And it was my standing way back in another lifetime that the Vacant Property Review Committee was put together for the purposes of expediting and moving properties, and it was Council's bill, to have a group of entities at the same table -- whether it was Public Property, PIDC, and at some point, PCDC was there -- in order for them to see things that came into public domain, figure out collectively its highest and best use and then dispose of them in a way that was beneficial both to the public and to the City. And now, we have that entity and the entity that I just heard you talk about. Can you explain the disposition process, the property disposition process in the City of Philadelphia for a 91 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379 layperson in plain speak?
And with that regard, we support the legislation, obviously, that Council passed, and we also support -- what's our bill number, 17500? UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: 16400.
16400, that certainly empowered the Vacant Property Review Committee to dispose of properties. It is -- Council created that legislation because we needed it to be able to service members in our community, service the homeowners, service people in need with side yards, to be able to come up with a way to give properties out nominally, to help develop neighborhoods. And we believe in that. We're having a hard time getting things moved, and that's in keeping with -- I'm sure that's part of the intent of this question as to why it takes so long, why aren't these moving. Now, we're reasonable people. 92 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379 All of us have been involved in development for a lot of years; and even our new folks. As we all know, Councilman Jones was head of PCDC. And we all know about Councilwoman Quiñones's role in her area, in doing development. She's headed many groups in education and housing, which is one of the reasons she's here. And Councilwoman Miller and I have been dealing with housing in our area even as Councilpeople for many, many years. So we understand when there are legitimate concerns about holding land transfers, land conveyances, holding things up. But, honestly, we don't see why it takes long, why our VPRC can't work, why people have to wait for appraisals. I remember years ago -- one year, I had eight hearings under former Councilman Street in June. Between May and June, we had eight hearings to deal 93 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379 with these kinds of issues. And at that time, we were told the City was hiring appraisers, that was the problem. But here we are again with things stopped and with my colleague asking for a process to answer the questions of what happens with properties. And inherent in that answer that's (indiscernible) to deal with it, I know that the Science Center, I know that the Morman Church, I know that these projects with people with means, I know you can't respond technically because they're with the Sign Center, they're in litigation. But since we -- and this is a long question, but you can answer it. But since we have to introduce, by resolution, legislation that will inveigh you to convey it to somebody else, why fight projects that we support in the beginning in our areas when you got to come back to us to reconvey? If you take 94 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379 it back, we're not going to reconvey it to somebody we don't believe in. And so, we don't understand that, nor do we understand why there's still an issue about properties going to the board before they come to us, going to the RDA Board before they come to us in areas, because we know what communities will accept and what they won't. So all of that is the same part of Councilman Jones's question.
But we can repeat it all if we need to. If I gave you too many pieces at once, we can repeat it all.
That's okay. What I will do is, I'll answer the part of Councilman Jones' question that relates to the Redevelopment Authority, and then I'll allow the folks who run VPRC to answer the part that relates to Public Property. 95 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379 So I can tell you that -- your question was about disposition, right? That when we -- right now, we have any number of ways that that we'll dispose of a property. But, basically, the Redevelopment Authority disposes of a property at fair market value unless it's for an affordable housing project; in which case, we can dispose of it for nominal value. The way try to establish fair market value is either through an appraisal or through putting it out, say, up on the market or -- so we can either -- we now list all of our property on our website. So if someone called us up and said, Hey, I want to buy, you know, 1234 Market Street, what would that cost? we would either ask them to pay for an appraisal. We'd go and get an appraisal and then tell them what the property costs. 96 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379 Or the other way we can do it is, we are starting to think about putting properties up on the multiple listing service and then seeing what people offer us by doing it. So we just sold a property, for example, on Hancock Street, an historic property in Old City, that had been appraised at a certain number. It wasn't moving, it sat there for about two years. And so, what we did was, we put it up on the Website. And the number came in a little bit lower. But we felt like that was the legitimate fair market value for that property. And it's now being rehabbed. And it was for about $350,000, so we got a substantial amount of money. So, that's essentially the way the Redevelopment Authority disposes of property. I want to address Councilwoman Blackwell's -- sort of two questions I think were in there. 97 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379 One is, I agree with you. I think that we're in agreement that we should be sharing this information with you earlier in the process. I think, when I came into the Redevelopment Authority, we were -- we got lots of complaints from developers, I'll just say, or from folks out trying to buy parcels who said that they thought that sometimes the process of having to go to Council slowed things down. So, frankly, we took a look at that whole process, but I think there are ways now that we can make sure that it moves, while still sending it to you guys earlier in the process.
