide. And I just wanted to note that during the process of these hearings, the Administration has been working with Council on language to amend what was submitted. And we understand that those amendments have been accepted and we appreciate your partnership in this regard insofar as the language is concerned. Thank you. But with that said, I do want to stress that it's universally accepted that preserving life and health is paramount. This priority aligns with the Administration's objectives. For this reason, the city is constrained from supporting this bill. This concludes my testimony and I am happy to answer the committee's questions.

Thank you. Thank you very much for your testimony. I'd ask that we call the next panel and then we'll take questions. Okay. Are there any questions for the first panel -- well, we'll do questions first. So are there any questions from -- okay. We'll recognize Dr. Ahmad and then Councilmember Landau. Okay. And then we'll move to the next panel.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Good afternoon. I'm sorry. But it just seems extremely cruel what you just testified. That's just basic cruelty. We're asking for families who are left behind and for us to say that the work does not have an impact in the mental health, the kind of work they do, rushing into situations that we all rush to leave. I'm not comprehending why we are doing this. Why would we not include survivors of those who have perished to do this -- I'm just trying to wrap my head around that. And I just wanted to ask you what will this expanding benefit cost? And was the cost already funded in the FY27 budget? What would this cost?

So before I get to the cost, I wanted to address the cruelty, because that's not our intention at all. Our intention is to focus on the preservation of life. This is a huge human problem dealing with suicides, and the Administration is focusing on preserving life. That's never cruel. That's always our intention, to keep people alive. And families that we've talked to regarding this issue, when we talk about benefits and we talk about preserving life, they always emphasize preservation of life and benefits that we provide to the families --

Excuse me. I need to interrupt you. We can always work on prevention, but that doesn't take away that suicides do happen and will happen. And for us to say that their survivors don't deserve anything because we're just going to put all our efforts into preservation and if someone goes ahead and does die by suicide, oh well. Is that --

That's not --

Well, that's what it's sounding like. Whether you're intending to say that or not, what it's sounding like is, oh, we're going to put all our resources in preventing this, and then if one person slips through, too bad --

That's not it at all.

-- you're survivors, too bad. Because that's what I'm hearing when you say this. And to me, this is deeply cruel. But I do want to understand what is the cost associated with this.

With all due respect, we're not saying to the families, so be it. What we're saying to the families is we hear you. We hear you that you don't want any other families to go through what you've gone through. So we want to focus on preserving life. We want to focus on prevention. Councilmember, if we get that right, we never get to the second question. And it is our aim in this Administration to get it right to preserve life. But with respect to your question regarding cost, the Pension Fund has not had the actuarial analysis completed regarding this legislation. But I will say this, that the expectation is that we'll have more applications in light of this ordinance, and the pension benefit regarding death is a very generous benefit. So you'll have more applications at a higher cost to the Pension Fund.

I am -- I have no words to say. First, you haven't done the analysis to tell us what it'll cost and say it's prohibitive. We just heard we give away millions of dollars to some preferred developer here for housing, and we can't give money to survivors of -- this is -- I am outraged that in the same hearing we are hearing these two juxtaposed, and it just tells me we are losing our humanity if we are trying to push this side of nonsense. So you have to testify. This is not at you. I'm just saying the kind of focus you're putting on this prevention, of course if there's prevention, you don't have to put out any money, so let's do it. Let's have prevention. But in case there is a need, then we have this support for those who survive. So I don't understand how you can sit here and say we don't support this bill. But thank you very much, Madam Chair. I really --

What I will say to that is that we do have lots of resources for family members and we never step away from that responsibility. We just want to emphasize that life is the ultimate issue here, preserving it. But we also do have supports for family members.

I'm just going to be honest. This is real rough. This is real rough, because many of us in this room have lost loved ones to this very issue and folks that we actually know who have worked for the City of Philadelphia previously who we have lost. This one is a little rough. Okay. And it does feel a little cruel. And obviously, we all want to do all that we can from a prevention standpoint, but that does not always happen. And this feels a little rough. And so, I'm going to recognize Councilmember Landau and recognize Councilmember Harrity, who I know has recently experienced a loss. Okay. Councilmember Landau.

Thank you, Chair. I will be brief. I will start by saying in my years now of serving on Council, this is possibly the saddest and most bizarre testimony I've ever heard from the Administration. It is so painful and so deep and cruel, that it is a little shocking that it's so public and a matter of fact. Absolutely, we should invest in everything we possibly can for mental health services and lifesaving services of all of our employees, not just those folks on the front line. That's what we should do. Prevention is extremely important. This has nothing to do with that. What we're asking for is to have these benefits go to survivors when there's service connected, these are death benefits. And you are now parsing out acceptable types of death and unacceptable types of death and I find that outrageous. PTSD is real. Trauma is real. Trauma from folks who are on the front line is especially real. We should do everything we can to support them, and their families every single day are hoping that their loved ones come home from work and it does not matter how somebody passes. But suicide is real. It is painful. It harms families. It trickles down for generations. We absolutely must provide the benefits. And the fact that you don't have the cost here today is extra disturbing. But I will ask the question, in the past three years, each year how many of our city employee staff in these categories have died of suicide?

To answer your question, right now we've only had a very small number of employees who've passed from suicide. Most of the suicides that come through risk management will be the suicides that have a work- relationship component. If there's not a work-relationship component, risk management may never hear about the suicide. So fortunately for the city, our numbers have been very small. But today, I can't give you an exact number of suicides for our employees in the City of Philadelphia for the last three years.

