My name is Ken Knight and I'm representing the Mantua Trade Center. And I just want to say good afternoon to the Council Chairperson and to the Council President and other Honorable Councilmembers. I just want to pick up on a few points that Mr. Washington has made for the Mantua community. Now, just to keep the process orderly, we could have had all of Mantua here today. But we, as leaders that we are, we decided to come and to represent the community in a very orderly way and at the same time to appeal to this body. As Gerald Washington has said -- now, I don't know all the reasons, I don't have all the answers, but one thing we do know is that if terms 146 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020673 of the ordinance that is now being introduced and proposed, it's just wrong, simply because there has no communication in terms of the rooted people in the Mantua community. I mean, there's been some for the special interests and I heard the names Neighborhood Restorations and everybody know that's Scott Mazo. But at the same time, let me just say again, there has been no real communication with the groups, the embedded groups, the groups that are very strongly rooted in the Mantua community. And in some cases, we feel that we've been sold out. And I'm saying that in terms of this information or what we call openness and just overall thing of disclosure, there hasn't been that. I found out about this meeting, this hearing -- and there again, I see Pat Smith over there. We were up in Harrisburg together last week, and that's how I found out about this hearing. And just like we talked about earlier about people's houses being torn down and them not getting even a post card or a letter, it's the same thing. I mean, NTI came to the neighborhood a few weeks ago. They were on Haverford Avenue. I'm in touch with everybody, every group, every organization in Mantua because, 147 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020673 there again, we've been coordinating these groups and having meetings for sometime now. And I'm telling you, we didn't even know that there was going to be a press conference. But we came. We have a way, just as you heard here earlier, even though we don't get the proper notification from RDA, one thing this community -- and I got to say to our credit. We can get the word out, whether you call it the grapevine, whether you call it a drum or whatever you want to call it, but we tend to find out about things that are pertinent to what's going on in our community. And several people were there that day. " And let me just tell you, I go back early on supporting the Mayor's program for Neighborhood Transformation Initiative. But at the same time, Mantua itself had its own transformation initiative program and it was called just simply that, the Mantua Transformation Initiative Program. And there again, because we saw early on the way things were going in the City and we wanted to be a part. We wanted to be inclusive. But then we find 148 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020673 out that we're not getting any information. And one thing the Chairperson said earlier, Councilman Kenney, as he was asking RDA, what are the particulars in terms of the land banking, what are the numbers? How much money are we spending into the preservation, housing preservation, the relocation? What are the numbers? I mean, we're not rocket scientists, but we can process some information. And there again, we want to know those hard numbers. How many houses are you tearing down? Because we already found out several people have contacted me and said, "Well, Ken, my house is on the hit list. " And I'm saying that we had on the part of L & I -- and there again, this whole thing is being driven and we understand that with NTI in terms of the whole effort of renewal and all of that. But at the same time, it has to be a thorough process. When you go and you knock down somebody's house, you can't build it back up. And we had situations and instances in Mantua what that has happened in the past.
It has happened all over 149 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020673 this City. So that's why I'm saying, as I said earlier, there needs to be an ordinance coming from this body to protecting those, as Councilman Cohen said, those due process rights on the behalf of those homeowners, those poor people. We have the lowest census tract data in the City. We're in a Catch situation in Mantua 9 and in the Belmont community. A lot of those people 10 moved in in the '20s and '30s, they're on a fixed 11 income. They don't have any money. They can't go 12 anywhere. But at the same time, they're not getting 13 no notice and then you take and you put that person 14 out of their house or you take that house. You 15 can't bring back the dead. Once that person has a 16 heart attack because they found out, they came back 17 from somewhere and then their house is no longer 18 there. You cannot bring back the dead. And I'm 19 saying the damage is already done. That person's 20 had a heart attack and they're dead because we as 21 leaders and as elected officials, we didn't care 22 nothing about them. And there again, going back to this whole idea of disclosure and openness, no, we don't know how many houses are coming down. Some of the 150 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020673 houses don't have come down because in terms of the Mantua Transformation Initiative, we have already identified blocks where we may have one or two lots. It makes no sense to go on that same block and now you're going to tear down six more houses. To land bank it for when? We don't know when. And then we're saying at the same time, and this is for RDA, we want to land bank, too. We want to land bank. The CDC that we have in Mantua, that we're formulating in Mantua, we want to be in the land bank business, too. Because that way we can ensure our people that they're not going to be displaced. And when those property values go up, then we're invested in that land. Because let's make no mistake about it, we know -- there again, we all don't have college degrees, but we know it's about the land. And like I said before, it's not 40 acres, but it's all we got, and we're going to fight to keep it. And that's why we're here today. We could have pack this room. We're going to go all around, not only in Mantua, we're going to go out to the City because we're saying that if it happens in Mantua, it's happening somewhere else. And if it happens in Mantua, that's 151 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020673 already too much. And I'm saying that we have to stop this. But at the same time, we need to get with the NTI officials. " That's the book, the big thick book that has the color pictures in it that tells you what's going on with respect to your community. There ain't no more. And that's a problem. We need to have that information. We don't have none of the numbers. We don't know what's happening. But one thing we can tell you, we are not going to give up our community without a fight. And I'm talking about a very, very serious fight. If you know the history of Mantua -- let me just tell you, it is the birth place of a lot of movements. And one in particular that I had a lot to do with and that's the anti-drug movement. Herman Rice, Dr. Rice, and there again, may the best wishes and salutations to him. There again, I walked side by side with him in Mantua when it wasn't slated for renewal. And I'm telling you, that movement went all the around this country. And 152 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020673 we plan to do the same thing with this fight. Because we're saying is that that is our 40 acres and that is our reparations. But if we give all the land back to the City, then we have nothing. And I'm saying that as a CDC, we want to land bank. We don't have no problem with giving you some of the land, but we want some, too. We want some of that land to develop for our people. When you talk about neighborhood restorations, I know neighborhood restorations.
They started out over there in the southwest part of Market Street with Vera -- and there again, may peace and blessings be upon her. And then died and they got a little inroads into West Philadelphia, but that is not our contractor of choice. We have several qualified people in Mantua that are ready to do projects. We as a CDC, we're ready to do projects. But we want to be vested. We want to be told what is going on. We want to be a part of the process, not after everybody done met. That's before they done met. And that's the problem now. We are not getting no communication. And we feel that Mantua is being sold out from under us, and that has to stop. And like I said, we're not giving up without a fight. And thank you for your 153 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020673 time.
I would like to speak after anyone else from Mantua speaks, if that is acceptable.
Absolutely. Is there anyone else here to speak on this particular bill? (No response.)
Mr. Wetzel, just one question before Councilmember Blackwell. Did you give me the location numbers on this bill in your testimony?
Thank you. I'll take the witness chair. I'm Jannie Blackwell, Councilperson for the area. Madam President, Chair of the Committee, and certainly to all Members of the Committee, as all of you know, development, we've been working in Mantua and throughout my district for many years. 154 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020673 In 1999, we announced West Philadelphia on the Move, a non-profit organization that we formed to deal with this development and other projects that we do throughout the year. Let me say that I've met with Mr. Knight and others several times, several times. So the allegation certainly that there is no information available is not true. In fact, I'm surprised and disappointed that he would come to this public meeting and say thusly. In fact, Mr. Knight, the Mantua Professional Development and Training Center has been in question. I am certainly happy to submit to this Committee a copy of a letter that we wrote to various members throughout the City, RDA and various elected officials in my district. I will read it. "Dear -- "We received endorsed proposal from Ken Knight, a self proclaimed community organizer in the Belmont/Mantua community entitled the Mantua Professional Development and Training Center. While I am listed as a supporter of the proposal, I would like to clarify that I nor my office were involved in creating, and neither do we endorse it. 155 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020673 "As Councilwoman of the 3rd District for the past years, I am quite aware of the need for 4 more employment opportunities on capital works 5 projects such as the Mayor's Neighborhood 6 Transformation Initiative for neighborhood 7 residents. To this end, my office is working 8 closely with the Mayor's Office and Capital Program 9 Office to ensure this concern is addressed and that 10 bona fide employment is created for district residents. "In regards to the proposal, though, we have several reservations. The author, Mr. Ronald Daniels, a legitimate business owner, was told that Mr. Knight was working in partnership with my office on this project. This is not the case. Furthermore, the training center prototype, is Mr. Daniels own proposal, the Daniels Center. He has no 19 knowledge that it would be used by Mr. Knight to market a concept for Mantua. We are in support of Mr. Daniels' center which would be an incredible asset to the Mill Creek community. We do not support the intentional manipulation of facts or the misguidance of honest people for the gain of others. If you or any of your staff would like 156 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020673 to see this proposal -- if you see it, we request that you disregard it. We are also available for any further discussion that you deem appropriate. " And I read that. There is a picture, which I will show you, marked Mantua Professional Development Center. I show this to the committee and certain to all those who are in attendance. There is also another proposal that we received some time ago for another area that we work with, 4706 West Minister Avenue. This is a proposal. Inside, you will see the same exact photo that was enlarged and renamed something else that Mr. Daniels did for another location. And that is why we said we could not associate ourselves with this. I will also pass this up for Members of the Committee. This also came, a before and after for future needs. These are not as appropriate as those. So we say that, you know, we work very, very long and hard on this Mantua plan, as we have for plans throughout the district. All of those in question are abandoned properties. They're a few lots included. When we are ready to bring a 157 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020673 development project to the community where we have everything ready, it is our goal to do that. We've talked to the leaders in Mantua. Everybody knows these are down and out, abandoned, deteriorated, dilapidated ID properties that are in this first package. There is no one who is displaced. Again, there are a few lots.