We don't slow it down. Your department slows it down, not us. We have the people who ask us.
Like I've said, many times, back in 1999, we had a PowerPoint, we tried to market our area. We had 30 developers who wanted to come in to get properties.
That's when we could -- VPRC could give properties nominally. They could go for tax credits, and it worked.
Now, to try to do it in reverse, I mean, we don't know what the board may try to agree to. And then we've got zoning issues that we have to go to communities about and all of that. We're clear on what our neighborhoods want. We do not slow the process down; it is your department that slows the process down, not us. 99 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379
Or you who slow the process down. The people who work for you aren't trying to slow it down, but you won't free stuff up and let things go. It is you who slow us down, not -- your departments. You have people who work for you, people who work for the City we worked with for many, many years, 12 years, 30 years, 35 years. We kind of 13 all know how to work together. We accept 14 the rules that we need to accept. We're 15 okay. 16 But you at the helm have to 17 agree to let things go and let us work 18 and let us do the things that we need to 19 do to improve our districts and improve 20 the quality of life in our city. We can do it if you let us.
That's why we're here at this hearing. Councilman Jones, she said she 100 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379 was answering the question. And then Councilwoman Miller.
You kind of got passionate about this issue, which I appreciate, Madam Chair. My question was more germane to a couple of specifics.
One, if we have a half dozen agencies that have the ability to hold and/or acquire property ranging from Philadelphia Housing Development Corporation, Redevelopment Authority, the Philadelphia Industrial Development Corporation, Public Property, PHA, the Sheriff, and a sundry number of others, what is confusing to me and this body and probably dreadfully confusing to a community person and/or developer, God forbid, in a recession, what door to go through, what process to begin, and how to do that. So my question becomes: If you want to develop a parcel, A, in a org 101 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379 chart that we talked about, in a process evaluation review technique, where does it begin? Does it begin at sheriff's sale? does it begin in the Vacant Property Review Committee? does it begin talking to your Councilperson? If you were answering a developer, not just for your agency but for the City of Philadelphia, is there a PERT chart that someone with moderate intelligence can look to, to gain access to property information today?
All right. So there is no predictability, there is no transparency because it -- and not to say that in a nefarious way, but there is no openness to how to acquire and have interest in properties in the City of Philadelphia. So it's left to the silos to determine. And if you're lucky enough to walk through one door, there it is. But 102 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379 if your misfortune is to call 4-1-1, you could be on a merry-go-round until the next recession. So the point -- I understand that you guys have taken this on, and I think it's an important thing to let this committee know how to try to make sense of this. And I wanted to know where we are in the process of providing the public with a -- or developers or people with engineering degrees on how this property acquisition disposition process in the City of Philadelphia works. And I know you were working on it, and I wanted to get a update on it.
Well, yeah, I share your frustration. It is a source of just wonder to me that we are where we are today. I agree with you. I can tell you that the Redevelopment Authority has pretty good data. We are -- you know, we're trying to work with the other land-holding agencies. We have a pretty good 103 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379 relationship with PHDC. As you know, the Mayor appoints that boards, I sit on that board, Deborah McCulloch sits on that board. So we are now in the process of putting together a pretty good list that PHDC has developed. And there's no reason that I believe, by the end of this year, which, I think, gets to Councilwoman Quiñones's point, that in the interim, there are things we ought to do. I think there's no reason that by the end of this year we couldn't have a single list at least of the Redevelopment Authority, PHDC, and Public Property properties posted on the City's website, with a phone number or someone that somebody should call to say, I want to buy one of these. Because your point is that a developer doesn't want to have to go to three different agencies, and they shouldn't have to. And I think that's an interim solution that we could put 104 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379 together, because we've got the technology to put together. And some of it is just a question of staffing that Public Property's staff and our staff would have to work together, but I think that's certainly an accomplishable goal. So that's all I can tell you, but I don't want to speak for Public Property because they're here and they should speak for themselves.
