COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC PROPERTY and PUBLIC WORKS - - - Room 400, City Hall, Philadelphia, PA Monday, June 4, 2007, 10:25 a.m. - - - Bill 060111 - Recessed to Thursday, 6/7/07 Bill 070273 - Ward Athletic Assoc. Agreement 7 Bill 070304 - Held at request of sponsor Bill 070337 - Companion to Bill 070446 8 Bill 070342 - Held at request of sponsor Bill 070430 - Continued to Wednesday, 6/6/07 9 Bill 070432 - Held at request of sponsor Bill 070434 - Recessed to Wednesday, 6/6/07 10 Bill 070438 - Re deed to East Tioga Street Bill 070446 - Re deed to 234 Diamond Street 11 Bill 070447 - Sublease of Tower Building Bill 070448 - Re North Front Street parcel 12 Bill 070452 - Re 1101 Market St. office space Bill 070454 - Companion to Bill 070448 13 Bill 070455 - Re Curtis Center office space. Bill 070466 - Re West Sedgely St. parcel 14 Bill 070468 - Re 2 Penn Ctr. Plaza office space 15 16 (Full text of all bills attached hereto.) 17 COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: 18 Darrell C. Clarke, Chair James F. Kenney Blondell Reynolds Brown Donna Reed-Miller 19 W. Wilson Goode, Jr. Frank Rizzo Jack Kelly Marian B. Tasco 20 21 - - - V A R A L L O Incorporated Litigation Support Specialists 1835 Market Street, Suite 600 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103 215.561.2220 215.567.2670 6/4/07 PUBLIC PROPERTY/PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE WITNESS Bill No. 070447 Joan Schlotterbeck, Public Property...... C. Kirchner, Phila. Children's Alliance Helene Dow, DHS......................... 14 Kathleen Barron, Episcopal Hospital..... 20 Bill No. 070430 Joan Schlotterbeck, Public Property...... John Herzins, Public Property............ 44 9 Henry Schwartz, City Law Department...... 49 Jahad Ali, Private Citizen............... 67 10 Paul Deegan, PAID and PIDC............... 90 Bill No. 070438 Joan Schlotterbeck, Public Property...... 100 Bill No. 070446 Joan Schlotterbeck, Public Property...... 103 Vincent Dougherty, Commerce Department... 106 Director, Mayor's Business Action Team Bill No. 070337 Joan Schlotterbeck, Public Property...... 120 Bill No. 070448 Joan Schlotterbeck, Public Property...... 123 Bill No. 070452 Joan Schlotterbeck, Public Property...... 126 Henry Schwartz, City Law Department...... 135 3 6/4/07 PUBLIC PROPERTY/PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE WITNESS Bill No. 070454 Joan Schlotterbeck, Public Property...... 138 Bill No. 070455 Joan Schlotterbeck, Public Property...... 141 Bill No. 070466 Joan Schlotterbeck, Public Property...... 145 Bill No. 070468 Joan Schlotterbeck, Public Property...... 147 Bill No. 070273 Joan Schlotterbeck, Public Property...... 149 * * * PUBLIC MEETING .......................... 153 * * * 4 6/4/07 PUBLIC PROPERTY/PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE
Good morning. This is the Committee on Public Property and Public Works. We have a quorum. To my left is Councilman Kenney, Councilwoman Tasco, Councilman Greenlee, and to my right is Councilwoman Miller. For those of you who may have an interest in the following bills, Bill No. 060111 is recessed until Thursday, at 9:30 a.m. Bill No. 070304 is being held at the call of the sponsor. Also, for your information, 060111, also known as Biosolids. Would the clerk please read the title of the first bill. I'm sorry. And Councilman Rizzo has also joined the committee.
Bill No. 070447, an ordinance authorizing the Commissioner of Public Property, on behalf City of Philadelphia, (The "City") to enter into a sublease 5 6/4/7 - PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070447 agreement (the "sublease") by and between the City of Philadelphia and the Philadelphia Authority for Industrial Development ("PAID"), providing for the leasing of PAID to the City of a certain building known as the Tower Building; covenanting to make appropriations in each of the City's fiscal years to provide for rental payments due under the sublease; authorizing the Director of Finance and other officials of the City to take all actions necessary to accomplish the intent and purpose of this ordinance 16 and the sublease and other agreements; and authorizing approval of all of the terms of the agreements and other documents and amendments thereto by the Director of Finance and/or the City Solicitor.
Good morning. Good morning, Chairman Clarke 6 6/4/7 - PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070447 and members of the Committee on Public Property and Public Works. My name is Joan Schlotterbeck. I am the Commissioner of the Department of Public Property. I'm here today to testify in support of Bill No. 070447, an ordinance authorizing me, as the commissioner, on behalf of the City of Philadelphia, to enter into a sublease by and between the City and the Philadelphia Authority for Industrial Development, also known as "PAID", provided for leasing by PAID to the City of a certain building known as the Tower Building, covenanting to make appropriations in each of the fiscal years to provide for rental payments due under the sublease; authorizing the Finance Director and other officials of the City to take all actions necessary to accomplish the intent and purpose of this ordinance and the sublease and the agreements; and authorizing approval of 7 6/4/7 - PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070447 all of the terms of the agreement and other documents and amendments thereto by the Director of Finance and/or the City Solicitor. This bill will permit the City to lease certain space located at the Tower Building on the Episcopal Hospital campus, which will allow collocation of the Department of Human Services Sexual Abuse Unit and Philadelphia Children's Alliance with the existing Police Department Special Victims Unit. This collocation will permit the full integration of resources for investigating child-abuse cases. The Department of Public Property fully supports this measure; and, accordingly, I respectfully ask that Council approve Bill No. 070447. I would also ask that the rules be suspended so that the ordinance may be passed upon the second reading of Council. 8 6/4/7 - PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070447 Thank you. I am not here solo. There are plenty of representatives, both from Episcopal Hospital as well as the Department of Human Services, so we are all available to answer any and all questions you may have. I believe that both Helene Dow from DHS would like to protest -- I mean -- protest? (Laughter.)
Hope not. Would like to testify. And I also have representatives, as I said, from Temple here, and for some reason, I cannot find -- I'm sorry, here, I have it. Kathleen Barron (sp?). She would like to read testimony, and there are -- Tom Quinlan's here, Ken Chadwick, and James Wellens. Kathleen, would you like to join me? (Witness comes forward.)
Thank you, 9 6/4/7 - PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070447 Commissioner. Commissioner, are you prepared to talk about the functions of these units that will be consolidated, or are you just here to talk about the actual real estate transaction?
Well, actually, I was going to talk about the real estate transaction, but any benefit from the collocation I have representatives from DHS here.
Okay, yeah. We may want to have a couple of questions with respects to the actual operations.
And the assumption -- at least my assumption is that consolidation will allow the operations to function in a much more meaningful way?
That's correct. Helene, would you join me 10 6/4/7 - PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070447 please. (Witnesses come forward.)
And we also -- and I should probably have come up Chris Kirchner from the Philadelphia Children's Alliance. (Witness comes forward.)
Just real briefly, I just want to talk about the positives associated with consolidating the actual operations of these two units. I guess SVU popped in my head -- I'm a "Law and Order" fan, so I, you know, obviously...
I would be happy to start. My name is Chris Kirchner, and I'm the director of the Philadelphia Children's Alliance, and my agency has been driving this discussion for the past 15 years. We were founded in '89 to try 11 6/4/7 - PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070447 to improve the way that child-abuse cases are handled in the City of Philadelphia by coordinating interventions with law enforcement, prosecution, child welfare, medical, and mental health. And we do that right now out of a site at 40th and Chestnut Street, but we're not co-housed. My staff of interviewers and case managers and support staff are there. And when there's cases, DHS workers come down from Center City, police officers come down from Northeast Philadelphia, children still have to go out to have medical exams at Children's Hospital l Children's Hospital and Chris and Temple. And it's kind of like pushing a really big, heavy rock uphill, with everybody in different venues. So we've been talking with all of the partners about how we could improve this intervention, how we could improve collaboration, how we could 12 6/4/7 - PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070447 improve outcomes for kids and families, and we looked around the country and saw large urban environments moving to the model where they really brought everybody under one roof. And so what we would be doing under one roof is a lot of joint work with law enforcement and child welfare to 3nsure that kids were safe. We would have also my agency there, we would have medical exams conducted by CHOP and St. Chris there, and we would just try to do everything that we could as a one-stop shop, improving efficiencies and effectiveness. I do have some remarks that I'll be happy to share with you, but what we found is, a coordinated approach results in more contacts during the investigation, more frequent in-person interviews, more perpetrators removed from homes, more perpetrator confessions, more frequent victim corroborations, more substantiated 13 6/4/7 - PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070447 reports, more dependency filings, more positive criminal prosecutions, and more guilty pleas. But ultimately, it also results in a better process for kids. Small children aren't required to go all over the city to be interviewed in many different venues by many different people. They'll walk in the door of this facility and you'll get the sense that this is a city committed to kids. All of the services will be there, they will be coordinated, children will be interviewed and have their medical exam on the same day, physicians will work with DHS workers and police officers to assess the cases collaboratively, kids will get services a lot faster, they'll get medical exams faster, they'll get mental-health services faster. And ultimately, we feel that the way to go is through a collocated facility from my perspective as the director of the agency that's been 14 6/4/7 - PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070447 working to implement a coordinated approach. Right now, at 40th and Chestnut, we capture about 40 -- maybe 30 to 35 percent of cases collaboratively in Philadelphia with DHS and the police. Our goal is to capture a hundred percent of allegations of child sexual abuse, of which there are 160 a month reported in Philadelphia, and also some physical abuse cases from a collaborative -- a very strong, deep collaborative perspective.