The whole development plan about who does what in the area we will bring to the community. And the whole issue of trying to criticize another developer who has invested 50 million private dollars into my district is absolutely unfair. If you have $50 million that you want to bring to do development, we're glad to receive it. But Neighborhood Restorations has invested 50 million private dollars into my area. And he's one of the private developers I boast of who is certainly a great part of our development team one whose money and investment and commitment to the area we're very, very proud to receive. I'm happy to answer any questions that the committee has and certainly hope that who hear wil realize that we always work in the best interest of the community. We always work in concert with them. And certainly, when we have a full proposal 158 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020673 together about the development plans, we will take that. But to talk about taking properties that are already stickered, that are ID'd as dangerous that falling down that are deteriorated, that have been vacant forever and some few vacant lots is certainly in no way hiding from the community about some great plan.
Anyone else to testify on this bill? If you could possibly make it brief. I understand the opportunity your desire to respond, but I'd rather not make this a debate. If you want to leave some parting comments, we appreciate it because we have a few more bills to deal with. 159 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020667
There again, in respecting the Chairman's wishes, I just want to state that, there again, anything that we had proposed or we have developed, that has come out of lengthy meetings with not only the community but all the stakeholders. And there again, we have several meetings with Mr. Daniels and I just don't want it said here that we were doing something that wasn't in partnership with Mr. Daniels. We were then and we still are. Thank you very much.
Thank you for your testimony. Anyone else to testify on this bill? (No response.)
The next bill on the list is Bill No. 020667, which is an Ordinance 18 approving the redevelopment proposal of the Redevelopment Authority of the City of Philadelphia for the redevelopment of the Greenway Urban Renewal Area being the area generally bounded by Chester Avenue on the north, South 49th Street on the east, Woodland Avenue on the south and South 52nd Street on the west; approving the urban renewal plan and determining that such plan and redevelopment 160 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020667 proposal conform to the general locality plan and make adequate provisions for individuals, business concerns and families who are displaced. Please identify yourself for the record.
Mr. Chairperson and Members of the Committee, my name is Herbert Wetzel, Executive Director of the Redevelopment Authority of the City of Philadelphia. I'm here to speak in support of Bill No. 020667, which would approve the Redevelopment Proposal for the Greenway Urban Renewal Area. This bill would authorize the Redevelopment Authority to acquire properties 42 properties, 35 vacant structures and 7 vacant lots, for the purpose of residential development. Neighborhood Restorations Limited Partnership, a developer of affordable housing, has expressed an interest in acquiring these properties for a tax credit rental project to serve low to moderate-income families. The acquisition will promote the elimination of blight and result in expanding housing opportunities for lo and moderate-income individuals and families while restoring abandoned 161 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020667 properties to the tax rolls. This amendment was approved by the City Planning Commission at its meeting on October 15, 2002. Mr. Chairperson and Members of the Committee, I respectfully request favorable consideration of Bill No. 020667 and would also ask the suspension of Council Rules to allow first reading December 12, 2002. Thank you.
Thank you very much. Please identify yourself for the record.
My name is David Napton, I'm representing the Philadelphia City Planning Commission. Madam President, Mr. Chairman, and Members of the Committee, I'm here to speak in favor of Bill No. 020667. As Mr. Wetzel just explained, this establishes the Greenway Urban Renewal Area. It's a new Urban Renewal Area within the context of a larger area called the Southwest Schuylkill Redevelopment Area. Also, as Mr. Wetzel mentioned, the purpose here is to improve housing conditions in the area between 49th and 52nd Streets. The Planning Commission approved this redevelopment proposal and urban renewal plan on 162 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020679 October 15, 2002. I'll be happy to answer any questions of the Committee.
Thank you very much for your testimony. Any questions for these witnesses? (No response.)
Seeing none, anyone else to testify on this bill? (No response.)
Seeing none, we will now move to Bill No. 020679, an ordinance approving the 1st Amendment of the Redevelopment Proposal for the American Street Industrial Corridor Urban Renewal Area, being the area generally bounded by Lehigh Avenue, Berks Street and Montgomery Avenue on the north by Second Street and Philip Street on the east by Girard Avenue, Oxford Street and Jefferson Street on the south and by Germantown Avenue, Sixth Street and third Street on the west, including the 1st Amendment to the Urban Renewal Plan and the 1st Amendment to the Relocation Plan, which provides inter alia, for the additional land acquisition of approximately 54 properties. 163 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020679 Please identify yourself for the record.
Mr. Chairperson and Members of the Committee, my name is Herbert Wetzel, Executive Director of the Redevelopment Authority of the City of Philadelphia. I'm here to speak in support in Bill No. 020679 which would approve the 1st Amendment of the Redevelopment Proposal for the American Street Industrial Corridor Urban Renewal Area. This bill would authorize the Redevelopment Authority to acquire 54 properties. A total properties, 18 vacant lots 14 and 3 occupied houses, would be acquired for 15 industrial development in the 2500 block of North 16 American Street. A Lancaster County ice 17 manufacturer has expressed interest in acquiring 18 this assemblage from the Redevelopment Authority. 19 A total of 27 properties, 21 vacant lots 20 and 6 occupied structures, would be acquired on the 21 west side of 1700 block of North American Street. The proposed reuse is industrial development. A total of three parcels will be acquired on behalf of the Pennsylvania Horticultural Society's Vacant Land Stabilization Program. 164 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020679 A total of three properties, vacant lots, would be acquired; one on the 1700 block of North Randolph Street and two on the 1400 block of North American Street. PIDC has requested these properties for business expansion and the creation of a parking lot. This amendment was approved by the City Planning Commission at their meeting of October 15, 2002. Mr. Chairperson and Members of the Committee, I respectfully request favorable consideration of Bill NO. 020679 and would also ask the suspension of Council Rules to allow for first reading on December 12, 2002.
Thank you. Just let me take this gentleman's testimony and then Councilman Nutter has questions. Please identify yourself.
My name is David Napton. Mr. Chairman, Madam President, Members of the Committee, I'm here representing the Philadelphia City Planning Commission here to speak on Bill No. 24 020679 for the American Street Industrial Corridor Urban Renewal Area. 165 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020679 This bill which would provide acquisition of 54 properties for general industrial, residential and related uses was passed by the Planning Commission at its meeting on October 15, 2000. I'll be happy to answer any questions of the committee.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to ask these questions more in a general context because of the relocation issues and I may find myself shortly in a somewhat similar situation. So I want to, to be honest with you, take a little advantage of the fact that you're here, better understand the issue of relocation at the moment so that I can better represent my constituents at a future point in time when this becomes an issue in at least one part my district. So let's talk a little bit about relocation in general. I thought I heard somewhere in the testimony -- but now I can't find it, although I see down on the bottom of the second page testimony you 166 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020679 made reference to six families, but I thought I heard in the course of the testimony more. What's the total number of people possibly being relocated here?
I'm sorry, there's a correction here. There are two on the 2500 block and four on the 1700 block, for a total of six.
It's mentioned down on the bottom of the second page. I was trying to keep track and then I lost it.
When you talk about "we're very mindful of the hardships," is that the section of the testimony you're talking about or somewhere else?
On the second page Roman numeral III, relocation information.
Was that attached to 167 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020679 the testimony .
Yeah, I've seen these fact sheets. They usually come right after the testimony. I didn't see that in this one. All right. Why don't we just agree that it's six. But again, my questions are more general in nature. Your testimony, I think, was that you regret bringing projects that require relocation but in this case, you say, "however, we are not able to do so." Is that because these properties are in the way of a proposed development?