I happen to know, Madam Chairwoman, that there are developers that come to Philadelphia from New York and surrounding areas with a interest and intrigue as to how our property values are so much lower than Washington, D.C.'s, so much lower than New York's, and we are strategically located in between the two, that a lot of people are looking for North Philly to be the fifth borough of New York based on the transit ability to get to that area. But there is a constant frustration of 105 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379 how to plug in. And if we are in a recession and if we are looking in the couches for quarters to balance budgets with 6 million here and 20 million there short, 7 these are ways that we can build our way 8 out of our condition. 9 And it is frustrating when 10 people do come to us, not for any other 11 personal interests other than they are 12 interested in my district. They say, 13 Well, how do I get started? who do I talk 14 to? where is the line? where do I bid? 15 Those kinds of things. 16 And, again, we have to have a 17 city process, because when I start 18 explaining to them alphabet soup -- PHD, 19 RDA, PHA -- I mean, their eyes glaze 20 over, and they pack their bags and move to Camden. And I'm saying that we have to address this. Councilwoman Blackwell makes a excellent point. We're in the third year of this administration, third year of 106 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379 this administration. If you're talking about next year, well, there's four years of -- you know, I used to go at PCDC to ribbon-cuttings all the time; it was one of the favorite part of my job. And we have slowed that down almost to nonexistent; I haven't used those scissors in quite some time, and I'm wondering if I ever will if we don't start churning the pump. Thank you, Madam President.
Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. You know, I just want to say that I have the same concerns that you've expressed. And, certainly, I think the public needs to be educated on how to purchase properties. I had this discussion last week with Joan Schlotterbeck regarding the surplus property, and I just think the 107 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379 public needs to be more aware of how to get a property and what the steps are for acquisition. But I also just want to make some of my own comments. I'm glad to hear, Ms. Gillen, that you decided that it's best to talk to City Council early on in the process rather than later. When did you make that decision? I mean, how long in terms of time?
We've been sort of inching in that direction, but a couple weeks ago, after talking to some Councilmembers and to folks in the Redevelopment Authority.
Okay. You know, one of the things that I keep hearing -- and I'm very frustrated. I've been here for a while and, you know, out in the community before I came here, was involved in development and building. And at this point, I'm frustrated. Someone called me the other day and wanted to know what they should 108 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379 do to acquire properties. I said, you know, I haven't had it in so long, I forgot. And I feel that way. Who is in charge here? Who reports to RDA? Who reports to you? Does OHCD report to you?
Okay, 'cause it seems like, you know, there's some influence going on, things changed. We've been working -- I've been here 14 years, and I've been working with OHCD and PHDC and all of these agencies for a number of years. And it changed two years ago, it changed when you came. And I thought that actually everybody -- I thought that you were influencing other departments because they report to you.
Okay. 109 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379 One of the things that in terms of holding up development, I get calls all the time, people actually saying what Habiba said, that she cannot get a return phone call. I get calls from developers that say that they call you in particular and cannot get a return phone call. So for anyone to even imply that City Council would hold any development up is just a little bit -- a little bit crazy, because we're interested in rebuilding our neighborhoods. We would not be there to hold up any development. One of the other rumors that I hear is that a lot of the new people that you've hired think that we don't know what we're doing, and some of the other parts of that comment I'll have the same -- I'll have to save it and have a private discussion about some of the other comments I've made -- I've heard about Councilmembers. You know, we were here, we've 110 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379 been here a long time, most of us. I think you and Maria and Curtis came at the same time. But the rest of us have been here for a while. And most of us, our only interests is in developing neighborhoods. Rays of Hope. I drove through Belfield Avenue last night on my way home from an event, and I showed my girlfriend a site there, and we also looked at that entire block. There's so much work to be done on that block. If we can get this project started, we're hoping it will kick-start other interests. I mean, people have the nerve to have a for-sale sign up at a house that looks like it's falling down and a for-rent sign. So, you know, we want this done, we want to get it done as soon as possible. We don't want next winter to come and can't break ground because it's too cold and the ground is too hard. I don't know the reason for that. 111 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379 But I'm just perplexed over -- I feel like I'm in a fight, in a struggle, and I don't want to be like that. I didn't come here to fight, I didn't come here to be frustrated. Something's not happening right. And we have to move this rebuilding-our-neighborhood agenda forward. I don't want to fight you. I don't want to fight any housing agencies. So whatever the holdup is -- and if we all need to sit down maybe together again and get it done, we need to sit down and discuss this stuff, air it out. We are going to be here. Whether the RDA and its staff likes it or not, we will be here. Our interest is in rebuilding neighborhoods. And we need you. We should be partners, we should not have to struggle like this; it doesn't make sense. If I call you, call me back. 112 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379 If I e-mail you, e-mail me back.