I'm sorry. My name is Helene Dow, H-E-L-E-N-E, D-O-W. I'm the Director of Intake at the Department of Human Services, and I want to thank you for the opportunity 15 6/4/7 - PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070447 to address you this morning. This has been a journey that the Department has started back in the mid-'80s in an effort to improve services to children who have been sexually abused. And there was the initial collaborative effort to create the Alliance back at the end of the '80s. Then most recently, in 2002, the Department created a specialized section that consists of an administrator, five supervisors, and twenty social workers that receive the reports coming into the Department to investigate of child sexual abuse. Currently, as you know, all of these reports must also be reported to the police. So what we have are two units all investigating the same incident, and this results in duplication of effort, wasted time, and a potential loss of information gathered by one system that the other 16 6/4/7 - PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070447 does not have. What we're envisioning is that when a report comes in, whether it comes into the police first or to the Department, the other system can be notified almost simultaneously, which doesn't happen right now. With that, we can be more creative and flexible in developing a strategy for making the initial contacts and how to proceed with a case. Right now, scheduling joint interviews between the police and the Department of Human Services is often a logistical nightmare because we're coordinating schedules of the DHS worker, the police officer, the PCA interview, and the family. Most of the families that we're working with now are working so that every time they have to take off work to go to meet with the police officer for a medical appointment, for an interview at PCA, or to be at home 17 6/4/7 - PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070447 for an interview with the department, this is adding to a stress to a family that's is going through an incredibly difficult time. Needless to say, that results in missed appointments. Families don't show up, an officer is suddenly called to court, an emergency arises on the DHS social worker's case load, and so then, the interview has to be rescheduled. If we were collocated, if something untoward occurred, there's another colleague right there, and the interview can proceed.
So we envision savings in time and a reduction of lost time and travel time for the Department.
I just wanted to ask all three units going to be there -- the Sexual Abuse Unit, the Children's Alliance, and the Police Department Special Victims Units?
Okay. Now, are there any facilities for overnight stay if there should be --
We've talked, though, about possibly having some resources -- cots or something -- so that if kids came in in the middle of the night, you don't want to interview children in the middle of the night, but you may not be able to send them home. And in some jurisdictions, they have the provision to keep children there temporarily. It's not 19 6/4/7 - PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070447 like a placement; it's just a temporary opportunity so that the safety of a child can be ensured until the interview and all of the players can be pulled together the next morning.
And the Department will, of course -- the staff from the department who would be colocated would be connected with the main office at 1515 Arch Street, where our hotline is, and they can secure emergency resources overnight if that's necessary.
Thank you. You said it was located on the -- what did you say, Episcopal?
It's the Episcopal Hospital campus, which is a part of Temple University Hospital.
100 East Lehigh 20 6/4/7 - PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070447 Avenue in North Philadelphia.
I'm sorry. You have to identify yourself for the record.
I'm sorry. My name is Kathleen Barron. I am the Executive Director and Chief Executive Officer of the Episcopal Hospital campus. The el stops right at Huntington Street, and there are several buses that run up and down Lehigh Avenue.
Thank you Let the record reflect that Councilman Kelly has also joined the committee. Any other questions by members 21 6/4/7 - PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070447 of the committee? (No further questions.)
There being none, thank you very much. Let the record reflect that Bill No. 070432 will also be held at the call of the sponsor of the bill. The clerk will please read the title of the next bill. * * * 22 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430
Bill No. 070430, an ordinance authorizing the Commissioner of Public Property, on behalf of the City of Philadelphia, to lease or convey to the Philadelphia Authority for Industrial Development for nominal consideration all or part of a certain triangular parcel of land with the buildings and improvements telephone situated in an area generally bounded by Penrose Ferry Road to the north, Hog Island Road to the east, and I-95 to the southwest, under certain terms and conditions.
Good morning. My name is Joan Schlotterbeck. I am the Public Property Commissioner. I'm here to testify on Bill No. 070430, an ordinance authorizing me, as the Commissioner, on behalf of the City, to lease or convey to the Philadelphia Authority for Industrial Development all, or part, of a certain triangle 23 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430 with the buildings and improvements therein situated in an area generally bounded by Penrose Ferry to the north, Hog Island Road to the east, I-95 to the southwest, under certain terms and conditions. This bill will enable the City to either lease or convey this property to PAID for further conveyance to a developer at fair market value, with the net proceeds being deposited into the General Fund. The Department of Public Property supports this measure; and, accordingly, I respectfully ask that Bill No. 070430 pass and be approved. I also ask that the rules be suspended so that the ordinance may be passed upon the second reading at Council.
Thank you very much. 24 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430 Who's the developer and what's the project?
It actually has a companion bill. This is an area -- it's about 5.8 acres of land oddly shaped down there where we have our Emerson Landfill. And also there is no identified developer at this point. We have three people short- listed, and this is one of the parcels.
The use? The use, yes. It could be either -- well, there's three competing interests down there, and each one seems to be able to work out the issues with the others, so we're hoping that we have one purchaser. It's going to be dredging. PRPA and another company is looking at all of these. This one has yet to be -- this is just an ordinance.
Is it 25 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430 going to be dredged or is it going to be dredge spoils or is it going to be developed?
It -- I don't have an answer for you yet. We're in the process of negotiating. I don't have an answer.
This particular parcel is just identified as able to be sold. The companion bill is the --
I guess arguably every parcel of land or property that we own is able to be sold.
Why would we want to put it in a position to be sold unless we knew what it was going to be used for. Once we release it out of hour hands and PAID has it, there's very little control we have over the 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430 parcel and what its use is going to be Job.
No, I understand, but would the RFP come back to here? For example, if they wanted to use the site theatrically to put the spoils of the dredge material for a temporary period of time while they're doing the dredging work, that would be something that certainly we would want to know about before we release the property to PAID, to a private land owner. I mean, I have a hard time kind of voting for the authorization to sell a piece of property when I don't know ultimately what the piece of property is going to be used for.
Well, as I said, there's a companion bill here -- 27 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430
-- for the other two, and the competing interests PRPA, a firm that wants to do some dredging, and also a local firm that wants to use it as a construction site. And we have yet to -- I understand what you're saying, but that is still in the process of being negotiated. And this other parcel is right there, right by the train line, the rail line, and it -- basically, I guess you're right. It does queue it up for further.
I mean, I'm not trying to be difficult but why wouldn't we work out all of the details first and then come back to get our approval to then sell the land for that purpose that rather than having three unknowns. I mean, I have a hard time voting for something when I don't know what they're going to be using it for. 28 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430 If it's going to be used to store construction equipment, that's one thing. If it's going to be used to store what's coming off the dredge project for a long period of time or a short period of time, I'd like to -- I'm not against it but I'd like to know it. If it's going to be developed by PRPA for use as some sort of use facility -- container or whatever -- I'd like to know that, too, but I have a hard time trying to guess at what may happen.
Commissioner, once the deal is consummated between any one of the three parties, in order for it to be -- the property to be disposed of or conveyed to that entity, does it have to come before Council for a 29 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430 resolution?
No. And the idea was that all three -- as you just stated, all three of those users, it appears that we're trying to work so that all three of them get what they need. You know, the local company stays, the dredging happens, and PRPA gets what they need. And this piece of land helps with that so the idea was to have it queued up to give everybody the opportunity to get what they needed down there.
But it could be queued up at any time. I mean, it doesn't need to be queued up prior to what we know what the use is going to be. Want if they want to build a casino there? I mean, I don't --
I'm not 30 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430 saying that they want to, but I mean, it doesn't eliminate -- once it's in private hands, they can practically do what they want to do with it. And whether it has an environmental impact or a community impact or an economic impact, I would rather know in advance rather than cutting it loose now.
What was this -- was there some activity on this land before recently? What was the activity at this location?
To the best of my knowledge, no. It's a very oddly shaped --
No, no. 22 That's the Victory Gardens. That's the companion bill, Victory and Emerson.
We were anxious to get rid of the farmers for 31 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430 some reason that I still haven't figured out.
No, that's the Victory Gardens, and the Victory Gardens and the Emerson Landfill and this parcel are all City-owned in the same area, and they're all up for sale.
I agree with Councilman Kenney that I'd like to know what's cooking there before we give you any authorization.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I guess my question is sort of on the same lines. Commissioner, is this unusual that you're giving the land before the deal is consummated?
I'm not 32 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430 giving anything. It has to be appraised, and we don't even know the value of it at this point.
But, as Councilman Kenney said, this would authorize us to give it to PAID, right?
Well, it -- if -- maybe it's a poor choice of words, but it queues it up for future disposition. It doesn't have to -- it doesn't do anything more than that. Am I right?
But can't the -- I guess I didn't hear the answer. I think Councilman Kenney asked the question. Why is it -- can't it be done in reverse? Why can't the deal be worked out and then we're here and we know exactly what the plan is, and then we give it to PAID.
Right. We actually had this very similar discussion a few months ago about us 33 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430 authorizing PAID, which is technically an agent of the government in some respects to sell property. And our concern then, and our concern now, is that once we authorize PAID to do its conveyance for a sale, it never comes back here. And I can't recall the resolution of that discussion, but we find ourselves again here, being obviously concerned about -- particularly in this location and the reference of dredging, a situation where property could be conveyed to a company, and it never comes back this Council, and I don't know what relationship you have with the District Councilperson where this parcel is. But it, again, concerns us. And I think before, we were talking about some process that notified the Council, short of a resolution, of the sale of the property or the ultimate company that was selected to develop 34 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430 the site.
Well, would it be possible to continue this specific hearing until our Wednesday hearing? And maybe I'll have more specific answers or...
Mr. Chairman, I would like -- on the next hearing on this, I would like to have an opportunity to question the three or two or one of the future owners. For example, if it's a construction equipment site, how many trucks are you going to have? where are they going to exit and enter from? I need to have people there I can specifically ask questions about as opposed to kind of guessing what may be used in the parcel.
Okay. And to answer the question, the Council President is very aware of this whole situation down there and is supportive 35 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430 of what we're doing.
But she knew that I was putting it on the table for the three groups that have competing interests for the other two parcels.
All right. I'm uncomfortable with it until I know what they're being used for.
I guess I'm not hearing the answer to my 36 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430 question. I'm not trying to be combative here, and I think Councilman's (indiscernible) too. Why do it this way? Why? Why can't we do it as we're suggesting -- work out what the best deal is and then work with one entity that can answer any questions that anybody might have?
Okay. We can do it that way. I just -- they're still not there yet, we're still negotiating.
Let me take a run at this. The reason why you do it this way is because PAID is an entity that probably best serves the interests of the City in terms of marketing and selling properties --
-- as opposed to Public Property. 37 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430
But the issue still remains: Even if they're the best entity to market or sell or do whatever they need to do with respect to the property, there's still this vacuum as it relates to us knowing what the end-game of that transaction is.
Couldn't they still be involved before this bill 24 is passed by us? I mean, couldn't there still be that interaction? 38 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430
I think we Council have to authorize Public Property to enter into an agreement with PAID.