You're right. I'm reading from Eva Gladstein's testimony who's right next to you. There's no confusion about who the two of you are. I am generally able to identify and distinguish between the two of you, although both of you I desperately attempt to represent here in City Council. You probably won't forgive me after this, though. So we've got six families, right, 168 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020679 regardless of whose testimony it is?
How do we deal with the issue of relocation? Let's talk about the notice. We had some notice discussion earlier with regard to properties that are probably vacant. What do we do in relocation situations? And do those people get notice?
Let me first state that what we do is operate under the Federal Uniform Relocation Act.
And all of our procedures and operations are guided by and we adhere to -- the acronym is the URA, but it's the Uniform Relocation Act. And with so many federal kinds of programs, there are real interesting sort of dichotomies in them; and one of those is when can we officially talk to someone. And technically we can't really officially talk to someone until we send them an offer letter. And we can't send out an offer letter until our board has filed a Declaration 169 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020679 of Taking.
I see where this discussion is going. And you can't file a Declaration of Taking until you have an ordinance 6 passed.
You got it. Now, the one cure is the very issue you raised earlier, and that is if it's possible to give notice at this stage. So then there wouldn't be any surprises if the notice is given at the stage we talked about earlier. And that's when, let's assume the public ad goes in and a written notice goes to the individual, if that's 's possible to do.
You do understand -- I mean, this is increasingly becoming clear, although it was pretty earlier that some additional requirement with specificity, I think, needs to be put in place to deal with whether it's the vacant house, the vacant lot, or now the occupied property. I mean, we could, if not in fact are presently having a discussion about the possible relocation of individuals, talking about them -- and I say this with every respect to you and everyone's been respectful here. But talking about them in almost a 170 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020679 third person kind of way at a hearing about possible relocation, we're address specific, we're urban renewal, we're talking about takings and the like, and in the big public forum for everyone to hear, but I think what I'm hearing from you is we have not had a discussion because of statute with the individuals involved directly; is that what you're telling me?
No, no, we've had discussion. What we can't do is sit down with an individual and discuss what their relocation benefits would be because we have not even proceeded to the point of condemning their properties.
Well, I understand that, but we have advertised in the newspaper and we're presently engaged in a public hearing at 1:35 in the afternoon about the possible relocation of the individuals, and you're telling me that we haven't had a discussion with them --
I'm saying we haven't given each individual a written notice from the 171 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020679 Redevelopment Authority, but we have been at community meetings. And Eva can add to this. Including Redevelopment Authority relocation staff. We can talk about the relocation process, the relocation benefits, the relocation entitlements, but you can't -- you can talk to the relocatees but not one-on-one and lay out a relocation plan and benefits because we're prohibited from doing that under the URA. But we can talk about the process, the entitlements, all the aspects of it and provide them literature on it as well.
-- specific relocation, "This is what may or may not happen to you; this is what we may or may not do for you, Ms. Jones, Mr. Smith," specific to that person.
Right. But we can talk about "You're entitled to a replacement housing payment; you're entitled to just compensation for your property." We can talk about if you're not satisfied.
And when the person 172 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020679 says to you, "Well, okay, this may happen to me. I'd like to be able to sit down with my family and have a fuller discussion about it," I mean, at some point, I assume, you have to say, "Well, we can't get into those details yet"?
Yes. And I think we did a simpler situation -- I hate to keep bringing up the Martin Luther King one, though, but --
We went down to the church more than one time and had very open dialogs and discussions about relocation, the benefits, the entitlements, you know, what happens, and provided information that I think actually facilitated in the overall scope of things. It was far better having those discussions up front than coming in cold afterwards. Even though you can't sit down -- because people are anxious, like, "Well, what do I get?" And I understand that.
Right. "What is my particular situation?" And I understand that, but I 173 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020679 think having had that kind of experience, we have stood ready to go out to any community meeting where this arises and explain the overall process itself and provide the brochures that HUD has produced on relocation, for example.
No. If you can't answer the questions, then I have no interest -- of course she can.
Good afternoon. My name is Eva Gladstein. I'm Executive Director of the Philadelphia Empowerment Zone. In this particular case, I'll just briefly state what we have done. Back last April, we held a community meeting sponsored by the community based organizations in the Empowerment Zone as well as by the Empowerment Zone, and that was the point where there was this urban renewal area was actually being created. It was prior to 174 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020679 its introduction to City Council to begin with. That community meeting was attended by over a hundred residents, and there was staff of the appropriate City agencies at that meeting. We had a meeting in October with over 200 residents. After the Redevelopment Authority and the City Planning Commission had approved at their boards these projects that would require relocation, our staff went out individually to the residents who would be directly affected, those six households, and offered to meet and answer any questions.
Our staff went and knocked on the doors of the six families who would be directly affected by these two projects, offered to meet, offered to share information to those families. And we brought Redevelopment Authority staff with us to provide technical information. And again, as Herb Wetzel had said, not being able to individually negotiate an arrangement, but speaking to people about what their rights are and what they're entitled to. 175 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020679 We also sponsored another community meeting on October 24th with also over 200 residents at that meeting. We sent a mailing to over 330 people who were the combined attendance of those two meetings. In that mailing, we again stated what the individual's rights are and we sent the information that's available through the Redevelopment Authority. We've also published articles in the two neighborhood newspapers that are read most frequently to try to share information, and been in as constant communication as we can with the residents according to their own interest. We spent about a half day with Councilman Mariano visiting the homes of many of the affected residents about a month or so ago.
I would also like to point out that, in large part, because of this intensive interaction, three of the six residents are here today and do plan to testify. We do have also a statement signed by three of the six residents as well based upon the work that we've 176 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020679 done.
A couple last questions. When I look at the boundaries of this particular bill, I'm going to make the leap that there might potentially be a couple different languages spoken in the area. Are the notices and other communications, whether from the City or HUD or anyone else, do they have dual language?
Actually, what we're doing now is several things. And you're right on target there. The last spanish translation of the HUD document that's essentially what happens when the government acquires your property, was done in 1992. And they've since revised the english language version of it but never bothered to update the spanish language version of it. We're actually just taking all the HUD notice brochures, having them translated into Spanish, having all our offer letters and other related documents that would be communicated translated into Spanish so that, you know, if it's a one-page letter, it will be English on one side and Spanish on the other side. And in addition to that, we've been authorized to hire a spanish-speaking individual to 177 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020679 work in our relocation department instead of pulling people from other parts of the Redevelopment Authority who speak Spanish to go out. So I think, you know, there were some valuable lessons there and clearly we're just going to have to spend the money. The feds aren't up to date in terms of their translations, and we can't wait for them.
One last question in this area. Of the six families potentially affected by this, what would you estimate to be their level of satisfaction with the process and where things are at the moment?
I would let Eva answer that simply because we have not been in that one-on-one contact with them.
I would say, of the six families, there's one family who actively was seeking the relocation benefits and was very excited 178 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020679 about the opportunity. The over five families, three are here today. I don't think it's anybody's first choice to move and I think they'll speak for themselves today, and hat's the statement that they said. But what they've said very consistently throughout all of our conversations is that they want to be treated justly, they want to be compensated fairly for their homes, they want to be able to obtain comparable housing. And we've been trying to work very closely with them to help them achieve those goals.
Mr. Wetzel, again, based on the requests from earlier in this hearing regarding notice, in this particular type of situation, it sounds like there has been a significant amount of notice. So again, I'd ask you in doing the research on the other notice discussion that we had with the broadest possible provisions, if you can look at how we provide notice in the relocation situation. And if that is somehow distinguished either by practice or by statute from the non-relocation notification process, certainly it sounds like you have broader leeway with the relocation direct notification than has been 179 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020679 exercised so far with the non-relocation notification.
I'm going to look into all of that. And I think one of the points is, though, is if you do that early on notice, whether it's a vacant lot, vacant structure, or an occupied structure, everyone has been noticed, and at the very outside if that's a possibility. And the implication is if you're living in an occupied one and you were to get this notice is that you would be subject to possible relocation.