Well, Councilwoman, I do want to say that I'm surprised to hear anybody say that I wouldn't call or e-mail anyone 'cause I --
No, ma'am. I respectfully but firmly disagree with that. I have to say that I have a pretty firm rule that I return all phone calls and e-mails within hours. 15
I'm just saying 22 that that is the one issue that I'm going 23 to take issue with, number one. 24 And, number two, I do want to point out that this administration and 113 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379 the Redevelopment Authority last summer went after some competitive federal monies, some stimulus money, called the Neighborhood Stabilization Program, a very competitive program. And my staff and I, you know, sort of worked very hard with the Office of Housing to apply for those funds. And we were able to target three neighborhoods for those funds and two of the neighborhoods are -- one is in the Third District, Mantua, which is Councilwoman Blackwell's neighborhood. And one is in your district, in the Nicetown neighborhood. And, with all due respect, we've done a lot. I mean that money just started -- you know, was just freed up in February, so we haven't started spending it yet. But I do think that we are trying to work as good partners with you. I think we're trying to bring resources to your neighborhoods because we 114 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379 recognize, and the Mayor recognizes, that those are neighborhoods that have lots of troubles, lots of vacancy, lots of dilapidated housing and the need for affordable housing. And that is one reason that we targeted your neighborhoods. So I want to keep working with you as a partner and to try to address your concerns. And I think we're doing that. But I did want to remind you that we have tried to bring additional resources to your neighborhood in addition to the ones that we've been discussing today.
Well, you don't have to remind me; I think I sent you a letter that stated I appreciate the additional resources that are being brought to the district. And, yes, we did work together very well on that NSP2, with Nicetown being one of the target areas, because my next actual e-mail to 115 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379 you is going to ask you, when will the RFP going out? because I noticed -- I believe you sent the RFP out for Point Breeze, so I wanted to know what was going on with NSP2 and the Nicetown project. And those are things we work good on. But then, all of a sudden, something else happens, like the 21st and Venango. You know, like when do they get it, when do they get it? We've been working in these neighborhoods for a long time. We have priorities too, and maybe that's where we butt heads. You have priorities, we have priorities. Let's sit down and discuss the priorities and agree on what they should be, okay? And I do -- and I'll say it publicly again. I do agree and I do appreciate the fact that additional resources have been added in the 8th District. Some of our neighborhoods are still in dire need, even after NTI. And 116 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379 there's a lot of work that needs to be done, a lot of work that needs to be done. And we want to do this in a honest way, honest way. But -- so, you know, I'm not going to dispute you on that because I agree with that, but then on the other hand, something else will happen.
Well, I agree. I just want you to be aware we are aware of the needs of your district. Absolutely, absolutely.
Thank you very much. Thank you. With regard to urban farms, you 117 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379 know I've had an issue for several years on the Mill Creek Farms when you mentioned Mantua. You know, we have -- it's in that area, the Mill Creek Farms on Haverford Avenue, where we have the opportunity to change the land to have the farm and the neighbors agree to have a farm next to Sulzberger School, where can't build on land due to the creek and have that land be used for low-income public housing, a block square. Why won't you consider allowing us to do it? Or maybe you've changed your mind. Why can't we have a block square of low-income housing built by PHA as well as a block for the garden that is so used by homeless people, by neighbors, by everybody? Why can't we have both? Why do we have to keep holding up on that? And we also -- PHA was even willing to do the borings, but they -- you wouldn't even let 'em do the borings to prove their case. Why can't we have a 118 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379 farm and a housing development? Why can't we have both?
Well, Councilwoman, all I would say is that that's a larger land-use question. And my understanding is that it's -- that's in the Mayor's Office, and I had thought you and the Mayor had discussed that; is that not correct?
And the people who have said they want to keep it there don't live in -- I don't know where they live. The neighbors across the street from the project are fine with going a few blocks down to Sulzberger. But the people who don't want to move it are people who do farms and move around the City or wherever they move to, but I don't know them. And we have the opportunity to 119 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379 have a housing development and satisfy the other need that is wonderful too. They do grow vegetables and give it to PhilAbundance and various homeless projects. It's a great project, but where we can have two, I don't know why we have to keep having it listed as an unresolved issue. We would really like to -- we'd like to be able to have housing there, that four-block square. Do you know what it's like in the winter, when it's just all weeds and dirt and nothing? I mean, why can't we, when we can make the -- And not only that, but Sulzberger has a school and they have a watershed program with the students, and this would expand it because it's right across the street, next to the proposed Lucien E. Blackwell Community Center. And we would like to -- you know, we've been asking, you know, for this since the beginning of this administration. 120 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379
And I'm going to have to just check in with the Mayor's Office, because my understanding is that's the place where this decision was being made. So all I can tell you is that I will check with them.