Right. But the question is: Is there a step that requires the ultimate approval or notification of Council upon the completion of the transaction? And that's where we have a problem.
Mr. Chairman, also, there's environmental issues with the storage of construction equipment, there's some very specific standards that have to be met -- paving, et cetera. So, you know, you just don't --
It is a potential for a lot of problems. 39 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430 Councilman Kelly?
Well, actually, Councilman Clarke asked the question I was going to, but I just want to know about the companion bills. Are they in the same position as far as this?
No, that's further along. I mean, in terms of answering Councilman Kenney's questions, we have identified -- we know what the value is, we had an RFP process, it was marketed, we short-listed to three firms. 40 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430 And in the process, we discovered that we owned another oddly-shaped parcel right in that area, right by the rail line.
This is that parcel. It's about 5.8 acres of ground. We do not even know the value at this point.
We can estimate it based upon what we know about the others.
I don't see any need in coming to us this morning on this bill. I think it would be better for everyone just to have to pick someone and then have that someone come in here with yourself and anyone else that's interested in this so that we could at least know how this parcel's going to be used. 41 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430
All right. A couple of things. The reasons why I approached it this way was, the other two -- and, again, that bill will be coming up. They're in -- the proceeds from those sales, we were hoping that done by the end of June. That's $2.5 to 4 million.
That's -- we're not -- I do not know exactly what use.
I understand, but three competing 42 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430 interests aren't exactly the same activities, correct? So we don't know -- it's not three competing interests for a construction storage yard; it's three competing interests for three separate potential uses. So if we're looking forward to recouping or to getting the revenue from the sale, we should at least know what the ultimate use of the property's going to be before we sell it.
Right. And maybe would it be possible to continue this specific bill until Wednesday and maybe I will have --
But you're not going to -- will Public Property make a decision on who the end-user is by Wednesday?
I'm not -- if I don't have an absolute answer, at least an answer and a letter of support from the Councilwoman -- I mean, I -- we're working on it, there are people 43 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430 working on it as I'm speaking here and now.
But at this point as we sit here, there are three competing interests, we don't know which interest is going to get the okay.
No. 10 What's happening is, they're working together so that each one of them gets what they need down there in that area.
But we don't know what the uses are specifically other than it's the DRPA and a construction company and who else?
The dredging company. So we don't know what they want to do there; we just know -- we happen to know who they may be, but we don't know what they exactly intend to do. 44 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430
Well, I don't have the exact answer to the plans, no. 5
I would just like to make a comment, please. John Herzins, Public Property. I think I understand all of the Councilmembers' concerns about not knowing the end-user. The reason we want to do get these two bills hopefully passed and transferred to PAID is because of the urgency of all three people who are interested in that companion site. Hopefully, all of them will involve job creation and expansion of their businesses. So we didn't want to really have to wait until October, November, December to get this bill passed. We had hoped originally to have a selection made at the time for the 45 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430 Victory Garden Emerson site, but we didn't want to delay it till the fall, and that's the reason why we were hoping to get this transferred to PAID, so that we could continue that negotiation.
Mr. Chairman, just a hypothetical on that particular point. What if the dredging company gets chosen for the acquisition of a parcel of this property? What are they going to do there? What's their activity? What do they store? Do they store anything there? Does the stuff leave on a daily basis? does it leave on a monthly basis? Do I have stuff piling up there that I don't know what it's going to be? I mean, I don't think that the dredging of the river is as bad an environmental situation as some people 46 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430 would like you to believe, but I don't know that it isn't, either. So do I have piles of stuff laying there are for six months, three months, a year? I don't care -- I mean, he may create jobs, but if I don't know 8 what it is that they're going to be 9 putting there, why would I release the 10 property now? 11
On that 12 particular note, the proposal for that 13 usage is to mix dredging with cement or 14 a dry cements kind of filler and ship 15 it off via the railroad to a site in 16 western Pennsylvania. 17
Is there 20 going to be a facility built there to do that, or is it going to be done in the open? See, these are the specific questions that I don't necessarily think is going to stop the approval, 47 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430 but it's questions that we legitimately need to legitimately ask as elected officials who represent that area, the at-large people, the district people. Is it going to be a facility that's closed, where the stuff goes in and they mix it inside? Is it mixed outside? I mean, if I cross the bridge and I see another car crusher facility or similar, that's not too -- I don't care how many jobs that creates; I don't know if I want that. But unless I have some specifics and can talk to somebody other than you guys, who I like and trust, I need to know who the end-user is.
All right. Well, it's very likely that it will be PRPA, and they'll work out --
Well, you said there was PRPA, the dredger, and the construction company; that's three 48 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430 entities. And you're saying from all the parcels down there, you're looking to try to carve out pieces for each.
Is there anything from a legal perspective -- you know, of course, Councilmembers think we can do everything, but I want 49 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430 to ask you on the record as a representative from the Solicitor's Office -- that can require that PAID, prior to its disposition, after the contract has been consummated, that you come back to Council for a resolution 8 for ultimate disposition?
Henry Schwartz from the City of Philadelphia Law Department. It's up to Council's discretion. If Council wants to condition the sale on that, it's within Council's discretion.
Okay. I just wanted to ask the question on the record.
But, Mr. Chairman, I don't understand why we can't wait just until we have all of the facts and then approve the sale. I'm not -- I'm of no mindset to stop this from happening, but I'm not going to do it with blinders on. 50 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430 It just doesn't make sense to me. I don't feel like I'm doing my responsibility is, which is to know the facts and then vote accordingly. And I'd like to see the principals here; I'd like to at least talk to them and ask them what it is they do and who they are and where they come from and what their track record is in other areas of the region or the country. I don't know who I'm giving the property to.
Commissioner, when we had the issue with the Victory Gardens, which the companion bill is that site, correct?
We clearly asked the question, what was the reason that we were relocating the farmers 51 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430 from that location? And I'm recollecting that conversation. And it was we weren't -- we didn't know, it was kind of vague on exactly what we were planning. And I think I even asked the question, Did it have something to do with the dredging of the Delaware? And I was told not by you but other folks that it was not. Now it's turning out that it is; is that correct?
No. The truth is that this was an initiative of mine and sort of a commitment as the new Commissioner of Public Property. The Victory Gardens as they stood in the past needed to be dealt with. It was just an operational nightmare, and there were a lot of issue there is, and I identified it as a parcel for sale.
But now it's very interesting that we move the farmers out and now we have a use 52 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430 that's appeared almost immediately to use it possibly for the dredging of the Delaware River, correct?
I don't know it's for the entire dredging. It's a company that has an interest in doing some part of a process in that area. The responses back from each one of these groups are very detailed. All of the questions that you have will be answered. The reason why I guess -- if you want to say I'm being vague, it's that we do not -- we are still negotiating, we are waiting to see who actually purchases it, and at the same time, I understand that each of these needs will be met -- the other two firms, the car crusher goes away, these people get -- I mean it's all a part of a grand plan. Again, I think we will have the answer by Wednesday. This has been 53 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430 going on for quite some time.
You can understand that I wouldn't be doing my job -- and I don't want to speak for my colleagues -- of representing our constituents by approving something like this unknown. I mean we trust you, but guess who takes it? We do, if something goes wrong here.
And I would suggest your policy on bringing this to us gets adjusted because this has happened too many times. I mean, this is not the first time that we've had this debate about making these transactions unknown. And I think, going forward, that your policy should be to listen carefully today of what we ask and have that process implemented so that it doesn't get presented to the Public Property Committee in the future in 54 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430 this manner so we don't have to spend as much time. If we knew and had the answers today, we'd be moving on here, but we can't because we don't have the answers, and I wouldn't feel --
I wouldn't feel I'm acting responsibly by approving something that we don't know that could back fire on us.
You're welcome, Councilman. Commissioner, Wednesday, 11:30, you'll be prepared to give us the information?
Yes. And just so that I'm clear, I mean, basically what you're saying is not only this but the companion bill, which 55 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430 --
Well, yeah, actually, I'm looking at the bills, and virtually all of them require us to approve authorization to convey to PAID, so we'll ultimately be in a similar situation with all of these bills. And I in no way, shape, or form want to recess all of these bills until Wednesday. But this is a problem. I'm just thinking. I recall us having this debate and actually thought we did something legislatively to change the process that required that you come back to us for ultimate disposition, but maybe we ended up not doing that.
Well, I think this one happens to be an anomaly today. This one parcel I do not have an identified user, I do not have a value because I knew the use of the other two parcels, and I knew that this 56 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430 one would help resolve all of the issues, we put it in the same position to be sold in the future.
All right. On this one, why don't we just hold this bill until the Public Property meeting at 11:30 on Wednesday.
Mr. Chairman, may I request that in addition to the panel here that we have some of the end-users, the potential end-users --
-- to be able to ask them what they're doing or how they intend to proceed.
Well, Councilman, I hope that we will have the end-users selected and they will 57 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430 come in and sit here and tell you absolutely how it will be used.
Well, this one is still -- I'm assuming that we -- if we can have a selected winner by Wednesday and that we all understand what the ultimate use of this one will be as well, that we could move forward.
How long have the negotiations been going on with the three parties?
And the fact that we haven't done this already has not slowed those negotiations down correct?
So why would completing the negotiations and coming up with a deal be problematic if we don't approve these today or 58 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430 Wednesday?
Because I wanted -- the idea is for those folks -- it's urgent for those folks to get possession of it. And also, it's an asset sale for us that we were counting on for revenue.
But if we've been negotiating it for two months, and I know we're coming up on the summer, why the rush before the summer recess? We can come back here and September and approve it after we've had a chance to discuss all of this with everybody. I get suspicious -- and I'm not suspicious of your motives, but I get suspicious when we get told a couple weeks before the end or a week before the end of session that we got to do this. We can't tell you how much it's worth, we can't tell you what it's going to be used for, but we got to get it done before the summer starts or a 59 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430 calamity's going to happen. I can't imagine what calamity would happen. You've been negotiating this for two months, you could negotiate it, you could pick the person next week, two weeks from now, and then come back to us and we'll approve it -- if it's acceptable use.
Okay. Well, again, I wanted to be clear. The other two parcels are valued, our key process happened. I would ask or request that we don't combine the two and keep them separate.
Even though that process is further along the road, you still can't tell me today what they're going to do there.
No, but I'm going to tell you Wednesday, and then we'll have people here to tell you what they're going to do.