Thankfully, the number is very, very small. Thankfully, we will even be working to reduce that very, very small number. If the number is so small, give those families those benefits.

Thank you. Thank you, Councilmember Landau --

Can I respond?

Pardon me one moment. Please allow me to recognize Councilmember Harrity, and then we'll recognize you for response.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I'm going to try to keep my anger in check because I've been known to go a little off. But as a son of a police officer and a grandson of a firefighter, this is completely outrageous, outrageous. I've seen my father's friends who are on the police force commit suicide. It's not seen. It's not something that people admit, especially police officers and first responders who are trained that they are above that kind of thing. They're the protectors. So for them to go to admit doesn't happen like that. And as Kathy said, I lost a friend of mine a few months ago, right. This guy had everything by sight that you can imagine somebody would want. He didn't have no money issues. He owned a successful business, but he decided to take his own life for reasons we still don't know to this day. Some mental illnesses are seen. I've said this before. I'm very well-versed in this. This isn't my first rodeo when it comes to this. I grew up in a rough neighborhood where a lot of my friends died when they were young, and a lot of them took their own lives when they were young. For you to say in one breath that the number is a very small number and then in the other breath say that the city can't afford to cover this is outrageous, especially our first responders, but any city employee. There's a lot of stress that comes with this, right. There's a stigma. So if they tell somebody they're afraid that they're going to be punished, that they're going to be put on desk duty, that they're not going to be able to do their job, and that alone is another mental block for them, because they can't speak about it because that's not who they are. They're that guy that runs into the burning building. They're that person, that woman that runs at the bullets. You don't think when they get home at night they're not crying to themselves. I've seen it. My father suffered from post- traumatic stress from Vietnam, ended up in the police department where it just got worse. Because as you said, people were waiting for him to say something. But a special forces veteran from Vietnam and a police officer isn't going to tell anybody something like that, you understand. So there is no way to know. You can do all the prevention you want. And this isn't directed towards you. You have a job to do. I'm thoroughly disappointed in my city. I'm thoroughly disappointed with this Administration, that this would be the stance they are taking when you, yourself, testified that the number is so small that you don't even know it. So what are we even talking about here, ma'am. I know it's not your decision, but you're in the room. This is not going to over well in this Council. I think that you should look into your stances on this and I would ask that you reconsider. Because if you don't, then one of us is just going to legislate that you have to anyway, and I don't care what (inaudible). Thank you.

Councilmember Harrity --

Thank you so much, Councilmember Harrity. The Chair now recognizes our risk manager.

Thank you, Councilmember Harrity. And you and I have spoken about this before. My heart goes out to you for this situation with your family, it really does. And we've actually spoken to other people who have lost loved ones, siblings, children and we know the pain that's associated with that. But I will tell you this: Everyone that we've spoken to has said prevention was the key, that money can't bring their loved one back. But what we can do as an Administration is prevent this from happening to anyone else. And we hear them and that's what they say to us. It's not our intention to be --

Bull --

One moment. One moment.

It is what they're saying to us and that's what we're focusing on. And we too as a city have to prioritize what we can and what we cannot do. But I tell you this for a fact, what we are aiming to do is to eliminate this epidemic from the City of Philadelphia. And the numbers are small, thanks in large part to all of the efforts that we have put into prevention and we will continue to fight that fight. So we invite you to join us in that fight to save lives because you have a very powerful voice because of your experience, but we will continue to push this issue of prevention because we want to save every life that we possibly can. And you know that the city doesn't have unlimited resources, we don't. But we put our resources to where the priorities should be, and we believe that it should be with prevention. So we just thank you for your efforts to support us in that.

Prevention --

And this is what I'm going to do. Hold on --

-- is fine and dandy and I'm for all the prevention you want. But you go look in those kids' eyes whose father or mother just committed suicide and then explain to them how they're going to eat next week because the City of Philadelphia won't cover the fact that their parent died because they suffered from PTSD that we gave them, we gave them.

Thank you, Councilmember Harrity. I am going to respectfully request as Chair, we are going to proceed from this particular panel and ask that Panel 2 please approach the witness table so that we can take Panel 2's testimony, because this is -- okay. As Chair, please Panel 2.

Will Dr. Melissa Rice, co-founder of First Responders Mental Health Symposium; Thomas Kane, union member of International Association of Firefighters Local 22; and Brianna Wakefield will be reading for Regan Faulk. Please approach. (Witnesses approached witness table.)

Okay. And then for the record, we also have written testimony from John C. Becker, Jr., Ethos Treatment; Emily Child Gray as well for the record. And for everyone who's here, particularly Councilmember Harrity, for everyone who's here watching on Channel 64 or listening online and for those who will rewatch this hearing afterwards, I am very sorry. I am very, very sorry. And if there's anyone listening who needs help or support, know that we are here for you. Okay. So I just want to apologize for just how traumatic and triggering I'm sure that was for so many people and/or families who may have been impacted through the years. Please state your name for the record and proceed with your testimony.