I mean, this issue only came up because we were at the end of the garden agreement --
But these are issues that frustrate us and make us not understand why we -- you know, why we have these kinds of problems. We shouldn't have these problems. We know -- we're elected to know what people want in our areas, what people want in our neighborhoods. And we certainly are concerned when we can't get 121 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379 these -- get these issues resolved. I know we mentioned the NTI Program, and I know that's a big issue with my colleague Councilman Clarke, who had to step out for an opening; he'll be back. But we would like to -- we need our acquisition, we need money for our projects. And what -- where are we with the NTI issue?
Well, as I said earlier, the process has started 'cause it's really -- it's cranking up and it's at the OHCD stage right now, so I'll let... (Deborah McCulloch comes forward.) MS. McCOLLOCH: Good morning. Deborah McCulloch, Director of Housing.
Good morning. MS. McCOLLOCH: On the NTI funding, as I testified last week at the Con Plan hearing, some of the money has 122 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379 been released and is going forward now; that's sort of what we're calling on the program side, so that additional funding has been made available for the Basic Systems Repair Program and the Adaptive Modifications Program so that cases can move through, using NTI funding. On the acquisition side, we're prepared to start moving that forward also. I met with each Councilmember last fall and reviewed what was in the pipeline for each district. In each case, there were some questions on both sides. Sometimes some Councilmembers needed to give me a list of priorities; in some cases, there were questions that OHCD or the Redevelopment Authority had to answer. I am reviewing all of those letters now. You'll be getting your sort of updated letter from that meeting to say, okay, this is the list, let's look at it again and make sure this is what you want. 123 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379 In some cases, I have gotten responses from Council people but not from everyone. So everyone will get a letter so that we're back all sort of at the same place. In some cases, meetings have been scheduled already to start reviewing that. They're all going to be scheduled as we get through this week. I've got to get through the Con Plan hearings this week, and then we'll get those off and going. And and over the summer, we'll be off to the races to finalize the list. And then the Redevelopment Authority is the agency that actually carries out the acquisitions. As they're moving forward this, committee that Terry mentioned earlier, IRT, which stands for Interagency Review Team, will be reviewing each of those lists to see what properties are on the list. The IART Committee is composed of representatives of the Redevelopment 124 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379 Authority, OHCD, the Planning Commission, Commerce to make these -- for the new ones to make recommendations to the Chief of Staff, who's the point person on the -- approving the acquisitions. So you'll be giving us the lists, we'll be reviewing them through IART, making recommendations to the Chief of Staff, and then we'll be ready to roll. We have to, as you know, align each property with a funding source, that there are different funding sources for the NTI -- of different types of NTI bond proceeds, so we have to ensure that properties are aligned with the proper funding source in order to move them forward so that we don't have the sorts of issues that we had in the past.
I have a 125 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379 question, Deborah. And, again, you know, hindsight. I guess the issue is, you -- we -- this Council want to improve a concept plan that will impact NTI and our NTI planning. So on the one hand, we're going to go through this review process that's going to be post your Consolidated Plan approval. And I'm just wondering, where do those things come together? because one thing may leverage the other. So, for instance, in some cases, what my pipeline is -- and my list hasn't changed; if anything, it's grown since we last met. Some of that requires NTI acquisition so that then you could do, you know, some CDBG funding and so forth. So I guess I'm asking you, what's going to be the timeline on that? 'cause I feel like we've been here before and we've had this conversation before. So are we going to say 30 days? You're saying you're going to get a 126 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379 letter to us when, before we approve the Consolidated Plan or after? MS. McCOLLOCH: The letter will not come before the Consolidated Plan process. The Consolidated Plan -- well, the Consolidated Plan is still in committee, so it needs to be passed out of committee --
Point of view, Madam Chair. Madam Chair, point of view.
And in your mind, what's the deadline for the Consolidated Plan? MS. McCOLLOCH: The deadline is June 17th.
Why? 127 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379 MS. McCOLLOCH: Because that's last day of City Council hearings, and the Consolidated Plan must be submitted to HUD no later than August 15th.
And we've never submitted a consolidated plan after August? MS. McCOLLOCH: We have never submitted a consolidated plan after August; and by statute, it must be submitted by August 15th.
Is there any way that we can get a sense from you based on those lists we gave in the fall, prior to the Consolidated Plan? MS. McCOLLOCH: Get a sense of them?
We gave 128 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379 you a list of pipelines of what we wanted to do. I guess my issue becomes that because we've held up the NTI, a lot of this stuff was dependent on several different things. And I just want to know at what point that comes together in the summer, 'cause, again, we have the October deadline of tax-credit deals for folks who are doing stuff independent of us. So I just feel like, you know, what's your timeline? Can you guys say in the next 30 days, this is what we're going to do; in the next 60 days, this is what we're going to do; this is going to be the point person, and this is how we're going to move forward? MS. McCOLLOCH: I can say to you that, certainly, by the end of June, I will have reviewed all of the information that I have and be scheduling. In some cases, another meeting may need to be scheduled with the City Council representative; in some 129 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379 cases, we may not need a meeting because what whatever we have is what we have.