You can tell me -- it's Monday and you're going 60 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430 to tell me Wednesday?
That's how close we are, yes. That's how close we are, yes.
The other two bills? So it's -- we have already approved PAID --
It's -- 070434 is the companion bill that the Commissioner will have people to testify on Wednesday.
So we'll move that till Wednesday at 11:30 also, and you'll be prepared to talk about it.
I'll be prepared. And the end-user, or end-users, will be here to also explain.
Could you tell us who they are now? PRPA and what's the other company?
I actually -- I actually don't know for sure who's going to be here.
So there's three entities: PRPA, a dredging company named...? Named...?
It's called the Fort Mifflin Reclamation Association, FMRA.
But that's seeming to me to be a corporation that was recently formed. This is not like 62 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430 Browning Ferris or --
No, I understand that, but the fact that it's called Fort Mifflin Dredging Company would lead me to be believe that this has just been created. This is not a long-term company like trash hauling firms that have been national companies. Who are the principals in Fort Mifflin --
Bill 25 Rinaldi. 63 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430
Bill Rinaldi is the principal. And he's currently operating a small dredging down there now -- not on our particular land but on the land adjacent to the site.
I want as much information as we can possibly find on this company. PRPA, they're a potential end-user for what purpose?
It involves relocating another tenant from another parcel onto this site.
Okay. Now, I know who they are. So it's so much easier --
We have 64 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430 all of that. We just --
But in all due respect, we weren't being given that today. Until we started this conversation, we weren't going to have any of this information.
We were going to be asked to cut these bills loose, give them to PAID, and we're going to go away. I don't think that's responsible.
Councilman, honestly, it had been our intention to have a selection made prior, of course, to Council recessing, but when that didn't happen, we didn't want to slow the process --
And we're not perfect, either, and we intend on doing lots of things we don't get to, but it doesn't mean we go and jump ahead and do it and put the cart before 65 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430 the horse before we know what -- I'm sorry, but it's just asking a little too much without the knowledge. And the third company -- potential company is who, the construction company?
Well, I thought that was the PRPA tenant who was being relocated.
That's Anderson Company, right? And that's a tenant from PRPA that's being potentially relocated to this site?
The third entity, yes. PRPA, Riverside -- 66 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430
They're going to be held on Wednesday. I'll be here Wednesday with the selected winner and anybody that's going to be using the property to testify about their uses, correct?
Okay. Will the clerk please read the title of Bill No. 070438. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: (Inaudible.)
I'm sorry. You wanted to testify on the bill that we're moving till Wednesday? Do you want to come back Wednesday? UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: 67 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430 (Inaudible.) (Witness comes forward.)
Good morning. My name is Jahad Ali. I'm a taxpayer and I frequently attend some of the PAID board meetings. I started going a few months ago because there was a project that I had a concern about. And one of the things that -- some of the thoughts that I came upon, after having attended the PAID meetings, is, a lot of times I question, how could some of the deals that are occurring at PAID take place at the board meeting, and you can't find out any information? When I ask about the jobs, when I ask about the diversity, I was told, Well, you will just be given a form of paper, more like what you had. And then if they treat you like this, imagine what they do to a taxpaying citizen that comes up there. I was told -- when I come to 68 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430 those board meetings, I'm questioned -- what is my relationship? what is my interest in it? And I'm just a taxpaying citizen that is exercising my right to be informed. One of the things you asked, Councilman Kenney, was there somebody from PRPA? But this document says "Philadelphia Authority for Industrial Development." Is anybody from Philadelphia Authority for Industrial Development here today?
A lot of times at the board meeting, when I go and I ask about the decisions that are made, I'm told that the decisions were made by PIDC, who, by statute, is the management agent for PAID. " But when stuff passes out of the City Council, when it gets to PAID's desk, a citizen can't find -- it's very hard to find out something. I went there on March 10th to question a project that was $28 million of affordable housing. To this day, I haven't gotten a response. I submitted a right-to-know request, I submitted all kinds of documentation, I attended the TEFRA hearing -- I don't know if you are all familiar with the TEFRA hearing -- which was the bond hearing, and then I attended the PAID board meeting. They never responded to that. I mean, everybody's nice guys, 70 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430 they're all polite; let me just say that on the record. But there seems to be like this vealed attempt. I refer to them as "the CIA of Public Property" because you can't find out anything. When you look at it in detail, you see that the decisions are made at the board meeting of PAID, which consists of five people. The decisions that they render are based on their recommendations of their management agent, which is a board of 30 people, and that meeting is closed to the public. I've tried to attend that on four different attempts. Four times I was told I couldn't attend. Yet the legislation says it's an open meeting, but I was told I'm not able to attend because it's a private nonprofit that was created in 1958, but the legislation doesn't support that. When I call, I'm told, Well, you know, that's just the way it is. And as a taxpaying-citizen, I think 71 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430 that all of your questions are right on point. I've attended, as you well know, a lot of meetings over here. And one of the things that I remember Councilwoman Tasco saying, when we were doing the stadiums, everything was always the last minute. The last minute they come over here, the last minute they want you all to approve this stuff. And then once PAID gets it, it's really just a negotiation deal. Like the Public Property Commissioner pointed out, she has three potential end-users. Well, that sounds like a team. Now, PAID has to have talked to them, but yet, this is a shell game where, if you're not on point, once you approve this out, PAID, through their management agent, the 30 board of directors, and there's only one City Council that sits on that board, and that's Councilwoman Jannie 72 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430 Blackwell representative that attends that board meeting. But there's no way for a taxpaying citizen to find out what's going on. And I'm like Councilman Kenney. I don't oppose none of this; I think all of this is good stuff. But I think, as a taxpayer, I should be aware, and we all should be aware of seeing how that cycle is. There's some firms that have an unfair advantage. They have an -- I won't say "unfair" because the business is not fair, they have an unethical advantage, because they get everything. You know, there's some firms that are buying land at 5,000 a square foot -- and PAID, he can correct me if I'm wrong -- at $5,000 square foot on the Navy Yard, at the Navy Yard. Now, you know, I know that we're talking about jobs because the legislation says that PAID is empowered 73 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430 for jobs and for the morale of the citizens of Philadelphia, and that was a big thing back in '67 and '58 was jobs, how do citizens participate. Now, I've attended a hearing at PAID, and I asked, How do we follow the jobs? how do you get an applicant come up there for a grant or a loan? They say that they're going to provide jobs. The question is, Well, how are they going to do the outreach for jobs? Then PAID says, Well, we have hands off on that; that's between the applicant and whatever they do; we don't follow that.
And the question is: We're empowering these people and giving these people land and discount capital. How come we can't track the jobs? PAID is an organization that has an annual budget. I've tried to get a copy of their annual report; I have still haven't gotten it, and that's been over 120 days. 74 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430 So my question is -- I really came because of the subject matter. I wanted to tell you as a citizen that I think you're right on point. The point is -- and like everybody's nice guys like you said, Councilman. I don't want to disparage anybody, but there are also agendas that you -- you're my representative, and if I can't come to you and get anything, you can be assured that I can't get it on my own without your help. And the way that thing was set up, it's -- the ball stops right there, at the front of this Council. And the fact of the matter is, you have to take a hard line, because if you don't, it's part of the game is to keep your judgment not fully enlightened so that you can make a decision without facts. And then we get this perpetual cycle where a citizen comes up and it's already done deal. 75 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430 And then we say -- like the Councilman said, we say, how did our Councilpeople do this? We don't say, how did the Public Property Manager do it, how did PAID do it; we say, how did our Councilperson approve this? So thanks for giving me the opportunity, Chairman and members of the Council.
Thank you, Mr. Ali. Real briefly. Commissioner, once you convey to PAID, what level of interaction do you have on the negotiation side? Do they notify you that they're close? 'Cause you're saying now that you're very close to consummating the deal, and we haven't even authorized you to convey it to PAID yet.
The complete disposition and negotiations rest with the City. We don't -- PAID doesn't do any of that for us. We do 76 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430 it.
They market it and go through that process for us, but they don't make any decisions about what happens. We tell them we've selected so-and-so and the sale price so-and-so, and then they process the paperwork.
Well, how does it then not come back to Council for disposition? I don't understand that. You're essentially telling me that the property never leaves the ownership of the City of Philadelphia. You simply have PAID --
No, I don't know -- now you're asking -- Henry -- I mean, I don't -- when you start asking me the legality, I would assume that it does in some way legal way transfer over. We control what 77 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430 happens to the process. It's not --
Henry Schwartz of the City Law Department. Councilman, in a typical transaction like this, you're authorizing the Commissioner to transfer it to PAID and for PAID then to transfer it to a third party. It all happens simultaneously at the closing table. So the property doesn't get transferred to PAID in advance, but when the ultimate user is ready and ready to close on the deal, at the same closing table, it goes from the City to PAID, and then from PAID to the end-user.
Oh, yeah. It's completely our process, our 78 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430 decision.
Because of the City Charter, it's transferred to PAID, and for a second, it's in PAID's name, and then it transfers to the end-user.
And the purpose for having that arrangement is what? And actually I think I know the answer, but I'm going to ask you: Why do we do that as opposed to the normal City conveyance?
Under the City Charter, the City would have to have a public auction.
Right. And other factors like jobs created or other issues may not be relevant in the bidding.
All right. Councilwoman Tasco? 79 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430
Well, if you say that the conveyance is at the settlement table, this ordinance says it's an ordinance authorizing the Commissioner of Public Property, on behalf of the City of Philadelphia, to execute and deliver to the Philadelphia Authority for Industrial Development for nominal consideration a deed conveying fee simple title to all or parts of certain parcels of land with the buildings and improvements thereon located in the general blah-blah-blah- blah-blah. So if the conveyance takes place when you make the settlement, why are we giving you the ability now to convey this land to PAID? If the conveyance takes place at the settlement table, after the owner has been identified, after they have done their marketing study, what are you entering into now? Why are we doing this ordinance now? 80 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430 Why don't you have a contract with PAID that they can market the land, bring you possible developers or the people who want to purchase the land? and then we know who the possible developers or owners might be. Why can't we know what they want to do with the land, have that discussion, and then you make the decision after the discussion with the Council, and we have some input as to who may want this land to make that decision.
And then we give you the ordinance conveying the deed to PAID to continue the settlement. It's a little backwards for me. Once we give you the authorization...