I understand. You'll work with your legal team to decide what the notice says. I think, again, what's most important here is occupied, non-occupied, a person's property is a person's property. I think for our own protection, we just want to make sure that we've gone through the steps to say, "We sent you something," whether it's registered mail or hand delivery or whatever the case may be. Whether you show up or not, literally almost kind of becomes your problem. Our requirement, I think, though, should be broad as possible notification. We gave it to you. Whether you responded on not, as long as 180 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020679 it's written in a language that most people understand, they do have some responsibility to respond. In most instances, the reason they're noticed is the fact that their property is either in disrepair or some other kind of state, that they haven't responded probably to L & I notices. 8 This is kind of your last opportunity here. 9 Thank you. 10
Mr. Wetzel, where is 12 the authority that leads you to conclude that you're 13 not permitted to have a one-on-one discussion? 14
I'll be glad to provide for 15 you. But it's in the Federal Uniform Relocation Act 16 and in other statutes. In other words, unless we 17 have proceeded with a Declaration of Taking, there 18 is nothing to discuss because there is no 19 condemnation on a one-on-one basis. I mean, if 20 somebody says to me, "What are my specific 21 benefits," that's subject to the value of their 22 property, to how far away or how close they're going 23 to move. They're entitled to like moving payments. 24 They're entitled to either a fixed moving payment or 25 an actual moving payment. There's a lot of 181 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020679 variables that come into play, and it all depends on what the replacement house is going to be. For example, an owner can decide to be a tenant and take their replacement housing payment to become a tenant. Or a tenant can take their replacement housing payment and put it as a down payment and become a homeowner. It is a very -- I'd be glad to share it with you. It is a very complicated system, the Uniform Relocation Act that has a high level of protection in it.
I must have in my career missed the occasion when there had to be a discussion as to government's right to limit discussion with its citizens, because I can't imagine the language that would be used in the Government publication saying that you must not discuss any specifics with an owner or with anybody until you've decided to take it.
I kind of have a feeling that it must have been language built by bureaucrats who were aware of the fact that they might give misleading information, and that could 182 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020679 create problems who then adopted a result that it's better to muzzled and say nothing to avoid being charged later with having given false information. And that's a genuine consideration. But I really can't believe that there is any law which bars Redevelopment Authority from talking to people ans saying, as Councilman Nutter suggested, "Well, we can't tell you your specifics until we work out other plans." That is understandable. But it would seem to that there could be absolutely nothing that exists that bars the Redevelopment Authority except is own decision from discussing as much as you possibly can with individuals. You know, you're not -- if somebody goes to buy a TV and they're wondering whether they should rent it instead of buying it, nobody can give them an answer until they know is it a rental or a purchase deal. In the same way, you can't give people the final answer until a lot of things are worked out, but I know of nothing that would bar you from you explaining every detail.
Point of order, Mr. 183 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020679 Chair. Excuse me, Councilman. Councilman, I'm only bringing this because there's several people that have been here since o'clock, 9:30 actually, 6 from the community to testify. And this discussion 7 that we're currently having is extremely important, 8 but it kind of centers more about policy and not 9 directly related to the bill. Is there any 10 possibility, Mr. Chairman, that we can have those individuals testify and go back to this policy discussion about the broader implications of relocation?
Actually, we had a pretty long hearing today with a lot of people in it, and it's going quite smoothly, and I guess that really speaks to when people come in and want to cooperate within the hearing process that things do go smoothly in here. I thank you all for your 184 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020679 patience and for your attendance and your involvement. Any other questions or anything else to say?
I have testimony that I understand you now have in writing which I haven't presented verbally. I'd like the opportunity to do that, but there are a number of -- as I said, three residents who are here and a number of community and business groups who are here, so I'd be happy to let them go and then I'll testify after.
That's fine. Thank you. Who on 020679 is here to testify? Please identify yourself for the record.
My name Daralia Rodriguez (ph), and I represent Dalia Rodriguez, my mother, 233 Cecil B. Moore. I would like to read the testimony first. We, the undersigned families are homeowners affected by Bill 020679. We submit this statement to ensure the City of Philadelphia records our position. We understand the reason the City is seeking to acquire the parcels. Unfortunately, to 185 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020679 achieve its goals, we will be impacted. As a city, we also have a vested interest in the outcome of today's hearing. The 1700 block of American Street includes our homes as well as vacant land. We have lived in these properties raising our families and working hard to make numerous improvements for many years. It is not our preference to sell or move. We recently made significant improvements to modernize our homes. We like where we live. We also understand that it is in the neighborhood's and City's best interest to acquire land for new industry and job creation. We are not against progress of our community. On the contrary. But at the same time, we don't want to sacrifice our current quality of life or financial investments. It is our expectation that the City and our Councilperson respect our rights and make sure that we are treated with fairness and provided with just compensation if this bill is approved by City Council. Thank you. Now, in addition to this, I just wanted to make a personal note. We've been living in 233 Cecil B. Moore for 46-some years. That number 233 186 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020679 is very important because my father 46 years he played that number in New York. He hit, and that's what he used to put a down payment on the house. 53 for years. But I might add, some 8 months were harder than others. But he did it. And 9 he's passed on, but my mother, myself, my sisters, 10 we've continued to make memories in this big old 11 house. It's old, but it's ours. It's our house. 12 We've adjusted our lives and our work 13 schedule as well in order take care of our mom, take 14 her to the doctors, since she can't travel alone. 15 My mom and I heard about this revitalization of American Street years ago, and we thought, wow, finally we can live in a nice place and a neighborhood that we can proud of. So we've made improvements, significant improvements in our house. Councilman Mariano you've been there. We've fixed the outside, the inside, and we're proud of it. A few months ago, only a few months ago, we found out this program had a lot to do with us. It wasn't in April, it was in September we found out 187 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020679 about it through some of the community residents. Not that we were going to be part of it as far as living within the community, but to be the part that means being taken out. Out of our home for 46-plus years. This was not what we dreamed of. No need to say how devastated we were and we still are of the possibility of not living in the community. We do understand, though, and are not against the progress of the community, but at the same time it's a shame we will not be a part of it. We have been approached by many people, many agencies and community leaders and have been told that if or when the bill is passed we would be placed in something comparable, but at the same time telling us that if we stay in the community we will definitely not find a house as big as ours. Our house is huge. We've worked hard to have what we have. We do not want to sacrifice our current quality of life. We have had sleepless nights over this and it has started taking a toll on my mom's health who is now 82 years old. And not to mention the way it has affected my production level at my place of employment. I've loss work today. If bill is 188 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020679 passed, we are willing to cooperate with the City, but as long as our rights are respected and we're treated fairly and with just compensation. And I speak for myself and my sister and my mother.
Thank you very much for your patience and for your testimony. I appreciate it. Thank you. Is there anyone else to testify?
Hi. My name is Malgras Velas (ph), and I'm going to speak on behalf of my father, Manuel Velas. He lives on the 1700 block of American Street. And previous to that we lived on Bodine Street which is the six houses that are going to be torn down. So we've been living in the neighborhood for a long time. Now, my father, like, we didn't know anything that was going on with his house on American Street, that it was going to be torn down, until October. And we heard like another gentleman had said, like from the grapevine, you know from other neighbors. And the community, you know, they've been setting up meetings with us, ourselves together, and they've created a committee and they're the ones who have been making phone calls 189 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020679 and finding out information. Yeah, now the American Street Empowerment Zone are coming to the houses, but they didn't come to us in the first place. The committee, they've assigned people to find out information, call this person, that person. And through them, they're the ones that, I think, called the American Street Empowerment Zone and the other organizations to have a meeting with us. So we were surprised. We were not sent a letter or anything. A neighbor just said to you, "Oh, tell your father that probably in seven or eight months he might get a letter saying that he's going to have to move because the house is going to be torn doubt. Now, also, two days ago someone came from the American Empowerment Zone to my father's house and, you know, was trying to tell my dad, you know, convince him to move, whatever, that they're going to relocate him, this and that. So my dad, he kept insisting my dad does not want to move. And what he told my dad at the end was if my dad doesn't want to give in and move then his case would be sent to court and then in 72 days my dad will have to move. Now, I don't know how this works, you 190 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020679 know, the process. I don't anything. But if it all boils down to that my dad has to move, he does want -- I understand what the gentleman was saying with the other organization Redevelopment Authority, but that's not good enough. In order for residents to be willing to move, we do want to what we're going to get. I agree what the gentleman here at the end said completely. He took the words right out of my mouth. There's going to be problems. We're not going to want to move if they're not going to tell us what we're going to get. We want something in writing, somehow, if somebody can do something to help us, the community. Because that's creating a problem. The people from Bodine, they were all of a sudden like just sent a letter and said, "Oh, you got a couple of months to move and we're offering you $20,000." That was the first thing. I don't know what organization it came from. They were all alone in on this. They didn't this a lawyer. They didn't know who to go to. And we were surprised about what's going on in our community, and we want to be involved. We want someone, anybody, to set up meetings with us, 191 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020679 with the affected residents, and let us know what is going to happen in our community. Everything, what's going to happen with us. Somebody who knows something that can tell us something because we don't know anything and we're like lost out in space. That's all I want to say.