My name is Melissa Rice, and I'm representing the First Responders Symposium of Philadelphia. A few years ago I was asked to put together and speak at a symposium for first responders. And I asked the question why me. I've been a mental health advocate for years, but I have never been a first responder so how could I relate to these people. When I started organizing it and meeting with these speakers on Zoom, I could just feel their stories, their pain of losing loved ones, of struggling with post-traumatic stress disorder, and I knew there was a reason I was here. I knew that although I couldn't experience what they went through on the job, we all had mental health. We all had things going on. And if we could start the conversation and talk about mental health issues and bring this awareness about, it's very important. But we have to focus on those left behind who are lost to suicide, those family members, particularly I met Regan, whose husband was a Philadelphia police officer, died by suicide, leaving 2-month-old twins at home. Her health care was being cut off, funeral expenses and she's meant to dealt with that, but all the grief she's facing. I've heard this twice already. We're very lucky it's a low number. Do you know why it's a low number? Because it's not in uniform. It's at home. Also, if you have addiction or overdose, suicide and overdose statistics are not accurate because they will label them as an overdose or a suicide when it could have been either/or. So we don't even know the exact numbers of this. 5 of out of 100,000 people represent the general population that will die by suicide. or of first 14 responders out of 100,000 represent 15 that. It may not seem like a big 16 jump, but going from 13 to 18 17 because of the high-stress 18 pressures of this job and going 19 from one scene to the next scene to the next scene without being able to cope with what happened, if I was in a traumatic situation, I would have time to back off and cope. They are literally risking their lives every day going into scene, scene and not being able to cope with these things. And you want to talk about prevention? Trust me, there's a lot of prevention. This man sitting next to me, peer support, employee assistance, I have sat in with his firefighters and done workshops with him. I've done workshops with the Philadelphia Police Department who just started their peer support program with Sergeant Janine Brown. So there is prevention happening. I don't want to hear that. There are conferences, there are symposiums, there is awareness. But when someone is struggling with post-traumatic stress disorder or mental illness, you look at my life, my life's perfect. You think at 15 playing sports, having a great life with family, I thought I was going to attempt to end my life? No. Why, because I'm struggling so much. And I look at that struggle and then I see it times a million by these first responders who are struggling every day with these scenes that they're seeing. And I forget the one person that's closest to me. My husband, who served as a police officer for only one year, and he talked to me the other day and I forgot the situation he went through, that he was a rookie and it was his first couple months and he was called to a train station where there was a suicide. He was 20-something years old and walked in, and what he saw of the remains haunted him for months. And you know what, I was so young that I didn't know how to deal with it. And it's really crazy that I've been in this work since 21. I'm 38, and the fact that last week is the first time I've remembered he went through this. I totally forgot my own husband went through that.

And although he's not a police officer anymore and I'm proud of the work he does, I think of that one scene and him waking up and him thinking about this and that replaying in his head, and wonder that these first responders who were on the job for I don't care if it's three months to years about what they see all the time, we have to focus on these families. And Regan, who was left to raise her twins alone with no 21 medical benefits. How is the funeral going to get paid? We have to start focusing because you know what, our first responders serve us, but their families sacrifice so much. And, yes, it's great that we don't have a huge number of suicide in Philadelphia. But there are reasons for that because those numbers are not being shown. And I can 100% tell you that one of the people that spoke on the panel at the first responder symposium was a police officer who went in and found their coworker who was supposed to be coming to their shift, they didn't show up, a police officer in Philadelphia because they took their own life that morning. So what does that mean? Because they were home in their pajamas, taking their own life from the stress of the job, we don't focus on that person. And I know you all are in support of this and I appreciate it. But I have to testify with this passion because mental health is so important. And I promise myself, I don't care if it's young adults, kids, 3-year-olds all the way up to first responders, to our amazing older citizens, I'm going to fight for mental health. I'm going to fight for prevention and those resources, but I'm also going to fight for supporting those families that are left behind because of suicide, because of first responders who are literally risking their lives for us and those families that are sacrificing. Thank you so much.

Thank you. Thank you very much for your testimony and for being here and for sharing your personal story. Please state your name for the record and proceed with your testimony.