That is our process. One particular parcel was outside of our normal --
No, but 81 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430 I'm not talking about this land; I'm talking about the process. I'm talking about how the process is a little backwards to me. It seems to me that after this discussion, we ought to know who the possible purchasers of the land might be.
What if they want to put on the land, and then we give our input into that thought, then we give you the authorization to enter into an agreement with PAID to do whatever they do to convey the land and blah-blah-blah-blah-blah at the settlement table. 'Cause what you just said, Mr. Schwartz, is that you conveyed this at the settlement table -
-- once all the negotiations are done and the 82 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430 purchaser is identified.
So we give you the right to do this now without any further involvement so we don't know who might purchase the land, what they will purchase it for. And so, it seems that we are -- this process is a little convoluted.
Sure. And just two comments. One is that PAID doesn't take title; they hold it until they're ready for the final disposition. And I think the reason, as the Commissioner, mentioned they had short-listed, and they want to close this summer. So I think the reason it's here now is a timing issue. But I think the Commissioner indicated that on Wednesday, she'll bring you the end-user for your review 83 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430 and then the consideration of the bill.
But you all are missing the point. The point is that this process is backwards. The next ordinance, 070438, says the same thing. Now, there doesn't seem to be any urgency about that. I'm talking about the process of how we convey the land to PAID so that PAID can do the final settlement, whatever you need, and I don't know the process and I'm not a Realtor.
Actually, Bill 070438, we know who's buying it and we know the value of it. That's -- what you're asking is the normal process. What you're saying the is that's how we normally do it. We identify something for sale, we use PIDC to market it for us, do an RFP. Oftentimes Councilpeople come to us with a buyer. You know, we have an appraisal. Sometimes it works that 84 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430 way. We then identify the winner, if you will. We then come before you, asking permission. And normally, I know -- I have a conversation with the affected Councilperson, and they know that PRPA is going to buy this for this use, and the value is 1.6 million. I mean, that's a known fact.
So you're saying that normally, you come to us once you have identified the purchaser and all of that.
And you give us all of that information at the time we pass the ordinance.
Is that 85 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430 what you're saying?
There's two ordinances that are out of the ordinary today.
Commissioner, so you would not have a problem if Council, by ordinance, required that you have the ultimate purchaser identified prior to the authorization to PAID to purchase or convey the land since this is abnormal, and it would be...
Normally, we do. Actually -- and I always do. I don't --
Yeah, I 86 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430 understand it's not a requirement. I mean, you normally -- and I agree 'cause I've been involved in these hearings a lot of times. You normally come to us with a purchaser or a developer and the deal that has to be consummated, but you would not have a problem if there was a requirement by ordinance for you to have the end-user identified prior to the request for authorization to convey to PAID for ultimate consummation of the deal.
And I know you want to have some flexibility to -- in the case that we're going on recess or whatever, but you can see that this is a problem.
This really is not -- I mean, that's why Episcopal is here today, in case there's any 87 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430 questions about the real estate. I mean, normally, I don't have any objection to it being a requirement. To be frank about it, I can't -- I wouldn't come before the committee if I already didn't have buy-in by the Councilperson. I know better.
I'm sorry, Mr. Chairman, but on these two bills, where's the buy-in?
Well, I've actually had conversations with the Council President about what was going on, who the three short-listed firms were, what the negotiations were, and what they were trying to accomplish. She does know that. But these two are unique; the Emerson and the other parcel are unique in the way we normally do things.
But think about this: You came here today with these bills and if we were snoozing up here, we would have just, by normal 88 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430 course of business, approved those things, and you go along your merry way and you pick whoever you pick, and then they start doing their operation, and people, and if something goes wrong, they say, "Well, what are you doing?"
I mean, I don't think three short-listed firms is enough specifics for me individually.
I mean, don't give me three and you're going to pick one. I need to know who's going to be where and what they're going to be doing and that they're going to be paying for it and who are the principals involved and what other companies and entities do they run, and do they have a track record. All of those lists of questions. It's just... 89 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430
Okay, that's fair. I mean, that's normally the way we do it, Councilman, so...
All right. So those two bills, Wednesday, 11:30 you'll have the specifics and the principals on those.
The remaining bills on the calendar that authorize an agreement between Public Property and PAID, you do have an end-user.
All right. And with the understanding that there's probably going to be some legislation coming out of this body to some degree altering the process. I'm just giving you notice. It's not a question. I'm just giving you notice, okay?
Okay. And so in the vein that I could not come 90 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430 before you again without having an identified --
Well, this is not the first time that we've had this conversation.
I know this is not a hearing on the operations of PAID, but since we had a citizen to raise some issues and you're here, Mr. Deegan, could you please respond.
My name is Paul Deegan, D-E-E-G-A-N, and I represent PAID and PIDC. I've met Mr. Ali. I'm not sure which specific questions you would 91 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430 like me to respond to; I think he had a few questions.
Well, it's information, public information, that he stated he had requested.
Yeah, I'm surprised to -- and I'd like to talk to him and find out which pieces of information he hasn't gotten that he's requested so that I can make sure that he does get the information.
This 30-member management board, it -- he said he tried to attend the meetings and was told he could not attend the meeting; is that true?
Oh, PIDC is the 30-member board he's referring to, and PIDC is a private nonprofit corporation, and the meetings are not public. PAID is a public authority, which PIDC makes recommendations to PAID. PAID is a public authority 92 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430 covered by the Sunshine Act so that those meetings are public. And I'm sorry if we haven't provided him with all of the information that he requested and I'll, you know, get a list of things that he's asked for and hasn't received and get back and go to work on them. But that's the process and, you know, we welcome anybody to come to the PAID meetings. We publish notices of them, we distribute information, we answer any questions. And Mr. Ali has attended these meetings and asked specific questions and I thought we had answered his questions but apparently we haven't, and I'd be happy to go back between and provide whatever answers he feels are necessary.
Councilman Kelly? 93 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Commissioner, I'm just curious, this morning, we have about 6 bills. Is this just a coincidence that 7 it's always a week before our recess 8 that -- you know, I'm a little, I 9 guess, concerned that sometimes that we 10 could miss something, as Councilman 11 Kenney pointed out, with these two 12 bills. 13 You know, it seems to me it 14 may be a rush to judgment here that you 15 throw all of these bills together and 16 then we have very little opportunity to 17 really go through these bills. 18 And I don't know whether it's 19 just a coincidence that you have 20 of 20 these bills just merged into, you know -- before June 14th or whether you had some of these bills already ready to go months ago. And I don't know what the rationale is to bring them all together at one time. 94 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430 Just curious.
It -- it's not any covert operation or anything. I just -- basically what happened --
No, I have the utmost confidence in your office, believe me, and you, Commissioner, I have no problem. But I think that it's something that we could look at and saying that what is the reason, what's the rationale of having all of these bills in here at one time in one committee session.
Well, I've been working on a lot of different real-estate transactions for a long time, and they do -- each one of them takes a lot of time. And then they -- I need cooperation and time from the Law Department and it gets -- it just -- I don't know. It just happens that they seem to always happen in groups. 95 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430
I mean, I have all types of bills here today. Some of them are sales, some of them are leases.
In the cases of the leases, they're saving a lot of money, so it's like -- But everything was negotiated and time was spent. They don't happen real quick. Real estate is not an easy thing to turn around quickly.
Well, it just seems a coincidence that they all merged just before our break. And it would be nice if we would have these in, you know, different settings or different committee hearings. Break them up a little bit is what I'm saying.
That way we 96 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430 could take more time with each bill. Okay. Thank you.
Maybe because of the fact that we're just getting hit up with this volume, maybe there's things that you could delay until we get back that you could put a circle around them and say that they're not time-sensitive.
Oh, that's a tough question for me to answer because I'm trying to save money. I'm all over the place. And, again, real estate, there's not nothing about real estate -- you all know that just from 97 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430 your own personal -- it doesn't happen quickly.
But you have to understand our responsibility that we can't rush through things that -- you know, we have the responsibility to act intelligently and with knowledge.
And when you're dumping stuff at the last minute, it puts us in a really awkward position. So I'm just saying that if there are things that could be delayed in this entire list, tell us. We'll talk more about it later.
Okay, so 98 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430 we're clear on that. We're ready for the clerk -- actually, I think we read the title of the next bill, so we will --
Do you have any more questions? Would you like me to remain here? I'd be happy to --
Yeah, hang around. You can take your seat in the back again, but you may want to hang around here.
We didn't read it? All right, the clerk will please -- Before I proceed, any other witnesses on the last two bills that 99 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070430 we've been discussing? (No response.)
There being none, will the clerk read the title of the next bill. * * * 100 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070438
Bill No. 070438, an ordinance authorizing the Commissioner of Public Property, on behalf of the City of Philadelphia, to execute and deliver to the Philadelphia Authority Industrial Development for nominal consideration a deed conveying fee simple title to certain parcels of land, with the building and improvements thereon, located on the southwest side of East Tioga Street between North Delaware Avenue and I-95, for further conveyance at fair market value, all under certain terms and conditions.
I'm Joan Schlotterbeck. I'm here today to testify in support of Bill No. 070438, an ordinance authorizing me, as the Commissioner, to execute and deliver to the Philadelphia Authority for Industrial Development for nominal consideration a deed conveying fee 101 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070438 simple title to a certain parcel of land, with buildings improvements thereon, located on the southwest side of East Tioga Street between North Delaware Avenue and I-95 for further conveyance at fair market value, all under certain terms and conditions. This bill will enable the City to convey these parcels to PAID for the Philadelphia Regional Port Authority, PRPA, at fair market value, with the net proceeds being deposited into the General Fund. PRPA is in the process of purchasing 3200 East Tioga and wants to purchase this additional adjacent parcel. The Department supports this measure; and accordingly, I ask for support to approve Bill No. 070438. I also ask that the rules be suspended so that the ordinance may be passed upon the second reading of Council. Thank you. I'm available to 102 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070438 answer any questions.
Thank you, Commissioner. Any questions of the Commissioner by members of the committee? (No questions.)
There being none, is there anyone else to testify on this bill? (No response.)
There being none, will the clerk please read the title of the next bill. * * * 103 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070446
Bill No. 070446, an ordinance authorizing the Commissioner of Public Property to execute and deliver to the Philadelphia Authority for Industrial Development for nominal consideration a deed conveying fee simple title to certain tracts of City-owned land with the buildings and improvements thereon, known as 234 Diamond Street and 2052-64 North Philip Street, located on the west side of North Philip Street in the City of Philadelphia, for further conveyance at less than fair market value.