Mm-hmm. MS. McCOLLOCH: And so, we would be able to begin to move those forward. I just -- each district may have a different list and may have a different set of --
But the problem becomes that even for us, as we begin to spend the NTI money, unless we have access to staff to tell us a range of some of the land acquisition pieces we're putting together -- sort of like if we wait for the one meeting, I just feel like there's a whole bunch of work that we could be doing prior to finalizing that, that we've not been able to do because staff has not been available to us to sit down and say, Okay, we're bundling this parcel. You know, give us some estimated numbers so that we can move forward. So I'm feeling a little 130 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379 apprehensive that we're delaying and delaying and delaying. And I'd like to get at least some sense that we can move some of those. MS. McCOLLOCH: I'm sorry, Councilwoman. Staff -- I'm not sure, when you say staff hasn't been available, which staff you're referring to.
Well, mainly from the RDA's perspective to sit down and start looking at what are going to be the market value on some of these things as we bundle stuff. There's a whole technical piece to this. MS. McCOLLOCH: Okay.
You know, we want to be ready. We've met with all of our CDCs, we know what all the pipelines are, we know the land what are the lands that we want to bundle. We need to begin to meet with the legal teams to begin to look at how much are these parcels going to cost, what are the projects, and so forth. 131 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379 I just feel like if we have to wait to go to the top to the come back to the bottom to go to the top to the come back to the bottom, there's a lot of time that's being spent there. So can we get some agreement that staff -- and I don't know how it's going to be coordinated in terms of staff from OHCD and RDA because, again, we haven't had clarity around who's taking the lead or how that's being coordinated. This is the first time I'm hearing about the intergroup. But we need to be able to take this in front of somebody that begins to work through some of that process.
Yeah. I think that we're ready to start that work now. I mean, I think that in -- we're not going to hold up all ten Council Districts for one or two; you know what I'm saying? So I think we're ready, especially on the Council Districts where 132 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379 we feel like the Council list is pretty much agreed on and everybody sort of knows what the goal is at least. I think we've got RDA staff ready to start doing the technical work as you describe it now, appraisals and title issues and things like that. So I think this is going to be an iterative process. I don't think it's going to be where every single -- it's not going to be, nor was it in the past, that every project went on the same timeline.
I think it's a constant coordination, and everything's got to go, and I think we've got to get these projects moving as we can get them moving. And we'll stop and take snapshots probably on a quarterly basis and say, Where are we? and how's spending going? and how's this Council District's projects going? 133 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379 But I think that's the way we see it. So we're prepared to start now. I just want to make sure that's clear.
So what does that mean? That means your staff will sit down with my staff?
We have been ready -- (Indiscernible; parties talking over each other.) MS. McCOLLOCH: Actually, we have a meeting scheduled already. (Indiscernible; parties talking over each other.)
I just feel like there's -- 134 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379
-- a certain amount of work at our level, and there's a certain amount of work that my staff could be --
... even as it relates to vetting some of this stuff --
Do you hear that, Jennifer? MS. McCOLLOCH: -- particular case, your staff meeting has already been scheduled. 135 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379
Thank you very much. Now, we have RDA's commitment that when people come to you, you won't take it to the board without coming to the Council people.
Okay. Now, let me ask another question. With regard to publicly-owned properties, we want to bring up the issue that some property under RDA ownership, PHDC or PHA, that we will consider all of those properties without selling bits of 'em off, because sometimes these entities want to buy it for a big project, or would consider it. So we need to -- we need -- and that's a Public Property issue as well, that we will ask Ms. Schlotterbeck that we look at properties in one area, so if 136 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379 they're publicly-owned, we can have one project as opposed to them possibly being sold off or doled out, and then we're stuck. So do you agree with that?
I certainly agree that's the goal. Obviously, I can't bind those other agencies, so that's above my pay grade.
Well, the others are easy to work with, Ms. Gillen.
We've been asking a lot of questions. Do we have more questions?
Yes. Let's -- I'd like to go back if I may, Madam Chair.
And then we'll ask Public Property, we'll bring them up next.
Madam Chair, I'd like to ask some questions. 137 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379
Thank you. So my colleagues will ask questions, and then we'll ask Ms. Schlotterbeck to come forward.