I hear you. Thank you for your testimony. Is there anyone else here to testify in this regard?
Rose Gray with Asocacion De Puertorrquenos En Marcha, APM. During the past two years we've worked in partnership with the American Street Empowerment Zone, the business association, other CDCs that are here today in developing a streetscape strategy. And the reason for this is because we believe that we need to revitalization of the American Street Corridor for the $54 million at least of investment that you have supported in the past for APM's initiatives. As part of this, unfortunately, there is a relocation component. And Ms. Rodriguez and her family have visited with me and my staff recently to talk about relocation. And I've sat through 192 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020679 listening to their trauma, their tragedy, and the sadness. And I think I can't express it any more than they've expressed it today. But what I can tell you is we're dedicated to assist them in the relocation activities. Fortunately, today, we are in the process of completing a 50-unit homeownership project in that neighborhood. One of the units is a five-bedroom unit newly instructed that I'm asking them to see if this bill is so passed. I don't know what compensation can really be made to take your home, but if we can assist them, we will. APM over the last years has relocated 40 families in situations like this. And out of the 40 families, we've had one negative event. So they can be assured that we'll do everything. And I'll make it short. That's it.
Thank you. Is there anyone else to testify on the relocation issue?
Mr. Chairperson, Members of the Committee, my name Jeramos Salas, Jr (ph). I'm the president of the Hispanic Association of Contractors and Enterprises, a non-profit 193 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020679 organization doing development in this area since about 1982. During this time, we've invested both private and public investment in affordable housing rent to own homeownership along with business services in the area of $60 million. The area in question is very close to my heart in that I've lived in this area since 1956. My family still lives in this area. And being around that long, you get to see the good and the bad that time brings on. In the last 40 years, this community has seen a lot of bad, not only in this community, but in the City in terms of blight and deterioration, loss of business, loss of jobs, loss of housing, lots and abandonment. The blight issue is a real serious issue in this community. And I think for the very first time in this many years we see a partnership between City government and the community in trying to bring about resources, programs, and initiatives to show progress. Unfortunately, there is displacement of these six families. And I think that while we talk about the Neighborhood Transformation Initiative City wide that the displacement and dislocation of families is part of progress, however, the manner in 194 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020679 which it is handled, as we've heard this morning by other people in terms of notices needs to be improved. In a process as complicated as development and in a process as complicated as community revitalization when y ou talk about businesses and jobs and housing and people, that is a very complicated process. And the manner that we should do it can be improved. And I think it will be improved. I think having the initiative to hire a person to speak Spanish goes a long way to be able to translate the proper information and the right information. HACE is currently doing a development in 1600 block of North American Street. It's a long-term vacant, City-owned property. It is a facility that will be done to prepare foods for elderly residents. It will create jobs. 19 I think the notion of having business 20 and community and people living next to each other is a good thing if we can just sit down and talk about it so that it is fair, it is equitable, not only to this community and the people, but to the City of Philadelphia. Thank you very much.
Thank you very much 195 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020679 for your testimony. As we go on, the only thing I would say is that we're dealing with in this bill apparently six families. From the testimony, we understand that one relatively happy, the other five realize that it's a fait accompli, they may go, but are very confused and concerned about the timing on how they were notified and what they were told. And that is a serious problem that, obviously, need to be rectified. The concern I have is that as we go forward, when you're dealing with hundreds of people potentially that have to go through this process, you need a much more refined and dependable process. I mean, if this is microcosm of what we're going to deal with down the road, I really think there's som serious things that need to be correct. Thank you.
Good afternoon, Committee Chair and Members of City Council. My name is Tom Forkin and I'm President of the American Street Erie Avenue Business Association, an association representing more than 150 business owners located within the American Street and Erie Avenue 196 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020679 Corridors. I'm also the Corporate Vice President of Uniguide Products, a small metal stamping firm located at 2403 North Second Street. Thank you for providing the opportunity for me to testify day. I would like to just start by saying, Jim, I agree with some of the comments you made. I'm not here to talk about the general macro issues about notice or fair just compensation. Basically, we're here to support the effort for economic development on a number of parcels located adjacent or contiguous to American Street. And we believe there's six major reasons for proposing and advancing this development. Number one, the proposed projects will create jobs for City and neighborhood residents. That's unquestionable. American Street firms employ several hundred neighborhood residents. When I say neighborhood residents, I mean residents of the Empowerment Zone Area itself. Our association's membership prefer to hire employees that live near by and can get to work without difficulty. And I can speak to that firsthand experience. In addition, ASEABA members have a long history of working with local job training providers, such as 197 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020679 Impact Services to identify new hires who live in the neighborhood. Number two, the vacant abandoned industrial land found at all these locations is a magnet for short dumping, abandoned autos, and illegal activity that are a source of constant problems for the existing businesses on American Street and for the residents themselves. Reuse of taxable vacant land will bring activity and investment to long abandoned parcels that have had a blighting effect around the surrounding neighborhood. Number three, American Street remains a highly attractive location for firms that distribute and manufacture goods due to its proximity to Center City and I-95, the width of the American Street itself, and the industrial character of that corridor. Businesses want to locate on American Street but are prevented from doing so because of a lack of parcels large enough for development. Number four, it is appropriate for the City to designate American Street as a location for future industrial development because of the problems that truck traffic create when trucks move 198 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020679 through residential areas. Because characteristics mentioned above, American Street suits these industrial firms very well and is now where many of them are already located. Number five, the designation of American Street as an industrial corridor and location for future industrial development has been affirm repeatedly over the past years in planning 10 processes involving the Business Association, 11 community-based organizations the City Planning 12 Commission. The industrial character of American 13 Street was affirm most recently with the creation of 14 American Street corridor industrial Urban Renewal 15 Area this past spring. 16 Finally, Number six, the proposed 17 projects will complement investments made over the 18 past 20 years, but not only the City of 19 Philadelphia, but the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania 20 to develop the American Street corridor as a location of businesses to manufacture and distribute goods. The ASEABA is committed to continuing to work as a partner with, not only government and community organizations, but with all the area 199 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020679 residents to better the neighborhoods that our member of companies are located in. This bill, done in an equitable manner, sends a strong message of support to local, small, family-owned businesses who have made a commitment to stay in the City.
As President of the American Street Erie Avenue Business Association, I look forward to continuing this work with Council. And I thank you for providing the opportunity to testify day.
Thank you for your testimony. Any questions? (No response.)
Good afternoon. You have to identify yourself for the record.
Thomas J. Carbine of the American Street Erie Avenue Business Association. We're talking in terms of several decades now in which we've been involved. One of the things that you are getting here now is just a microcosm of what it was here originally. And you can recall from looking at pictures that when we had it torn up unused railroad and it was on either side with 200 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020679 demolished buildings that had fallen into disrepair. However, in that area, there are people who I know today who were there when we decided that -- and I say the City and I'm saying Frank Rizzo decided to ask the federal government for $18 million to start this project. This project is not completed. From Day One we have had to think about census tracts. I think there were 15,000 census tracts involved and many, many families. It was hard for them to think of moving. But nevertheless, when they stepped back and thought of what we could accomplish, they then became very agreeable and we did the best we could. And to my knowledge today, they were very happy and satisfied. So Philadelphia has a reputation for treating the residents with respect and doing the best by them. Currently, we have had additional funds come down from Harrisburg. Governor Casey on the same day that he committed to the improvement of South Broad Street committed $20 million to the work that we were doing at that time which was remediation basically because the businesses that had been there had been using materials which had contaminated the ground, and it's taken quite a 201 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020679 while for that remediation to take place. And so that's why we're delay in getting around to this portion of the corridor. When we initially were approached by the residents in the lower part of the corridor, we were business individuals, businessmen, who did not and had no association with each other. Business made no concerted effort. This was strictly an effort on the part of the City and the current Councilman in that area to foster this project. What I really want to let you know is the project is here, it's underway, it's not completed, and we have some more to do. And we know that these relocations could happen again. We just have to make sure that everybody is treated fairly. Thank you.
Thank you. That's my hope that in this particular area especially that the private sector move this forward. We've been through a number of programs in the section, Enterprise, Empowerment, KOZ, NTI. I mean, the list goes on. And I really do personally depend on the private sector to make sure that the money that's invested in -- I guess if I look back at all the money that's been invested in the City, not just 202 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020679 there, but around the City in these kind programs, if we could reduce the taxes and improve the schools, we probably wouldn't be doing NTI. But there's always time to start over. Thanks Tom. Good afternoon.