I'm Joan Schlotterbeck. I'm testifying today in support of Bill No. 070446. This is an ordinance 21 authorizing me, as the Commissioner, to execute and deliver to the Philadelphia Authority for Industrial Development for nominal consideration a deed conveying fee simple title to a certain 104 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070446 tract of City-owned land, with the buildings and improvements thereon, known as 234 Diamond Street and 2052 to 64 North Philip Street, located on the west side of North Philip Street in the City of Philadelphia for further conveyance at less than fair market value. This bill will enable the City to transfer the property to PAID for further conveyance to David Auspitz, owner of Famous Deli Street Cookie Company, where the property serve as the new cookie manufacturing plant. The Commerce Department has requested a 50 percent reduction in the sale price due to the creation of jobs the plant will bring. The Department supports this measure; and accordingly, I ask that City Council approve Bill No. 070446. I also ask that the rules be suspended so that the ordinance may be passed upon the second reading of Council. 105 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070446 This is an economic development use. And basically there -- is someone here from Commerce to also testify, but what we're doing here is, we're -- this parcel's being conveyed and they're meeting the required number of job creations as well as the development per acre. So it meets the requirements that they have for economic development, and that's why we're asking to sell it for 50 percent of the value.
Yeah. Actually, you know, that was going to pique my interest when you said "less than fair market value."
I guess I do have a question for the Commerce Department about the guidelines associated with the reduction in the sale of property. (Witness comes forward.)
The Chair 106 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070446 of the Zoning Board will recuse themselves at the time of the hearing.
Mr. Chairman, it might be helpful at this time to also call out that there is a companion bill. This is -- it's all the same parcel. Bill No. 070337, it's all a part of the same economic development plan.
Good morning, Mr. Chair and members of the committee. My name is Vincent Dougherty, D-O-U-G-H-E-R-T-Y. I'm the Director of the Mayor's Business Action Team for the Commerce Department.
I 107 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070446 understand, you know, that the Commerce Department, unlike the Redevelopment Authority, has some levels of flexibility in conveying properties when there is some job creation associated with that. My question is: What are the guidelines and what level of flexibility does the Commerce have in terms of setting a sales price? As you know, I have a couple of developments -- well, you may not know, but a couple of developments in my district that we're trying to move that would create what we believe will be a substantial number of jobs. And one of the properties in question is owned by the Redevelopment Authority, and they're being -- holding steadfast that we can't reduce the price, that we must sell at market value. What's the story with Commerce?
As far as the 108 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070446 City-owned properties, of course, it has to come before this committee for approval. The policy that has generally been used, and is now being codified basically, allows for the write-down of up to 50 percent of the appraised value of a property based on three factors: First of all, low- and moderate-income jobs in low- and moderate-income industrial neighborhoods that we're trying to revitalize, such as American Street, where this is. Also, Allegheny West area, where we're working with the Councilwoman to revitalize. And it based on two things: We expect 15 jobs to be created per acre --
-- is this qualification designating any specific 109 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070446 areas? What does it do?
No, no. This is generally where we've been using this policy.
Potentially anywhere in the City where it may be needed. Generally, we've been using this on American Street, the older industrial areas, where we have acquired properties and are disposing of those properties.
Okay. Say, for instance -- and I keep bringing up these references to properties that I'm familiar with -- Ridge and Sedgely, there's a substantial --
Right. So that property would qualify for -- (Indiscernible; parties 110 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070446 talking over each other.)
Correct, correct. I'm just saying this is where we have generally used it 'cause this is where we have been acquiring properties as part of the American Street Site Assembly Program, which you're familiar with. And also Allegheny West, where we've been working to acquire properties.
So I say that 'cause that's where we've been using it, but not -- it's not exclusive to those areas.
So basically again, 15 jobs to be created per acre and investment of -- I forget what the last number was. Let me check. It's $900,000 in investment per acre.
So, again, it's low- to moderate-income jobs, job 111 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070446 creation and investment. If you meet the max, you'd be eligible for --
It has not officially been blessed as a general rule-of-thumb we've been using. We're trying to get it officially established, which takes a lot of things off the table in the sense where it makes it much more transparent as to how we're getting to this. I'm sure you've seen bills over the last 12 years on American Street, where we would come in and say we'd like to sell this property to "XYZ Company" for this price. Behind that was this general policy.
All right. Are there any requirements in terms of 112 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070446 the actual development of the site for participation, MBE WBE neighborhood participation on construction, neighborhood hiring?
I don't believe that is in the policy. I haven't seen anything -- no, not in the policy. Again, if they're going to get through -- most of these projects would come through PIDC with low-interest financing to help these programs; and therefore, their requirements would also kick in. But no, specifically in this policy, it is not stated.
Well, since it's a -- it has not been codified, it should not be a problem to add such language?
Absolutely. I can relay that back to the Commerce Director and --
Yeah, that 113 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070446 would be helpful if you could add such language to codify it.
Sure. And one of things we are getting involved about in the development issue is to assure that the development does happen according to the terms that this property is being transferred. There will be deed restrictions put on the property to assure that there are no 12 bait-and-switch programs or anything like that happens that is not consistent with the policy. And I'll just add one last thing. When we do these things, we do meet with the local Councilperson and the community as a rule; that's part of the commitment, especially on American Street, that we've made. So we have met primarily with Pat DeCarlo, the head of the Norris Square Civic Association. We had a preliminary meeting with her and we've committed to her that we would bring it 114 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070446 back before the project, before the entire community meeting to lay it all out and address any concerns that they have.
In the testimony, Ms. Schlotterbeck mentioned the fact that this property will serve as the new cookie-manufacturing plant. Since he is presently in business, is he in business in Philadelphia? Does he manufacture his cookies now in Philadelphia?
Well, the deli was on the corner of Fourth. And the actual place where he makes the cookies is in the middle of that block, on Fourth Street, just south on Bainbridge. He actually makes them and 115 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070446 delivers makes them out of that location.
Now, in moving to the new location, to qualify for this 50 percent reduction, is he hiring an additional people, or is 8 he transferring 15 people? 9
It's my 10 understanding from the letter that I 11 have here is that he's going to develop 12 and create or retain 27 jobs. 13 So I believe that the answer 14 is both. 15
He's going to -- there's 27 jobs that he's going to maintain in the City if he gets this parcel. So the answer is: He's going to retain the people that he has, and my assumption is that he's going to hire others from the area.
Is he going to hire 15 more people? 116 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070446
He has 10 now, he's going to put 7 on within the first year once the facility is fully up and running. Also, there's going to be a companion catering, which will create jobs, and that's where we get to the 8 27 new jobs. 9
I actually 10 have a very detailed plan that I'd be happy to share.
Okay. Let's go back to your plan. Your plan states that he is going to retain 27 jobs. He has 27 jobs now at the current site?
No. He has 10 jobs now, will add 7 in the new facility, and a companion company, a catering company, will create 10 new jobs, so we will have 17 new jobs -- retain 10 and create 17 new jobs at this site.
I just 117 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070446 wanted it clear for the record. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Dougherty, just generally on the policy again of job creation, is there a set number of jobs you're looking for as far as the size of the land? You know, is there kind of a formula there I, guess?
So it's 15, okay. I didn't know if this was referring to this particular -- okay.
Per acre, correct. 118 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070446
Thank you, Councilman. And, Mr. Dougherty, you will provide in writing to the Chair the policy once it's been amended?
To include the language about the subsequent development of the site.
Mr. Chairman, I think it would be -- if I may, I think it would be helpful if we introduce the companion bill. And the reason they're separate is simply because it was an unusually complicated parcel, and we introduced one piece and then realized we had the legal description and we had other addresses to include. 119 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070446
We'll have read into the record Bill No. 070337, which is the companion bill. * * * 120 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070337
Bill No. 070337, an ordinance authorizing the Commissioner of Public Property to execute and deliver to the Philadelphia Authority for Industrial Development for nominal consideration a deed conveying fee simple title to certain tracts of City-owned land with buildings and improvements thereon, known as 214-32 Diamond Street, located on the south side of Diamond Street, in the City of Philadelphia, for further conveyance at less than fair market value.
I'm Joan Schlotterbeck. I'm here in support of Bill 20 No. 070337, which is an ordinance 21 authorizing me, as the Commissioner, to execute and deliver to PAID for nominal consideration a deed conveying fee simple title to certain tracts of City-owned land with buildings and 121 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070337 improvements thereon, known as 214 to 232 Diamond Street, located on the south side of Diamond Street in Philadelphia, for further conveyance at less than fair market value. The bill will enable the City to transfer the property to PAID for further conveyance to David Auspitz, owner of the Famous Street Cookie Company, where the property will serve as the new cookie-manufacturing plant. The Commerce Department has requested a 50 percent reduction in sales price due to the creation of new jobs the plant will bring. The Public Property Department supports this Bill No. 070337. I also ask that the rules be suspended so that the ordinance may be passed upon the second reading of Council. Thank you.
Thank you. Any questions? (No questions. 122 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070337
There being none, is there anyone else to testify on this bill? (No response.)
There being none, will the clerk will please read the title of the next bill. * * * 123 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070448
Bill No. 070448, an ordinance authorizing the Commissioner of Public Property, on behalf of the City of Philadelphia, to convey the City's interest in certain tracts of land with the buildings and improvements thereon known as 1043-47 North Front Street, located on the east side of North Front Street, to the Philadelphia Authority for Industrial Development for nominal consideration, for further conveyance at fair market value.
Thank you. Again, this has another companion bill with it; for the record, it's Bill No. 070454. I'm here today to testify in support of Bill No. 070448, on ordinance authorizing me, as the Commissioner, on behalf of the City, to convey the City's interest in a certain tract of land with buildings and improvements known as 1043 to 47 North 124 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070448 Front Street, located on the east side of North Front, to the Philadelphia Authority for Industrial Development for nominal consideration for further conveyance at fair market value. This bill will enable the City to convey this property to PAID for further conveyance to Gianni Pignetti at fair market value, with the net proceeds being deposited into the General Fund. Mr. Pignetti plans to develop the property for residential housing. The Department supports this measure; and accordingly, I respectfully ask that Council approve Bill No. 070448, I also ask that the rules be suspended so that the ordinance may be passed upon the second reading at Council.