Good afternoon. My name is Thomas Kane. I'm representing Local 22. I'm also a 34-year veteran of the Philadelphia Fire Department. Currently, my position at Local 6 is coordinator of the peer support 7 team. Myself and Mike Yeager, 8 retired Battalion Chief, started 9 out about 10 years ago. With the 10 department, I'm the employee 11 relations officer. I oversee the 12 employee assistance program. 13 So our representative 14 from risk management did mention we 15 do have prevention and we do, we 16 have tons of it. Also mentioned 17 the medical examiner's office, 18 which we don't really deal with 19 medical examiner's office at all. 20 MEU, I believe, medical evaluation 21 office, Dr. Barnett, who texted me, 22 says, no, no, hasn't lost anybody yet. But we deal with this every day. As a matter of fact, today, today's a beautiful day. I don't know if you noticed it. Outside, it's beautiful. But even more so when I stepped out of the room, I got a text and one of our guys is okay. Last night he wasn't. We were at his house until about 1 o'clock in the morning and he's okay. It's a beautiful day, and for some people it is and they go on, they have moments and they're able to get past those moments. And some people aren't. And all the prevention you try, it doesn't stop you from trying. You can't stop every suicide, but you can try and you don't stop trying. And that's what we do. We're out there. We talk to our members. And so many things that were said by you folks, Councilpeople, with the last testimony is so true. It's like what do we need to say. You're saying it all and it's so true. We're out there. We have trainings. We talk. I try and get as close as I can to people to let them know the message, you're important, everything you do is important. This job takes a lot out of us. It does. And suicide is a result of this job at times and substance use and depression and a lot of things. But suicide is there and some folks -- like the connection, I notice in there there's language about it has to be certain things. Yes, yes, we can take that and draw those lines and connect those dots, yes. And the number is small. And that's great that the number is small. I want the number to be -- you want it to be zero. It's not going to be though, but we're going to do our best everything we can do. And again, the resources. Like I said, with Local -- and I want to give credit to 5 the people who've helped me out, 6 with Local 22 and within the 7 department. So when I got in this 8 position as ERO, Commissioner Thiel 9 was commissioner at the time. 10 After him, Commissioner Murphy and 11 now Commissioner Thompson. 100% 12 support, they back me up 100%. 13 On the union side, Eddie 14 Marks, Andy Thomas before him and 15 Mike Bresnan now, 100% support. So 16 we have that commitment at the top. 17 Missy mentioned Regan. What's 18 Regan -- Regan is her first name. 19 Regan Regan, right, how about that. 20 And Kevin was the police officer 21 who died and her benefits were to 22 be terminated. And what happens is -- what could happen depending on the person's situation, they could be actually -- if somebody completes suicide on the 27th of the month, three days later their benefits are cut off, if they don't have the right pension time in and stuff like that. That's what can happen. This bill would take that to another level where they're going to have benefits throughout and it makes a big difference. It really does. Like I said, we've had enough suicides that we've seen, and they're fewer now too. They are fewer. And that is a result of prevention and the outreach we do to our members. But again, there are folks who can't cope. And I don't want to say fail, but they lose the battle. And that's where this could help.

Thank you. Thank you for your decade of work, and longer than that, but decade of work specifically in this area and your 34-plus years of service to the city and all that you continue to do. We certainly appreciate both of you for being here, for staying for the entire hearing and just uplifting the importance of the work that you are doing. Again, just for anyone who's listening, you can call 988 for additional help or assistance. But we want to just say thank you, thank you for the hard work that you are doing. It's hard work, but it's heart work. So thank you very, very much for that work. Okay. Are there any questions for these two witnesses before we hear the reading of the testimony on behalf of Regan Faulk? Please, Madam Vice- Chair.

Thank you very much, Madam Chair. And I want to thank you all for being here, hearing the testimony. And getting a briefing from my colleagues about some of the commentary and some of the decisions by the Administration is extremely disappointing. I can only think of what it is like, and I praise God that I haven't had this personal experience, but what it is like when you have a sudden loss, whether that be a homicide, a suicide, you know, a naturally- occurring death and all of a sudden, if to use your example, sir, if you pass away let's say on the 27th, that on the 30th now you no longer have benefits, and trying to figure out and scramble and just in the midst of grief is just -- it's incomprehensible. The idea that we wouldn't be more thoughtful about making sure that people have what they need to be able to get through at least this grieving period. And then far beyond that, there's so much more that we could be doing on this issue around suicide and what happens when a city employee commits suicide. But beyond that, we know that there are certain positions that are more stressful than others. We know that particularly for police and for firefighters and paramedics and, you know, there are certain positions, I would say correctional officers are in that as well, and there's a number of different positions, but we know that those are positions that give a level of stress or level of stress on our employees that some other positions likely don't affect them the same way. And so, with the cause and effect. For example, we used to dispute that, say, for example, asbestos caused cancer. There was a time when we -- well, we said there was no connection, but we know better now. And there was a time when we said, okay, well, lead paint doesn't cause any sort of issues with young children. We know better now. We know that there is a direct relationship between exposure to asbestos or lead paint or to the health effects of an individual. So we should also by now know that those who are in these very critical positions are affected in a way that could more likely lead to depression, anxiety and ultimately suicide. And we should know that by now. It's not a secret. It's not hard to figure out. This is something that you know. To me, it's kind of like common sense at this point. And so, there's just so much more that we can do as a city. I think that this bill is going to be a gamechanger and I'm happy to support it. But even in supporting it, I would like to see really the city administration take a more comprehensive, just sort of embrace what it is that needs to happen here. Just embrace what we're trying to do and help our city employees do, you know, our city employees and their families when these occurrences happen. Just as an aside, I have a relative, my sister, who works for SEPTA and she works in the subway system. And on more than one occasion, she's seen someone walk in front of a train. And so, when people see these kinds of traumatic events, when you talked about your husband and how when he saw a suicide victim and he just replayed it over and over and over in his mind, there's an effect. There is absolutely an effect. And so, I say all that to say that, Madam Chair, I look forward to supporting this piece of legislation wholeheartedly.

Thank you. Thank you very much, Vice-Chair Bass. The Chair now recognizes Councilmember Driscoll.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I just wanted to state for the record, Dr. Rice, thank you for what you're doing. You are an asset to the fire department. And, Tom Kane, I've been following your career with admiration for years. Thank you for what you do for the men and women of Philadelphia Fire Department. We're lucky to have you guys advocating for our fellow city workers, that we go to sleep at night and they're awake waiting for that call. So I just want to -- I'll be supporting this bill 8 and thank you.