I want to understand kind of this appraisal situation 'cause we've been doing this desktop appraisals, and I think Councilman Jones alluded to this earlier. The radius in which we're doing comparables -- and I have a case right now and it's actually in front of Public Property. We need to agree on an appraisal process for the City-runs. I know that -- and when I -- quasi-City, PHDC, at least Public Property and RDA; I know PHA has its own process, they got to get federal approval for their disposition. Because what happens is, in certain neighborhoods where it abuts -- for instance, everything south of Lehigh abuts Fishtown and Northern Liberties. You do a desktop appraisal, there's a 138 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379 two-mile radius, and I'm getting a comp that comes from Northern Liberties, which is just ridiculous. You know, we've asked for reconsiderations. Again, these are the ones that are caught up in, I'm sure, Clare Arbruster's desk. We got to come up with a better way of saying what's an actual comp and not. I'd rather have a comp from Southwest Philadelphia that's my reality versus these Northern Liberties and Fishtown appraisals. What are our legal caveats? And ultimately, what is the level of discretion we have on those?
Right. And we're dealing with one that is in, I would say, on the edge of Kensington right now that has the exact same problem, where we know the appraisal is too high, we know they're comparing it to Northern Liberties. It's making the deal not workable. 139 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379 And the problem is that the RDA is required to sell properties basically within appraisals, so we've got our lawyers looking at this very issue right now, to figure out how do we make realistic adjustments for neighborhoods because neighborhood boundaries could --
But what are we telling our appraiser? I mean, we hire them, and we say, Hey we want an appraisal that's fair?
Well, there are standard guidelines in a appraisers use. And, unfortunately, they don't necessarily -- they -- you know, it's much art as science, as we're finding out. So we -- you know, what we have done is, we've gone back and said to them, for instance, We know that you're comparing this to properties that are going to be sold for housing purposes, but this is a non-housing use.
Mm-hmm. 140 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379
So can you do an appraisal based on that. So there are certain ways that we can give the appraisers realistic directions or better directions that we haven't done in the past. So we're trying to do that to see if that's getting the appraisals to be more realistic.
And in one case, we had an appraisal come in, you know, based on Northern Liberties. You know, one is commercial.
It should not be acceptable. And moreover, Councilwoman, the other problem that we're seeing is, lots of appraisers' appraisals are coming in 141 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379 high because they're comparing it to folks who are speculating.
And under the Redevelopment Authority, as you know, we're saying to people, No, you've got to go and develop it now. Well, that lowers of value of the property.
And the appraiser, in the past, has not taken that into consideration. So we are absolutely trying to figure out a way to tweak the appraisal process so that it is more realistic, it's producing more consistent numbers, both high and low. Again, as I said, we've seen appraisals come in both too high and too low, which makes us concerned. We're looking at the way other places do it, because this isn't just a Philly issue, so we're trying to figure out, what does Boston? what does 142 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379 Baltimore do? what do other places do? And how we do it so that it's not subject to mishandling, you know, so that it's not subject to somebody giving an appraiser a wink and a nod and saying, Hey, give me a low number, because that's -- you know, we don't want that either. So it's really hard. This has turned out to be way harder than I thought it would be. But we are -- you know, all I can tell you is, we're working on it. And anytime any of you get an appraisal that you think is out of whack, we --
We have been sending them back. And it leads me to another issue that's been one that's difficult, because every time we bring it up, there's this notion that we're doing something bad, and it's the ability to give folks sweat equity. You know, we set up processes 143 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379 where, you know, we've given people urban garden agreements and they now want to buy them. And these appraisals are coming back at -- you know, so high. And there's, like, this reluctancy to say -- and we've done it before. You know, we've done sweat equity before; that's where the whole $1 house program came in, and people had to put in -- You know, I can't understand why we can't say there's a value to the fact that people kept these properties clean for all these years. Many of them did improvements. And that's complicated.
To me, it's not complicated. If you maintained it for ten years, you know, it costs us a thousand dollars to clean a lot. This person has kept this lot clean for 20 years, you know. If we had cleaned it in our normal vacant lot, they'd have put 144 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379 in -- we'd have spent $20,000 potentially on that lot. Why is it so, you know, out of the norm to say we're going to do, you know, a 50 percent credit to these folks for maintaining it?