Anybody 125 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070448 else to testify on this bill? (No response.)
There being none, the clerk will please read the title of the next bill. * * * 126 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070452
Bill No. 070452, an ordinance authorizing the Commissioner of Public Property, on behalf of the City of Philadelphia, to amend its sublease with the Philadelphia Authority for Industrial Development as landlord and the City of Philadelphia as tenant for office space at 1101 Market Street, under certain terms and conditions.
I'm here today to testify in support of Bill No. 14 070452, which is an ordinance 15 authorizing me, as the Commissioner, on behalf of the City, to amend its sublease with the Philadelphia Authority for Industrial Development as landlord and the City of Philadelphia as tenant for office space at 1101 Market Street, under certain terms and conditions. This bill will permit the City to sublease for certain office space located at the Aramark Building. This 127 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070452 amendment is required for the inclusion of the reduction of lease costs for the overall term of the lease amendment. The Public Property Department supports this measure; and accordingly, I ask that City Council approve Bill 8 No. 070452. I also ask that the rules be suspended so that the ordinance may be passed upon the second reading at Council. This is the Aramark Tower lease that we've been in, I guess, 30 years almost. The building has recently sold, and there's one group of tenants in there, City tenants, if you will, that would like to stay long-term. It's the Water Department. So with my real-estate consultants, key advisers -- and they're here today if they're need to do testify -- we approached the new owner with, you know, what can you do for us? So our current lease does not 128 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070452 terminate until '09. They offered as an amazing reduction, and we approached them in a manner where we'll have the Water Department stay for another long-term. There's a huge reduction. They gave us a major concession, which is to say they lost money by negotiating a lower rate because they had two years left in the current term. And the Water Department will stay, they'll have an option to expand. And the other reason they'll be able to expand is they'll be able to expand is, they also gave us the ability at a certain point in time to terminate the other two City spaces, which is the Behavioral Health as well as the Health Department. And also in there is Inspector General and the Bar Association. So it's a series of moving pieces. But right now, we renegotiated to change the current term so that very high costly lease went away. They gave 129 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070452 us a better price.
Yes. The Water Department is locked in for long-term as a part of this deal. We had the ability to terminate the others. Again, that's a concession the owner gave us that they didn't have to; they could keep us there for the next two years and charge us the higher rent.
And we have the ability to terminate the other spaces?
They're all '09. The Water piece will go into a long-term deal. The other two, I had the ability to terminate those -- help me out, you guys. What is it, September? -- at the end of the 130 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070452 calendar year. And that's about as much time as it will take me, with their support and help, to identify should other places that are less costly. And I also intend to reduce the footprints in the process, so we'll go into less expensive space and save on the amount of space.
How long is the lease with the Water Department? How long are they locked into now?
The lease expiration is June the 30th, 2017. 131 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070452
You're welcome. And that was something that the Water Department was pretty emphatic about. It was very costly to try and uproot them, and they're very happy there.
This is just a question. In Public Property's process, where is our study long-term to eventually get us out of all of these leases entirely? When are we going to need a new City building? So where are we with analyzing 132 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070452 how, if government shrinks, government grows, when are we going to someday house all of our City employees in City-owned buildings?
Well, I don't have an answer for that. I mean, that would be an ideal. In other words if we could -- we'd have to buy buildings in order to do that. We'd have to have the ability to spend that kind of money in order to not have rent.
In other words, as government hopefully gets smaller, space may open up in other buildings, so why should we not have a goal of getting the Water Department into the MSB someday or some other City-owned facility or 20 years down the road, in other words, part of our long-term plan, when 2017 comes that maybe there would be an opportunity to put those folks in a building that's owned by the City of Philadelphia. 133 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070452
That's always are first option. In fact, one of the tenants got out of another lease that you'll be hearing about in a few minutes. We're going to move one of the tenants into City Hall up on the seventh floor with me. I mean, there are -- so we do that ongoing. I'm always trying to reduce space to move people out of leased space if there's available space on City property and at the same time reduce the rent roll.
You know, the similar long-term plan, like the Police Administration Building, is bursting at the seams there, and people are always saying that we need to eventually build a communications center for emergency preparedness, 9-1-1, a stand-alone facility. I mean, these are the kinds of things I'd like to hear about long-term that we're really looking at seriously. 134 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070452 Thank you.
So the -- just process so I can understand the process -- is the PAID, the space is actually rented to PAID, and then each City department, I guess, negotiates with PAID for their space?
No. They negotiate with me. All the -- it's all under the jurisdiction and the control of the Department of Public Property.
Well, we -- it's a legal -- Henry? 135 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070452
I mean, I know what it is, I know what PAID is, but --
I know. When we go into long-term deals -- Henry can explain it.
Henry Schwartz of the City of Philadelphia Law Department. Councilwoman, we use PAID or PMA, which is the Philadelphia Municipal Authority, for the same purpose -- as a conduit between the City and the building owner primarily because of the provision in the City Charter related to the four-year-out provision, which means that we can't enter a contract for more than four years without the ability to get out of it at anytime after that four years. That provision does not apply to agreements with authorities, so by using PAID or PMA in between the City and the landlord, we're able to commit 136 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070452 to the landlord that we'll be there for a period in excess of four years.
Okay. So then PAID is there because you have a lease that's more than four years old.
Okay. But then the other City departments that's going to move -- I guess they're going to move -- they wouldn't really have to go through PAID, correct? No?
Well, the building owner often gets financing for their buildings based on their long-term City lease. So, for example, if Council were to approve a ten-year term for this building, that would be a part of their financing for the building; they'd want to know that the City was committed to that ten-year period. So then they would sublease to the City, and the Commissioner would be 137 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070452 responsible for using the space for various City departments during that ten-year period.
Okay. All right. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you, Councilwoman. Is that all of your testimony on that?
Are there any other questions of these witnesses by members of the committee? (No further questions.)
Is there anyone else to testify on this bill? (No response.)
There being none, would the clerk please read the title of the next bill. * * * 138 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070454
Bill No. 070454, an ordinance authorizing the Commissioner of Public Property behalf City of Philadelphia, to execute and deliver to the Philadelphia Authority for Industrial Development for nominal consideration a deed conveying fee simple title to certain parcels of land with the buildings and improvements thereon located in an area bounded by North Front Street, Wildey Street Leopard Street, and Richmond Street, for further conveyance at fair market value, all under certain terms and conditions.
Good morning again. For the record, this bill that I'm testifying on, Bill No. 070454, is the companion bill to Bill No. 070448. I'm here to testify in support of Bill No. 070454, authorizing me, as the Commissioner, to execute and deliver to PAID for nominal 139 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070454 consideration a deed conveying fee simple title to certain parcels of land with buildings and improvements located in an area bounded by North Front Street, Wildey Street, Leopard Street, Richmond Street, fur further conveyance at fair market value, all under certain terms and conditions. This bill will enable the City to convey this property to PAID to Gianni Pignetti at fair market value, with the net proceeds deposited in the General Fund. Mr. Pignetti plans to develop the property for residential housing. This bill replaces Bill 17 050379. The Department of Public Property supports this measure; and accordingly, I respectfully ask that Council approve Bill No. 070454. I also ask that the rules be suspended so that the ordinance may be passed upon the second reading at Council.
Thank you. 140 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070454 Any questions? (No questions.)
There being none, will the clerk please read the title of the next bill. I'm sorry. Councilman Rizzo?
We're going to take a two-second recess. (Short recess.) (Proceedings resume.)
I'm sorry, please proceed. * * * 141 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070455
Bill No. 070455, an ordinance authorizing the Commissioner of Public Property, on behalf of the City of Philadelphia, to enter into a sublease agreement with the Philadelphia Municipal Authority for the City's use of space located on the third floor of the Curtis Center, 601 Walnut Street, all under certain terms and conditions
I'm Joan Schlotterbeck, and I'm here in support of Bill No. 070455, an ordinance 15 authorizing me, as the Commissioner of Public Property, on behalf of the City, to enter into a sublease with the Philadelphia Municipal Authority for the City's use of space located on the third floor of the Curtis Center, 601 Walnut Street, all under certain terms and conditions. This bill will permit the City to sublease certain office spaces located at the Curtis Center for 142 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070455 location of the Board of Revision of Taxes Philadelphia, the Philadelphia Commission on Human Relations, and the Inspector General's Office. Public Property supports this measure; and accordingly, I respectfully ask that Council approve Bill No. 070455. I also ask that the rules be suspended so that the ordinance may be passed upon the second reading of Council. Thank you.
Thank you. Any questions of this witness on this bill by members of the committee? (No questions.)
There being none, would the clerk please read -- there's a sidebar question about why are they moving particularly, I guess, 143 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070455 the BRT, which is --
Well, 34 South 11th Street has sold. The owner is not interested in doing any really long-term deals. This presented itself as part of my overall, again, like movement of space and where people can be and how I can maximize space available and save money at the same time. So it's all a part of our plan.
Of the 144 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070455 sale?
I don't know. I don't even know if they've closed. Have they closed? No, it hasn't closed yet, but they did sell. Or they are selling, I should say.
You're welcome. Is there anyone else to testify on Bill No. 070455? (No response.)
I would -- just for the record, all of the tenants are very happy to be going there. Everybody's pleased with the move, so the board -- the BRT, they're all fine.
Okay. Thank you. Will the clerk please read the 145 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070455 title of Bill No. 070466. * * *
Bill No. 070466, an ordinance authorizing the Commissioner of Public Property, on behalf of the City of Philadelphia, to terminate and extinguish an easement to a three-foot-wide alleyway abutting the rear of several City-owned properties located at 2633-2655 West Sedgely Avenue and on the northwest side of West Sedgely Avenue and 2113-2121 North 27nd Street on the east side of North 27th Street.
Joan Schlotterbeck. I'm here today to testify some supportive Bill No. 070466, an ordinance authorizing me, as the Commissioner on behalf of the City, to terminate and extinguish an easement to a three-foot-wide alleyway abutting the rear of several City-owned properties located at 2633 to 2655 West Sedgely 146 6/4/07 - PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070466 Avenue on the northwest side of West Sedgely Avenue, and 2111 through 2121 North 27th Street on the east side of north 27th Street. This bill will permit all easement rights to the alleyway to be conveyed to the developer. Thomas L. Baldwin Senior Housing, LP, for rehabilitation for existing senior citizens developments, also called the Clara Baldwin Manor. Public Property supports this measure, and accordingly, I ask that City Council approve Bill No. 070466. I also ask that the rules be suspended so that the ordinance may be passed upon the second reading at Council. Thank you.