Thank you, Councilmember. Just want to add one thing real quick, if I may. One of the things like when I talk to the folks, when I go out to the stations and talk to them, I always try and throw this out there. What's the most important thing we do every day? Go home. And people say save lives, do this and everything. And yes, we're all going to do all that anyway. But the most important thing we do is go home. And that's what we want to do.

Thank you. The Chair now recognizes Dr. Ahmad.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I just have one sentence. Thank you for your humanity. We need nothing else. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you both so much for being here, and thank you again for all of your work. And I just apologize for today. It was very, very rough. Brianna, if you could approach the witness table to read the testimony on behalf of Regan. And I believe I was just reading the previous transcript from the last hearing that was in the Committee on Public Safety. That the witness you're reading testimony on behalf of was at the last hearing on the Committee on Public Safety. Within the transcript of that hearing, it did notate the city gave a preliminary estimate of $1.3 million to $1.6 million to respond to Councilmember Landau's request, but that it could potentially be more than that. And that was directly from the transcript. So, Brianna, please approach. State your name and then the name of the individual you're giving testimony on behalf of and read the testimony. Okay. (Witness approached witness table.)

Good afternoon, members of the Committee on Finance. My name is Brianna Wakefield. I'm here today to read Regan Faulks' testimony into the record. They're going to know, Kevin said to me as we were standing in the local emergency room Thursday, October 6th. Who's going to know what, I replied. The department. They're going to know something's wrong with me. We're here and it'll be reported back and I'll lose my job. How is it possible that in the middle of a mental health crisis, my husband's biggest concern was losing his job and his credibility. Less than 36 hours later, he was gone. October 8, 2022, my world came crashing down. I not only became a widow, but our twin 1-year-old boys lost their father. There's a lot of uncertainty surrounding that day and what happened and what went on. But there's one thing I am 100% certain about, and that's that my husband didn't have PTSD and wasn't in a mental health crisis from spending time with his family. He had PTSD and was in crisis because of the stressors of this job. There's no question that first responders are exposed to more traumatic events in their career than the average human is in their lifetime. In fact, they're 500 times more likely. And a study done by First Health has showed that first responders witness anywhere between 400 and 600 traumatic events in a 20-year career. 85% of those people report symptoms related to mental health conditions. 70% of that 85% will never use the mental health resources provided to them. 57% say they don't ask for help because they're scared of repercussions associated. 40% specify that the fear is being demoted or fired. How is this possible? How can the men and women that put their lives on the line for all of us, day-in and day-out, fear their own departments, scared of the benefits that are being provided to them and that they're working hard for? Meanwhile, police and firefighters are more likely to die by suicide than on the job. It just doesn't add up. In October 2020, my husband was on the front line of the Walter Wallace riots, where he was shot with bricks, glass and a multitude of weapons, eventually being injured in the line of duty. Days after the riots, he got in an email with information on how to contact EAP. That was it. We contacted EAP the week we got the email. It took four phone calls and countless attempts at getting an appointment with someone before we gave up. In October of 2022, days after Kevin's passing, I looked at my family and said, we need to do something, we can't just sit here and let this happen to other people. That day we came up with Kevin Regan Family Foundation. We are a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization committed to helping families of fallen first responders in the tri-state area, specifically those who have taken their own lives or who struggle with mental illness. We provide not only financial relief, but also the mental health resources needed to support struggling frontline fighters and their loved ones. We do the job that we realized was so lacking after Kevin's passing. We communicate with the families, send initial care packages, pay funeral costs, pay mortgages and do whatever we can to provide benefits for the family. Because in a time of great unexpected loss, money should never be your first thought or burden. We were born out of our very own experience. One, officers are scared to use their health insurance. They're scared of the big brother aspect that the department has on them. Astonished at the statistics of how many people want or need services, but won't use the ones provided, we created a program where first responders and their families can sign up for mental health services as well as regular health care anonymously, quickly and at zero cost to you or your family. Two, suicide in general, but suicide related to PTSD is somehow seen as lesser than death than those that die in the line of duty.