Good afternoon. My name is Ron Ramstead, and I'm the president of small food processing plant on the 1300 block of American Street. I'd like to thank for the opportunity to testify today. My company has been located on American Street for about years, and I've only been there 15 six. I currently employ over 40 people, full-time jobs, represented by a local union. A majority of my employees live in the Philadelphia market. And over a third of them can actually walk to work. I urge you to support this proposed legislation. My perspective is probably a little different since I'm not a native of Philadelphia. I'm from the great state of Iowa and got lost one day here. But the perspective of six years ago I came here and it was very, very difficult place to do business on American Street, from the graffiti, 203 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020679 the crime, and different situations. And also, some of the situations of how to expand a business. My mission was to basically turn around a very poorly run company and then probably to move it out of the area. I have elected since then by working with many officials to stay the course as long as I can. One of the difficulties we do have is basically acquiring land and that's an issue that happens a lot. I have had some help and have acquired several properties since that time. There are things I do like about American Street now that I didn't before. It is a safer place. My car doesn't get broken into every other week. Graffiti is no longer in existence and the crime of breaking into the building and stealing things off my roof no 17 longer happen. The proposed projects will improve American Street by bringing in new investment activity and jobs for residents. Activity is really important. When you do see investment by private companies, things get better. More people in the local area will be hired and it becomes very more successful. It has been tough, but with this legislation I do see the light at the end of the 204 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020679 tunnel and greater success in the market.
Good afternoon. My name is Jim Flaherty. I'm the Executive Director of the Kensington South NAC and I'm also the acting President of the American Street Empowerment Zone Community Trust Board. I'm speaking in support of this bill also. And I'm just going to paraphrase what I will leave you in writing. The area of American Street, which runs from Girard to Burks in my area is approximately seven blocks of the approximate 15 blocks of this area. So it's an important part of our community and has been identified in our strategic can plan as an industrial area and to continue into the future as an industrial area. In 1999, the American Street Empowerment Zone Community Trust Board set a priority of attracting 300 jobs into the community, and it was always thought of at that time and to this day that those jobs would go on American Street. It was the largest area of vacant land. It had the 205 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020679 infrastructure for it and it also had the appropriate zoning. So this is something that the Community Trust Board has kind of pushed forward and we're, in one sense, happy to see it going forward. However, we have been very disturbed by the initial way that the relocation process has been carried out. I'm not going to go beat this horse again, but it could have been better. I think there have been a lot of very good questions that have been raised and a lot issues that need to be resolved. Having said that, though, I certainly hope that the Committee and the Council will approve this bill 14 because I think it's something that's very much needed. Thank you.
My name is James Hartling. I'm a principal with Urban Partners and Economic Development Consulting Firm. We've been doing this for years. Prior to that time, I work 21 for the City of Philadelphia and, in fact, 22 supervised the beginning of the American Street revitalization process years ago. So I bring 24 some perspective to this issue. I am speaking also 25 in favor of the bill. I should also point out I'm a 206 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020679 consult to the Empowerment Zone for economic development issues. I just want to make four points. The first one is that residents and businesses have for a quarter century now and perhaps longer if you listen to Mr. Carbine, struggled to try to make American Street a good place to both live and to work. But we're trapped in the environment created by 19th century land use patterns with homes and small business chocked up against each other. It simply doesn't work with the trucks that we have now have on American Street. And so it's very important to try to move away from the fragmented land use patterns. We see the immediate problem of that at all times as small parcels are owned by the City, they're vacant, they're derelict, they're not tax paid and then there will be some person living in the middle of that or small business trapped in the middle of that. The dumping occurs on all those vacant parcels, and everyone is hurt immensely. So getting past the fragmented ownership pattern is a critical issue to moving forward. Secondly, effective parcels are critical to attract the types of businesses that are 207 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020679 interested in American Street. As Mr. Forkin mentioned, we're essentially looking at value added distribution firms who have a lot of jobs, a lot of good-paying jobs, but who need the ability to move up and down American Street with their trucks and to be in a position in which they can function on their parcels effectively with a large enough building to house their goods and services. We have to have larger parcels to do that. Time and again, as we have interviewed businesses, they've said to us, "We are not investing in our business in this community because of the rest of the property looks so bad that our customers do not want to come here." So the spill over investment to the adjacent businesses will be a tremendous benefit. The third point I want to make is that for years we've been making investments in 19 American Street to be an effective, modern 20 industrial district, and the bill you have in front 21 of you is one more step in exploiting all those 22 investments and roads of business development and 23 job training that we've made all those years. 24 The last point I'd like to make is that 25 the residents in this community want to have the 208 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020679 business corridor be an asset for them. The businesses want the business corridor to be an asset for them. And in order to do that, if we look anywhere around the region, business districts that are assets have terrific landscaping, they have clear boundaries, they have places where the trucks go and places where the trucks don't go. And the bill you have in front of you is one small step in a continuum to begin to create that vision for American Street that everyone wants. Thank you very much for your time.
Thank you for your testimony. Anyone else to testify on this bill?
My name is Jordan Muhammad Akbar. Transportation is my forte. And we were looking at property on American Street for our hallow endeavor. We have a constituency of 2.5 billion people worldwide and we have the only hallow, which means lawful, water purifying mechanism and bottle purification process in the world. And we reached out for some property on American Street and was wondering why we couldn't get it. 209 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020679 The language here is making me sick on my stomach. It sort of reminds me of what happened to my ancestors 400 years ago when some people decided in the name of progress it would be profitable to move some people from one continent to another continent. And I caution this Council, to violate one citizen is like building your castles on sand. And the mistakes of the past that we ignore, we're doomed to repeat them. And what goes up must come down. So I just wanted to caution that the cure cancer might come and if we violate one human being and save a million, yet that one human being is worth more than that million. Thank you.
I'm not going to read my testimony because you have it already.
You're welcome. I wanted to make sure, though, that you had a copy of the testimony that could not be delivered by the Pennsylvania Horticulture Society. They were here earlier. And also, the statement that was read from the residents, I have copies of that and I wanted to make sure that that got entered 210 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020679 in as well. And that's it.
I'm sorry, I do want to say one thing on the record on behalf of the residents, which is that the City Planning Commission has initiated steps to establish a broad based very interactive planning process that will involve looking at the American Empowerment Zone neighborhood and probably in areas slightly larger than that so that we can address some of the issues that have risen today around making sure that everybody in the community has the same vision for the use of the land going forward and the various amenities, both residents and businesses.
Thank you. I'd like to thank Councilman Nutter, first of all, for bringing up some poignant questions and driving home the points that were probably well taken here today, 211 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020679 and I would like to thank the rest of the Members of the Committee for bringing out some things that went wrong with this whole process. And I'd especially like to thank Ms. Rodriguez and her sister for coming down here, and the rest of the neighbors. I was in that house that her father won on that lucky day. I didn't have the fortune to meet her father, but I met her and her sister and I met her mother. Now, I can venture a guess when they bought that house there was more than two houses there. So their reward for sticking it out here is just this. So if she seemed a little emotional, you can understand. They just put a whole new room 15 downstairs so their 82-year-old mother doesn't have to walk up the steps. And the one lady whose name I forget who spoke for her father, if you walked in his house, I was transported back in time. I thought it was like 1975 and I may have on an island in Puerto Rico. It's a very lovely house and he put a lot of time and care in it. The whole process which may start out good -- one of the Councilpeople taught me this. The rode to hell is paved with good intentions. 212 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020679 Everything in here was good intentions, and we certainly understand my friend Mr. Forkin and what he's, Mr. Carbine what he has been doing all these decades and the consultants. Let's not make these mistakes again. And this is a message to this Administration who I've been favorable with I'll be favorable on this bill because the community is for it. I'm not going through this process again. This should be handled a lot better and it should be handled in a process -- if you're sending letters out to people that don't speak English but don't read English or Spanish, someone has to visit them. And you know what, a Spanish-speaking consultant may not be good enough. There may be someone that lives in that neighborhood that everyone knows and trust. If I'm Mr. Valdez and somebody's knocking on my door that I don't understand on the 7800 block of America Street, I'm not answering that door. I don't care how Spanish he looks or how white he looks or how African American he looks; I'm not answering that door because his whole life is in that house and the life his family before him. Nobody wants to hurt anybody here, but don't bring us this again, not like this. So I hope Mr. Wetzel, Ms. Smith and Eva, 213 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020679 I mean, we all try to do good things there. You're going to lose one person if this ever has to happen again. And I think these are all good people and you understand what's going to go on. But the community had this spread all around because that's the only way they had to get information. If they heard something from their neighbor, it had to be true because they weren't hearing nothing else. And being human beings, we go for the worse news. That's what I do. "Well, what's the worst thing that could happen? I'm going to lose my house. Are they coming to take my dad's house? " Then we go down there six, eight months later and it's like we got our thumbs stuck up a certain part of our anatomy that we don't want to and we don't want to say in these people. I was in tears, literally had to fight back the tears to walk in a couple of them houses and say, you know what, this person is probably going to lose their house regardless of what I do. So take that as warning. It's as nice a warning you're going to get. This can never happen again here. And I can tell by the other district 214 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020681 council and the at-large councilpeople here, no 3 matter what federal guidelines, we need people that live in that community to be able to go there and they can see a face that they trust so they can understand what's going on here. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you very much. Anyone else to testify on this bill? (No response.)