Thank you. Any questions of this witness on this particular bill? (No questions.)
Anyone else to testify on this bill? 147 6/4/07 - PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070466 (No response.)
There being none, will the clerk please read the title of the next bill. * * *
Bill No. 070468, an ordinance authorizing the Commissioner of Public Property, on behalf of the City of Philadelphia, to enter into an amendment to an existing sublease between the Philadelphia Municipal Authority and the City of Philadelphia for the City's use of certain office space located at Two Penn Center Plaza, under certain terms and conditions.
I'm here today to testify in support of Bill 20 No. 070468, an ordinance authorizing me, as the Commissioner of Public Property on behalf of City, to enter into an amendment to an existing sublease between Philadelphia Municipal Authority and the City of Philadelphia 148 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070468 for the use -- for the City's use of certain office located at Two Penn Center Plaza, under certain terms and conditions. This bill permits the City to amend to sublease to allow for expansion of the space for the Pension Board, located at two Penn Center. The Department supports this measure; and accordingly, I respectfully ask that Council approve Bill No. 070468. I also ask that the rules be suspended so that the ordinance may be passed upon the second reading of Council. Thank you.
Any questions of the witness for this particular bill? (No questions.)
There being none, will the clerk please read 149 6/4/07 PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070468 the title of the final bill, Bill No. 3 070273. * * *
Bill No. 6 070273, an ordinance authorizing the Commissioner of Public Property, on behalf of the City of Philadelphia, to enter into an agreement with the 21st Ward Athletic Association under which the City will lease to the Association certain parcels of land located in the 21st Ward of the City of Philadelphia and grant to the Association a related access easement, under certain terms and conditions.
I'm Joan Schlotterbeck, and I'm here today to testify in support of Bill No. 070273, an ordinance authorizing me, as the Commissioner of Public Property on behalf of the City, to enter into an agreement for the 21st Ward Athletic Association under which the City will lease to the Association certain 150 6/4/07 - PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070273 parcels of land located in the 21st Ward of the City of Philadelphia and grant to the Association a related access easement, all under certain terms and conditions. The bill will permit the City to continue to lease certain parcels to the Association, who previously had a 25-year lease with the City, which expired in September of '06 and was redrafted and commenced October of '06. The Association will continue to use the parcel as a public recreation facility. The Department supports this measure; and accordingly, I respectfully ask that Council approve Bill No. 070273. I also ask that the rules be suspended so that the ordinance may be passed upon the second reading of Council. Thank you.
Thank you. Any questions of this witness 151 6/4/07 - PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070273 on this bill? (No questions.)
Yeah. Commissioner, I just have one question: What's the term on that bill -- that lease for the 21st Ward?
October 1, '06; is that correct? Through... (Ms. Schlotterbeck confers off the record with Mr. Schwartz.)
Henry was just reminding me that we can cancel at any time in the future, with six months' notice that the Water -- it's a 152 6/4/07 - PUB PROP/PUB WORKS - BILL 070273 Water Department parcel, that if they have any reason to need it, we can terminate.
Thank you, Councilman. * * * 153 6/4/07 PUB. PROP./PUB. WORKS - PUBLIC MEETING
Okay. We will now proceed to the public meeting on the Committee of Public Property and Public Works. Bill No. 060111 will be held until Thursday, at 9:30 a.m. Councilman Kelly, can you please give me a motion on Bill 070273.
Mr. Chairman, I move that Bill No. 12 070273 be reported out of this committee with a favorable recommendation and also further move a suspension of the rules in order that this bill may be heard at the next session of Council. (Motion seconded.)
Those who approve? Those opposed? The ayes have it. Bill No. 23 070273 is reported out of committee with a favorable recommendation and a rules suspension as to allow for 154 6/4/07 PUB. PROP./PUB. WORKS - PUBLIC MEETING reading at the next session of Council. Bill No. 070304 has been held at the request of the sponsor. Councilman Greenlee, can you please give me a motion on Bill 7 No. 070337.
Mr. Chairman, I move that Bill 10 No. 070337 be reported out of this committee with a favorable recommendation and that the rules of Council be suspended to allow for first reading at the next session of Council. (Motion seconded.)
Those who approve? Those opposed? The ayes have it. Bill No. 20 070337 is reported out of committee with a favorable recommendation and a rules suspension as to allow for reading at the next session of Council. Councilwoman -- I'm sorry. For the record, Bill No. 070430 is 155 6/4/07 PUB. PROP./PUB. WORKS - PUBLIC MEETING being held until Wednesday's Public Property meeting at 11:30 a.m. Councilwoman Tasco, if I can ask for a motion on Bill No. 070342.
Oh, I'm sorry. That bill -- correction. Bill No. 070342 is being held at the request of the sponsor. Bill No. 070434 is also being moved to be held until Wednesday, 11:30 a.m. Councilwoman Tasco, I ask for a motion on Bill No. 070438.
Mr. Chairman, I move that Bill 19 No. 070438 be voted out of committee with a favorable recommendation and a recommendation that the rules of Council be suspended so as to allow for first reading at the next Council session. (Motion seconded.) 156 6/4/07 PUB. PROP./PUB. WORKS - PUBLIC MEETING
It has been moved and seconded. These approved? Those opposed? The ayes have it. Bill No. 070438 is reported out of committee with a favorable recommendation and a rules suspension so as to allow first reading at the next session of Council. Councilwoman Miller, could I please have a motion on Bill 14 No. 070446.
Okay. Mr. Chairman, I move that Bill 17 No. 070446 be reported out of this committee with a favorable recommendation, and I further move that the rules of Council be suspended so as to permit first reading at our next session. (Motion seconded.)
It's been moved and seconded. 157 6/4/07 PUB. PROP./PUB. WORKS - PUBLIC MEETING Those who approve? Those opposed? The ayes have it. Bill No. 070446 is reported out of committee with a favorable recommendation and with a rules suspension so as to allow first reading at the next session of Council. Councilman Kelly, a motion on Bill 070447, please.
Mr. Chairman, I move that Bill 14 No. 070447 be reported out of this committee with a favorable recommendation, and I further move for the suspension of the rules in order that this bill may be heard at the next session of Council. (Motion seconded.)
It's been moved and seconded. Those who approve? Those opposed? The ayes have it. 158 6/4/07 PUB. PROP./PUB. WORKS - PUBLIC MEETING Bill No. 070447 is reported out of committee with a favorable recommendation and a rules suspension so as to allow first reading at the next session of Council. Councilman Greenlee, a motion on Bill No. 070448, please.
Mr. Chairman, I move that Bill 11 No. 070448 be reported out of this committee with a favorable recommendation and that the rules of Council be suspended so as to allow for first reading at our next session of Council. (Motion seconded.)
It's been moved and seconded. Those that approve? Those opposed? The ayes have it. Bill No. 070448 is reported out of committee with a favorable recommendation and that the rules of 159 6/4/07 PUB. PROP./PUB. WORKS - PUBLIC MEETING Council suspended so as to allow for first reading at our next session of Council. Councilwoman Tasco, a motion on Bill No. 070452.
Mr. Chairman, I move that Bill No. 9 070452 be reported out of committee with a favorable recommendation and a request that the rules of Council be suspended so that this bill can be read at the next Council session. (Motion seconded.)
It's been moved and seconded. Those who approve? Those opposed? The ayes have it. Bill No. 070452 is reported out of committee with a favorable recommendation and a rules suspension so as to allow first reading at the next session of Council. Councilwoman Miller, a motion 160 6/4/07 PUB. PROP./PUB. WORKS - PUBLIC MEETING on Bill No. 070454, please.
Mr. Chairman, I move that Bill No. 5 070454 be reported out of this committee with a favorable recommendation, and I further move that the rules of Council be suspended so as to permit first reading at our next session. (Motion seconded.)
It's been moved and seconded. Those who approve? Those opposed? The ayes have it. Bill No. 070454 is reported out of committee with a favorable recommendation and a rules suspension so as to allow first reading at the next session of Council. Councilman Kelly, Bill No. 23 070455, please.
Mr. Chairman, I move that Bill No. 161 6/4/07 PUB. PROP./PUB. WORKS - PUBLIC MEETING 070455 be reported out of this committee with a favorable recommendation, and I further move for the suspension of the rules in order that this bill may be heard at the next session of City Council. (Motion seconded.)
It's been moved and seconded. Those who approve? Those opposed? The ayes have it. Bill No. 070455 is reported out of committee with a favorable recommendation and with a rules suspension so as to allow for reading at the next session Council. Councilman Greenlee, a motion on Bill No. 070466, please.
Mr. Chairman, I move that Bill No. 23 070466 be reported out of this committee with a favorable recommendation and that the rules of 162 6/4/07 PUB. PROP./PUB. WORKS - PUBLIC MEETING Council be suspended so as to allow for first reading at our next session of Council. (Motion seconded.)
It's been moved and seconded. Those who approve? Those opposed? The ayes have. It Bill No. 070466 is reported out of committee with a favorable recommendation and a rules suspension so as to allow first reading at the next session of Council. Councilwoman Tasco, a motion on Bill No. 070468, please.
Mr. Chairman, I move that Bill No. 20 070468 be reported out of committee with a favorable recommendation and that the rules of Council be suspended so as to allow for first reading at our next Council session. (Duly seconded.) 163 6/4/07 PUB. PROP./PUB. WORKS - PUBLIC MEETING
It's been moved and seconded. Those who approve? Those opposed? The ayes have. It Bill No. 070468 is reported out of committee with a favorable recommendation and a rules suspension so as to allow first reading at the next session of Council. Thank you very much. This concludes the public meeting on Public Property and Public Works. (Proceedings end at 12:40 p.m) * * * 164 C E R T I F I C A T E I HEREBY CERTIFY that the proceedings of the City of Philadelphia Council Committee on Public Property and Public Works are contained fully and accurately in the stenographic notes taken by me on Monday, June 4, 2007, and that this is a true and correct statement of same. __________________________________ JOSEPHINE CARDILLO Registered Professional Reporter (The foregoing certification of this transcript does not apply to any reproduction of the same by any means, unless under the direct control and/or supervision of the certifying reporter.)