Suicide should be pursued as relentlessly as any other cop killer, together, publicly and without unabating courage. I won't stand here and diminish in any way those who make the ultimate sacrifice, those who get dressed for work and never come home. Those people are heroes. My question is, how is suicide different. Both are tragedies at the job. My husband put on that uniform more days than not, days, nights, weekends, holidays, anniversaries, birthdays, you name it. He left me and the kids at home and went to work. The only difference is his mental load became unbearable. And on that day, he didn't drive himself to work. He took his own life in our bedroom, what was supposed to be our safe space. We're all aware of what happens when an officer dies in the line of duty. There's an outpouring of resources. There's benefits for families. There's stains to lift the emotional and mental burden. When an officer dies of suicide, there is a quiet and uncomfortable, dishonorable, quiet. Three, money should never be your first worry when you lose your person. About a week after losing Kevin, I got a phone call to let me know that his last check was coming to me in the form of a paper check. However, it was only $900 because I had prorated and stopped his salary the day he died. I was also informed that I had only 18 days to find health insurance because it would be expiring on October 31st for myself and my kids. My son Declan has Long QT Syndrome, a syndrome that is genetically inherited. In this case, from his father. He sees a cardiologist four times per year. He takes medicine three times per day, every single day since he was 7 months old. With police health insurance that bottle is $10 a month. Out of pocket or with other insurance, that can range anywhere from $275 to $500 per month. Seven days after Kevin was gone, the panic set in: mortgage bills, no health insurance, twin toddlers, daycare, everything hit me like a ton of bricks. Three days after that panic, I returned to work, only 10 days after the most traumatic loss of my life. I sat back at the desk in Conshohocken, Pa, left my kids at home with their grandmother who was using PTO, and I went to work all because the burden of money and life had just been dropped on my shoulders. I know many families have had their health insurance in days after the loss of their loved one. There is no monetary benefit. It's just you and your surrounding family left to pick up the pieces of something you never wanted. You're submerged into a life you didn't choose. About two weeks after the loss of Kevin and only a week left of health insurance, I realized I needed to stand up and fight for something. There was no 17 way I was able to survive on my one salary, and now adding health insurance bills and copays. I went to the FOP and asked for health insurance for myself and the kids. If I couldn't have his salary, could I at least have health insurance. The President of the FOP granted me five years of health insurance, expiring on October 2027. He told me when he resigned as the President of the FOP, he would look into extending it before he left. He never did. I've called four to five times. I've spoken to the Police Commissioner twice, and still nothing has been done. After fighting for health insurance, I wondered if there was anything else. A woman from the FOP helped me get Kevin's 10-year pension. I was not expecting it, but it felt very lucky to get. After speaking with multiple other Philly police widows, it seems that my loud outspokenness is what grants me those two things I receive. These other women receive nothing, despite being in the same position, children, now the sole provider, etc. The federal government marks the suicide of a public safety officer as an on-duty death if PTSD is an underlying condition of that death certificate. So why do we as a state, city and department not recognize that. There is a one-time payout benefit for widows or next of kin.

The amount changes yearly, but for 2022 the payout was $422,000. It takes about three years to receive. In those three years, I was essentially forced to sell my home in Pennsylvania, move to Florida to be near family and have help with child care. I lost my job in March of 2023 due to not being in office enough because I needed to be at home with my kids for illness, doctor's appointments, whatever the case may be. I'm functioning as a single unit, something I never dreamed I'd be. I tell you all of this not so you'll take pity on me and my family. We are so lucky. My children are so loved. I was able to get a new job that is much better for myself and for my children. I bought a new home, much smaller than the last, but still filled with the love and safety my children need. I'm working as hard as I can to give my kids the life Kev and I had planned for them, all without the help of the city and the department. So in the case of having a death benefit, not only is it a need for these families, especially the ones that aren't as lucky as I, but it is a want for a chance to grieve and adjust to a new life we didn't sign up for. At Kevin's funeral, one of his fellow 9th District officers said to me, he signed the paperwork to put his life on the line, and somehow now at the expense of the job, you've given the city your everything and barely are surviving. I support Bill 260521 because it provides much needed compassion and stability for the families of the City of Philadelphia during the most excruciating point in their lives. By modifying the circumstances under which service- connected death benefits are granted, this legislation helps ensure that surviving spouses and families receive the support they deserve during one of the most difficult periods of their lives. When a husband or wife loses their partner, their focus should be on grieving, healing, and caring for their family, not navigating financial insurgency or bureaucratic obstacles. This bill recognizes the sacrifices made by public employees and offers their loved ones greater security and peace of mind. It is a fair and humane measure that honors those who serve the city while protecting the families that they leave behind. Thank you for the opportunity today to share my story and thank you for wanting to change for all of us. Being here is leaps further than I ever thought we'd get. So thank you. I'll leave you with one last question. My husband, like many others, sign up to protect you. Who is going to protect them? This concludes Regan Faulk's testimony.

Thank you, Brianna. Thank you for reading that testimony and for working with Regan Faulk for all of these months and just working on the legislation. We are going to get clarification on one question that we have and proceed from there. Are there any other witnesses here to testify on Bill 7 No. 260521? (No response.)

Is there anyone here whose name has not been called and anyone who'd like to give public comment? (No response.)

Okay. Are there any other witnesses here to testify or give public comment on any of the previous bills who were unable to do so? (No response.)

Okay. Seeing none, we thank you for being here. And given that there are no further witnesses, panels or comments, we will conclude our public hearing. We will now begin the public meeting on the previously- mentioned bills. Clerk, I ask that you please call the roll to take attendance. And members who are in attendance will please indicate that you are present when your name is called.

Councilmember Jones. (No response.)

Councilmember Thomas. (No response.)

Councilmember Ahmad.

Present.

Councilmember Driscoll.

Present.

Vice-Chair Bass.

Present.

Chair Gilmore Richardson.

Thank you. A quorum of the committee is present, and we thank you all again for being here. Prior to recognizing for the motions, we will be holding at this time for the vote, holding 260509 and 260527 and also 260521. We are only holding 521 to get an answer to a question. If we could get that answer now, we will be able to move on. So I'll pause for one moment. Okay. We will now resume with the public meeting and thank you all so much for your patience. At the onset of this public meeting, we are going to hold voting on 260509 and 260527 as well as 260521 until we receive clarification regarding one question from a member of the committee regarding who this will impact. And so, we will now recognize -- I'll recognize Councilmember Driscoll for a motion on Bill No. 260564.

Thank you, Chair. I move that Bill No. 15 260564 be reported from this committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended to permit first reading of this bill at the next session of Council. (Duly seconded.)