We will now move to Bill No. 020681, an ordinance approving the 30th Amendment of the Redevelopment Proposal for the Model Cities Urban Renewal Area, being the area beginning at the northwest corner of Front street and Spring Garden Street, including the 22nd Amendment to the Urban Renewal Plan and the 21st Amendment to the Relocation Plan, which provides, inter alia, for the additional land acquisition of approximately 1,035 properties for residential and related uses; the additional land acquisition of approximately 39 properties for institutional and related reuse; the additional land acquisition of approximately 301 properties for residential, commercial and related reuses. 215 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020681 Please identify yourself for the record.
Mr. Chairperson and Members of the Committee, my name is Herbert Wetzel, Executive Director of the Redevelopment Authority of the City of Philadelphia. This bill would authorize the Redevelopment Authority to acquire 1,376 properties. A total of 301 properties, all vacant lots, will be acquired as part of a land banking strategy in Strawberry Mansion Acquisition Zone, an area of North Philadelphia generally bounded by 33rd Street to the west, Oxford Street to the south, Dauphin Street to the north, and North 31st Street to the east. This area has been selected because of its high vacancy rate and proximity to Fairmount Park and lends to redevelopment potential. A total of 582 vacant lots will be acquired as part of a land banking strategy in the Cecil B. Moore Acquisition Zone, an area of North Philadelphia bordered by North Broad Street on the east, North 21st Street on the west, Montgomery Avenue on the north, and Master Street on the south. It is an area that has been strategically selected due to its high vacancy rate and redevelopment 216 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020681 potential. A total of 221 properties, all vacant lots, will be acquired as part of a land banking strategy in the Sharswood Acquisition Zone, an area of North Philadelphia in the vicinity of 22nd and Jefferson Street. It is an area that has been strategically selected due to the high vacancy rate and redevelopment potential. A total of 55 properties, 29 vacant structures and occupied structures, will be 12 acquired in support of the last phase of the Cecil 13 B. Moore Homeownership Zone. 14 A total of five properties, vacant 15 structures, will be acquired on behalf of the Board 16 of City Trusts for the development of five 17 affordable homeownership units for first time home 18 buyers as part of an overall commitment to remove 19 blight in the Girard College area. Development 20 funding will be applied for by the Board to the 21 Redevelopment Authority's Homeownership 22 Rehabilitation Program. 23 A total of two properties located at 24 1717-19 North 33rd Street will be acquired and made 25 available for development as affordable housing for 217 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020681 the elderly. A total of nine properties, eight vacant lots and one vacant structure will be acquired on behalf of Habitat for Humanity-North Central. Habitat proposes to develop new construction single-family homeownership units for sale to low and moderate-income families. A total vacant structures will be 10 acquired and rehabilitated under the Office of 11 Housing and Community Development's Homestart 12 Program as affordable homeownership units for sale 13 to first time home buyers. 14 A total of 34 properties, 11 vacant structures and 23 vacant lots, will be acquired for Susquehanna Seniors Development, a joint venture made up of ventures and the Susquehanna Business Association Community Development Corporation, which proposed to develop a 65 to 70 unit low-income housing tax credit project. A total of vacant properties, all 22 vacant lots, will be acquired on behalf of the 23 Pennsylvania Horticultural Society's Vacant Land 24 Stabilization Program. 25 A total of 39 properties, 36 vacant 218 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020681 lots, vacant structure, and occupied structures, will be acquired for future institutional development. Hope Partnership for Education has expressed interest in developing a Charter school at this site. A total of four properties, vacant lots, will be acquired and made available to the neighborhood garden association. A total of properties, all vacant 11 structures, 5 of which have been encapsulated by the 12 Department of Licenses and Inspections, will be acquired and made available for rehabilitation under the Redevelopment Authority's Homeownership Rehabilitation Program. A total of 60 properties, 55 vacate lots and 4 vacant structures, and 1 occupied structure, will be acquired on behalf of the Women's Community Revitalization Project.
WCRP proposes to utilize low-income housing tax credits to develop 32 new construction rental townhouses and apartments for very low income families. A total of one property, a vacant lot, at 1810 Ridge Avenue is being acquired on behalf of Complete Wilding for expansion of their existing 219 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020681 business. A total of three properties, vacant structures, will be acquired on the 1600 block of Montgomery Avenue for the Advocate Community Development Corporation for a special needs housing development. E. E. will rehabilitate these properties utilizing the Redevelopment Authority's Homeownership Rehabilitation Program. These homes will be made available for low and moderate income first-time home buyers. This amendment, which will result in the enhancement of the property, was approved by the City Planning Commission on October 15, 2002. Mr. Chairperson and Members of the Committee, I respectfully request favorable consideration of Bill No. 020681 and would ask the suspension of Council Rules to allow first reading on December 12, 2002.
Thank you very much for your testimony. Could I just ask, the first three items 220 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020681 you mentioned, all land banking, how many properties of the 1500 are included in that land banking?
And with the exception of Mr. Brown at Complete Welding, the others are either projects that are publicly subsidized or have some social service mission of some kind?
But not generally private sector projects with the exception of Mr. Brown's expansion?
No, none of these are what you would call a fair market rate other than the business expansion. 221 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020681
Mr. Brown's expansion is probably the only private sector besides the potential land banking uses?
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee. I'm Richard Redding representing the Planning Commission testifying on Bill 020681, involving the Model Cities Urban Renewal Area proposing acquisitions in many project areas, including Strawberry Mansion where our community planning from the Planning Commission is well under way. The Planning Commission approved this at their meeting in October, and I'm able to answer any questions if you'd like.
Thank you very much for your testimony. Councilman Clarke, do you have a question for these witnesses?
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I just wanted to reference two of the land banking initiatives in particular, 222 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020681 particularly the Sharswood Acquisition Zone and the Cecil B. Moore Acquisition Zone. Both of those acquisition packages are adjacent to current development initiatives, so this hopefully will build upon what is currently a relatively successful development both in the Sharswood area where we approximately a year completed 72 units of housing and those acquisitions are around the perimeter of that particular development. I think probably all of the parcels are vacant with the exception of two. The Cecil B. Moore Acquisition Zone is around the perimeter of the current funded Homeownership Zone in addition to which it is adjacent to the Temple University area. So we're very sure that the development initiatives in those particular areas will be enhanced by its location. So I just wanted to clarify that for the record. I'll assume the Chair. Are there any other questions of these witnesses? (No response.)
Councilman, you were on the phone. I had to steal the initiative.
I appreciate it. Is this the last bill? 223 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020681
I can hold my questions for that. I would ask, Mr. Wetzel, and I know there's been a lot of discussion going back and forth about what's ready for development, what's possibly in a land bank. Was an earlier question asked for data regarding a delineation between those two for the upwards of 2500 properties that are part of today's --
Thank you very much. Anyone else to testify on this bill? Please identify yourself for the record.
My name Patricia Smith, and I'm Director of Neighborhood Transformation. I did submit written testimony on behalf of the Cecil B. Moore Homeownership Project, which is part of the 224 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020681 Model Cities in the Cecil B. Moore Urban Renewal Area. Briefly, that's a 296-unit development project that was funded by HUD in the mid '90s. We're moving towards the final and last phase of that project. The intent is to complete approximately 151 units, in part, using resources from NTI bond proceeds to support the acquisition and site preparation and demolition activity where new construction would be involved. Also, we will be moving forward with constructing a community-based development organization as required by the HUD regulations which will consist of a qualified developer to partner with a community-based organization. The CBO will be comprised of several individuals and organizations represented in the community in earlier planning processes. That's just an overview of the initiative.
Thank you very much. Please identify yourself for the record.