Chair notes for the record that Councilmember Bass seconds the motion. It has been moved and properly seconded that Bill No. 260564 be reported from this committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended as to permit first reading of this bill at the next session of Council. All those in favor of the motion will indicate by stating aye. (Aye.)

Any opposed? (No response.)

The ayes have it and the motion carries. Bill No. 260564 will be reported from this committee with a favorable recommendation and a request that the rules of Council be suspended as to permit first reading of this legislation at the next session of Council. The Chair recognizes Councilmember Driscoll for a motion on Bill No. 260510.

Thank you, Chair. I move that Bill No. 8 260510 be reported from this committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended to permit first reading of this bill at the next session of Council. (Duly seconded.)

I note for the record that Councilmember Bass seconds the motion. It has been moved and properly seconded that Bill No. 21 260510 be reported from this committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended as to permit first reading of this bill at the next session of Council. All those in favor will indicate by stating aye. (Aye.)

All those opposed? (No response.)

The ayes have it and the motion carries. And Bill No. 260510 will be reported from this committee with a favorable recommendation with a request that the rules of Council be suspended as to permit for its reading at the next session of Council. The Chair recognizes Councilmember Driscoll for a motion on the amendment to Bill No. 22 260508.

I offer an amendment to Bill No. 1 260508. A copy of the amendment has been circulated to all members of the committee and move that the amendment to Bill No. 260508 be approved. (Duly seconded.)

The Chair notes for 9 the record that Councilmember Bass 10 seconds the motion. It has been 11 moved and properly seconded that 12 the amendment to Bill No. 260508 be 13 approved. 14 All those in favor of 15 the motion will indicate by stating 16 aye. 17 (Aye.) 18

All those opposed? 20 (No response.) 21

The ayes have it, and 23 the amendment to Bill No. 260508 24 has been approved. The Chair now recognizes Councilmember Driscoll for a motion on Bill No. 260508 as amended.

Thank you, Chair. I move that Bill No. 7 260508 as amended be reported from this committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended to permit first reading of this bill at the next session of Council. (Duly seconded.)

It has been moved and properly seconded that Bill No. 18 260508 as amended be reported from this committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended as to permit first reading of this bill at the next session of Council. All those in favor of the motion will indicate by stating aye. (Aye.)

All those opposed? (No response.)

The ayes have it and the motion carries. Bill No. 11 260508 as amended will be reported from this committee with a favorable recommendation with a request that the rules of Council be suspended as to permit first reading at the next session of Council. The Chair recognizes Councilmember Driscoll for a motion on the amendment to Bill No. 21 260513.

I offer an amendment to Bill No. 24 260513. A copy of the amendment has been circulated to all members of this committee. I move that the amendment to Bill No. 260513 be approved. (Duly seconded.)

Thank you. The Chair notes for the record that Councilmember Bass seconds the motion. It has been moved and properly seconded that the amendment to Bill No. 260513 be approved. All those in favor of the motion will signify by stating aye. (Aye.)

All those opposed? (No response.)

The ayes have it and the motion carries. The Chair recognizes Councilmember Driscoll for a motion on Bill No. 260513 as amended.

Thank you, Chair. I move that Bill No. 6 260513 as amended be reported from this committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended to permit first reading of this bill at the next session of Council. (Duly seconded.)

Thank you. It has been moved and properly seconded that Bill No. 260513 as amended be reported from this committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended as to permit first reading of this bill at the next session of Council. All those in favor of the motion will indicate by stating aye. (Aye.)

All those opposed? (No response.)

The ayes have it and the motion carries. Bill No. 10 260513 as amended will be reported from this committee with a favorable recommendation with a request that the rules of Council be suspended as to permit first reading at our next session of Council. The Chair now recognizes Councilmember Driscoll for a motion on Bill No. 260507.

Thank you, Chair. I move that Bill No. 23 260507 be reported from this committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended to permit first reading of this bill at the next session of Council. (Duly seconded.)

Chair notes for the record that Councilmember Bass seconds the motion. It has been moved and properly seconded that Bill No. 13 260507 be reported from this committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended as to permit first reading of this bill at the next session of Council. All those in favor of the motion will indicate by stating aye. (Aye.)

All those opposed? (No response.)

The ayes have it and the motion carries. Bill No. 6 260507 will be reported from this committee with a favorable recommendation with a request that the rules of Council be suspended as to permit first reading at the next session of Council. The Chair now recognizes Councilmember Driscoll for a motion on Bill No. 260511.

Thank you, Chair. I move that Bill No. 18 260511 be reported from this committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended to permit first reading of this bill at the next session of Council. (Duly seconded.)

The Chair notes for the record that Councilmember Bass seconds the motion. It has been moved and properly seconded that Bill No. 260511 be reported from this committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended as to permit first reading of this bill at the next session of Council. All those in favor of the motion will indicate by stating aye. (Aye.)

All those opposed? (No response.)

The ayes have it and the motion carries and Bill No. 24 260511 will be reported from this committee with a favorable recommendation with a request that the rules of Council be suspended as to permit first reading of this bill at the next session of Council. The Chair now recognizes Councilmember Driscoll for a motion on the amendment to Bill No. 10 260512.

I offer an amendment to Bill No. 13 260512. A copy of the amendment has been circulated to all members of this committee. I move that the amendment to Bill No. 260512 be approved. (Duly seconded.)