Good afternoon, Chairman and Committee Members. I'm Alfred Essandoh, and I'm Director of Operations for Habitat for Humanity in 225 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020681 North Philadelphia. We have been in the neighborhood for 4 years now, and we enjoy the support of our 5 Councilman Darrell Clarke, and I'm here to lend our 6 support to this initiative. Thank you. 7
Thank you very much 8 for waiting. 9 Finally, Reverend. 10 REV. MOORE: Thank you, Mr. Chair. 11 Thank you for the opportunity to testify, and I'll 12 respect the fact that you have been sitting a long 13 time and I'll get right to the point to say that I 14 do want to lend my support to this initiative. I 15 think for the record I need to give my name. 16 William B Moore, I'm Pastor of the 1300-member 10th Memorial Baptist Church in North Central Philadelphia and president of two non-profits: One has built a 60-unit senior housing at Ridge and Master and also a second development, 10 townhouses just across the street from my church in the 1900 block of Master Street. And on both of those projects as well as the other initiatives, we worked cooperatively with our Councilman, Councilman Darrell Clarke, and he has been very sensitive to 226 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020681 all of the issues that, not only we've had, but also the community initiatives. I do want to say that I do support the land acquisition strategy of this bill. I think it's so vitally important because being a part of having done development in the past, I've seen what dangling participle development has meted out where you have a block of good development and then two blocks of vacant and abandoned housing, and it really does not engender people wanting to stay in the neighborhood. So this bill, I think, provides an opportunity, a window of opportunity, to do it right, to do wholesale development to build houses so that it does in fact invite and encourage other development that makes a community whole and strong. And I want to add my strong support to this bill.
Thank you very much. We appreciate it. REV. MOORE: Thank you.
Thank you for I'll be fast. I'm Steve Kaufmann, I'm the Executive Director of Community Ventures and we're going to be involved in partnership with Susquehanna CDC in the 227 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020681 seniors development at 15th and Susquehanna, and we appreciate very much the opportunity to be allowed to do this work and the consistent support of Councilperson Darrell Clarke. I just wanted to state briefly that this is a development that won't work unless we do do some relocation perhaps on a private basis. And I think it's appropriate to ask developers, particularly if they're involved in big projects that generate significant fees to get involved in the relocation issue financially and also in terms of working with the residents. Details would have to be worked out with the Redevelopment Authority in terms of all these timing and notification issues. But I think it's appropriate to ask developers to step up and help with the problems since there's genuine human concerns here. Thank you.
Good afternoon my name is Susanne Stone. I work for Sherrick Project Management. I'm here today on behalf of the Board of City Trusts who is represented in this bill by the five properties on Thompson Street. 228 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020681 The Board of City Trusts has made a commitment to the Girard College area to renovate blighted properties and has done so over the past couple of years. With the renovation of these five vacant properties, there will be no more vacancies on this 1700 and 1800 block of West Thompson. So the Board of City Trusts is in full support of this bill.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Good morning, Ms. Stone. Could you just very briefly, because the time is late, talk about the initiative, focus of the Homeownership Initiative and the residents that we have targeted for placement in these homes?
Absolutely. The program has looked at the immediate area surrounding Girard college and looked at all the vacancies. They have begun renovation. Actually, they've renovated -- I don't have the exact number, but over the last two years they renovated several properties in that area. The properties are then sold to first time 229 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020681 low-income home buyers.
Exactly. And I guess it's because it's second nature, so everybody else must e know this.
I know I'm leading the witness, but this is not a courtroom so I can probably get away with it.
Thank you. I'm a little punchy from not eating lunch. Absolutely, the parents of the children that go to Girard College are targeted to be those first time home buyers. And then also, people that buy the homes that may not have their children enrolled are offered a scholarship and encouraged to enroll their children at Girard college. So it's a really unique and exciting project that the Councilman has been very involved in and have been 230 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020681 very supportive of.
You're welcome. I'm sorry. I think if I had eaten lunch I would have picked up on that a little bit better.
Good afternoon. My name is Carolyn Placke. I am Housing Community Development manager for Project H.O.M.E., and my colleague also David Cleghorn who's Housing Project Manager at Project H.O.M.E. Project H.O.M.E. is testifying in support of this ordinance which will result in a total of 11 units of homeownership, five of which are included in this bill. The five properties will be rehabilitated through the RDA's Homeownership Repair Program. And I'd also like for your consideration to know that Project H.O.M.E. has been committed to this neighborhood for the past 10 years. And the neighborhood that we're focussing on also falls within the NTI designated Strawberry Mansion neighborhood. 231 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020681 In addition, these units will help complement the many investments that have been made over the years as well as community anchors, including eight units of rental housing, six open space sites, a community center, and extremely vibrant after school program. Thank you.
Again, I want to ask a question. Do I have to re-identify myself?
Jordan Muhammad Akbar. I want to ask the Council the position of an Administration. When can an Administration own something? My understanding, the way this process happened with the Declaration of Independence that the Administration's origin is out of the consent of the people to be administered over or for, not ruled or et cetera. That's my understanding. You have to work with me because I may be back in time. So whenever the citizens fault or don't hold up their end of the bargain, my understanding is that the land or the houses or something reverts to an Administration, but the Administration cannot be an 232 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020681 owner because that's a conflict of interest. That's why I asked Mr. Wetzel what was the origin of the RDA or the PHA, et cetera. Because I'm confused there. And the people I represent -- I'm also the Director of the Islamic Officers, the 197th Legislative District. And as Darrell knows, I was in Andrew's office. Andrew is my cousin, as a matter of fact, he was state representative for X amount of years. So it's not new to me. So I'm asking again. Then I wanted to read something and then I'm done. " The need for universal ownership in response to dialog with Wally Wilson Goode, Mayor of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, enjoyed Muhammad Akbar, Citizen, native Philadelphian, property owner. At the North Central Philadelphia Association Board Director and Members Meeting, 100 Sullivan Hall, Temple University, 10:25, 1984. Mayor Goode stated that public housing along with the rest of the blight in Philadelphia was his pilot priority. And I quote, Iman Muhammad, 233 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020681 teacher of the American Muslim Mission, quote, the circumstances affecting our lives as members of this nation are no long a question for the court. The American ownership papers we allow in, so called African Americans have are in way different from the ownership papers or title of citizenship held by any other racial members or ethnic persuasion of our nation. The lonely marching song must give way to the ownership song. Once identified with America in terms of ownership, I don't approach the problems with an eye of an embittered or hurt person standing outside. From ownership sentiment, I approach the problems of American with a courageous and healthy mind, with the strength of my intelligence and of owner sentiment and responsibility, unquote. " I'm going to skip over that and come to here. Today we are confronted with the negative effects of a longstanding national policy which undermines land and homeownership in American life. Those who are gravely concerned about such a policy need little reminder of a third sinister and 234 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020681 rapacious law at work in the area of public policy. We call the law of bureaucratic scavengery. Whenever no barriers exists in any area of our common life, the government bureaucracy always tends to move and stake its arbitrary and all-consuming claim. We simply site here one tragic story presently being enacted involving so-called black American which exemplifies the process at work to demean and lessen the lives of an overwhelming majority of people. I represent a people whose time has come, and I'm questioning the process in this land-grabbing all-staking claim that an administration or those subsidiaries that exist out of that Administration and, I want know what makes them an authority and, et cetera, that was my question earlier. So I put these things together because I am also spearheading a movement called the Rediscovery of America. So I might want to discover where you live at and see whether for the sake of progress, as I understand it, whether your property et cetera and the things you've invested all your life, et cetera, don't mean anything. And I have an 235 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020681 offer for you that you can't refuse. So I'm asking of those lines, you see.
And there are more than I can count on all of your hands and toes qualified people to plan something for me. This cage is not my habitat. I don't care if it's gold, I don't care -- my sackcloth is more important to me than your gold cage or anybody's gold cage. Again, I want to know when an Administration -- and I want to separate the two because government is people, City is people, and they elect representatives not leaders, you see. And leaders are not servants, they're stewards and they're governed by an oath. That's my understanding. Now, when the City owns something, then I'm the City. And you all are our elected representatives. Is that right or wrong?
Then I'm asking up those lines. And it would behoove me not to ask these questions, but I have to go back and face some people. I'm going to talk to some people on the radio, et cetera, about the response because, again, this language is sickening. I'll ask again, is this 236 12/9/02 - RULES - BILL 020682 the same language the ancestors of the Caucasian world used when they moved our people out of the Continent of so-called Africa? Is that the same language with a three-piece suit. I'm asking. Thank you.
You're very welcome. Thank you. Is there anyone else to testify on this bill. (No response.)