The Chair notes for the record that Councilmember Bass seconds the motion. It has been moved and properly seconded that the amendment to Bill No. 260512 be approved. All those in favor of the motion will indicate by stating aye. (Aye.)

All those opposed? (No response.)

The ayes have it and the amendment to Bill No. 260512 has been approved. The Chair now recognizes Councilmember Driscoll for a motion on Bill No. 260512 as amended.

Thank you, Chair. I move that Bill No. 19 260512 as amended be reported from this committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended to permit first reading of this bill at the next session of Council. (Duly seconded.)

The Chair notes for the record that Councilmember Bass seconds the motion. It has been moved and properly seconded that Bill No. 260512 as amended be reported from this committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended as to permit first reading of this bill at the next session of Council. All those in favor of the motion will indicate by stating aye. (Aye.)

Those opposed? (No response.)

The ayes have it and the motion carries. Bill No. 1 260512 as amended will be reported from this committee with a favorable recommendation with a request that the rules of Council be suspended so as to permit first reading of this bill for the next session of Council. The Chair recognizes Councilmember Driscoll for a motion on Bill No. 260299.

12 Thank you, Chair. 13 I move that Bill No. 14 260299 be reported from this 15 committee with a favorable 16 recommendation and further move 17 that the rules of Council be 18 suspended to permit first reading 19 of this bill at the next session of 20 Council. 21 (Duly seconded.) 22

Chair notes for the 24 record that Councilmember Bass seconds the motion. It has been moved and properly seconded that Bill No. 260299 be reported from this committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended as to permit first reading of this bill at the next session of Council. All those in favor of the motion will indicate by stating aye. (Aye.)

Those opposed? (No response.)

The ayes have it and the motion carries. Bill No. 20 260299 will be reported from this committee with a favorable recommendation with a request that the rules of Council be suspended as to permit first reading at the next session of Council. I want to go back to Bill No. 260509. The Chair recognizes Councilmember Driscoll for a motion on Bill No. 260509.

Thank you, Chair. I move that Bill No. 9 260509 be reported from this committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended to permit first reading of this bill at the next session of Council. (Duly seconded.)

Chair notes for the record that Councilmember Bass seconds the motion. It has been moved and properly seconded that Bill No. 260509 be reported from this committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended as to permit first reading of this bill at the next session of Council. All those in favor of the motion will indicate by stating aye. (Aye.)

Those opposed? (No response.)

The ayes have it and the motion carries. Bill No. 15 260509 will be reported from this committee with a favorable recommendation with a request that the rules of Council be suspended as to permit first reading at the next session of Council. To clarify for the record, 260509 was regarding JJSC. And then we are holding and not voting on Bill No. 260527 or 260521 to receive further clarification regarding those two bills. The committee will now stand in recess. City Council's Committee on Finance will now stand in recess until 4:30 p.m. today, at which time we will go back into the public meeting to address Bill Nos. 260527 and also 260521. Thank you very much. (Recess.)

Good afternoon. Good afternoon. We will now reconvene City Council's Committee on Finance, recognizing the presence of Councilmember Cindy Bass, Councilmember Curtis Jones, Jr., and thank you to our Council President for appointing Councilmember Jay Young to the committee. The committee will now stand in recess until 5:30 p.m. today, Wednesday, June 3rd. Thank you. (Recess.)

Good afternoon. Good afternoon. Thank you all so much for being here for City Council's Committee on Finance. We will now move back into our public meeting. The Chair now recognizes Councilmember Bass for a motion on the amendment to Bill No. 260521.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I offer an amendment to Bill No. 260521. A copy of the amendment has been circulated to all members of the committee. I move that the amendment to Bill No. 20 260521 be approved. (Duly seconded.)

The Chair notes for the record that Councilmember Jones seconds the motion. It has been moved and properly seconded that the amendment to Bill No. 260521 be approved. All those in favor of the motion will signify by stating aye. (Aye.)

Those opposed? (No response.)

The ayes have it and the motion carries. The Chair recognizes the presence of Councilmember Dr. Nina Ahmad, Councilmember Mike Driscoll, Vice-Chair Bass and also Councilmember Curtis Jones, Jr. and in the gallery, Councilmember Jeffrey Jay Young. The Chair now recognizes Councilmember Bass for a motion on Bill No. 260521 as amended. COUNCILWOMAN BASS:Thank you, Madam Chair. I move that Bill No. 4 260521 as amended be reported from this committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended to permit first reading of this bill at the next session of Council. (Duly seconded.)

The Chair notes for the record that Councilmember Jones seconds the motion. It has been moved and properly seconded that Bill No. 260521 as amended be reported from this committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended as to permit first reading of this bill at the next session of Council. All those in favor of the motion will signify by stating aye. (Aye.)

Those opposed? (No response.)

The ayes have it and the motion carries. For the record, we will hold Bill No. 260527 until the call of the Chair tomorrow morning, Thursday, June 4th at 9:30 a.m. Thank you very much. And the committee will stand in recess until Thursday, June 4th at 9:30 a.m. Thank you. - - - (Committee on Finance concluded at 5:50 p.m.) - - - C E R T I F I C A T I O N I, hereby certify that the proceedings and evidence noted are contained fully and accurately in the stenographic notes taken by me in the foregoing matter, and that this is a correct transcript of the same. _______________________________ TANEHA CARROLL