Right, yeah. And I haven't thought about that as much, but it ought to be a problem that we should be able to figure out. I agree.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, Councilwoman. Good afternoon now. I just wanted to first follow up on the questioning of Councilwoman Sanchez with respects to appraisals. And we actually had a similar problem up in some areas up and around the Strawberry Mansion community, where we were looking at values; and frankly speaking, the appraisals they were valuing, they were appraisals based on property at 15th and Cecil B. Moore, which were Temple -- people were purchasing lots to build 145 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379 student housing, so you know those appraisals out of whack. But what we looked at -- and never got to implement it because the market tanked -- is, if you do an appraisal and you standardize the appraisal process, and the market value is what the market value is based on the appraisal, but in a case where the sales value of that particular project won't make -- won't -- will not allow the project to move forward because the value of the acquisition is too costly to accommodate the development, we looked at a possibility that if you put a soft second or third mortgage that amortizes over a period of time, so if the person -- we want to do affordable housing or, you know, workforce housing that doesn't have a deep subsidy, that person buys the property, but you sell it for, say, 50 percent, and the remaining 50 percent amortizes over a period of time if that person agrees to stay in the 146 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379 house. So, therefore, as it relates to the purchase price, the deal works because the purchase price is not so high that it won't -- that it will support the construction loan and the mortgage. We actually think that that's a process that works. It allows you to keep a standardized appraisal process so that, as you said earlier, Ms. Gillen, people aren't winking and saying lower to appraisal, because that's not a real value. But it gives the government the ability -- and we did the research; it is actually allowed under the statute to give that -- the rest of that sales price as a soft second or a soft third, depending on what position you would like to have that in your mortgage. So, therefore, you sell it at a reasonable amount, the deal works. That person has a commitment to stay in that property for a period of time. It stops 147 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379 the speculation, 'cause if that person sells the property, that 50 percent kicks in immediately at the close, so they have to immediately pay the remainder of that purchase price. So it gives you an opportunity to work a deal, but it also makes sure that you have the appraisal process in a standard way and also gives you an opportunity, in the event that that person does not comply with that agreement, to recapture that additional 50 percent. So that's just one thought. And we were actually ready to proceed, but the market tanked, and we didn't get a chance to implement it, but it made sense.
All right. Well, we'll take a look at it. I mean, anything that we think makes sense, I mean, because this has been an area of great frustration for everyone, I think, and I'm open to all suggestions on this. 148 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379
Yeah. Well, we're actually -- as we proceeded, we've actually been driving up the cost of our own acquisition process.
So the government is probably paying more than anybody else in the City for land, because we have to pay the maximum amount --
-- in addition to putting money in the court. So we're driving those values up in the neighborhoods. And, frankly speaking, they're not realistic.
I just want to get a question 'cause I'm a numbers guy. I know we want to do things differently and we're looking at other cities and other states, and we're working on systems. But at the end of the day, it's 149 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379 always been my belief that housing production -- in particular, affordable housing -- is about the numbers, providing as many opportunities to build affordable housing as possible. And I think that's what we all should be here to facilitate. So what I would like to ask you, Miss McCulloch, is if you can give us analysis -- not very detailed, but just on the bottom line, what are the numbers in terms of the number of units that we have funded both in rental and in homeownership for the last six years? MS. McCOLLOCH: Total?
Total -- no, I want 'em broken down by year, though. How many units were funded and how many units were completed is not really at issue 'cause that takes a long time. I just need to know how many units we've funded over the last six years. 150 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379 MS. McCOLLOCH: Okay.
'Cause I think that ultimately, at the end of the day, our ability to do that and position ourselves to take advantage of leveraging PHFA or Federal Home Loan Bank or any of the other funding entities is most important. And I'm a little concerned that I'm not seeing the level of production as we move ahead. Fortunately enough, Councilman Greenlee and I just left for a groundbreaking. It wasn't even affordable housing, Councilwoman; it was market-rate housing.
But it was in a community in Francisville, where we had done a significant amount of affordable housing. And the reality is that that market-rate housing now works because of the investment over the years. And Miss McCulloch and Scott, you all know 'cause you've been involved 151 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379 in a very aggressive way. Half a block away, on Poplar Street, affordable housing is coming up out of the ground; Councilwoman Blackwell is seeing the development. And it was a gentleman, a development team; they're building market-rate housing, and the only thing we had to do to facilitate that was to assist 'em in zoning and, you know, pull the appropriate community groups together. So I'm very concerned. It's a good thing. I'm very concerned about the numbers, 'cause at the end of the day, if we're not here to facilitate the building of affordable housing, then why are we here? I mean, it's just -- You know, I was with the Mayor Saturday, up on Germantown Avenue, looking at a development, Warnock Place. And we were up on the roof. The senior citizen development had a green roof sitting there, and it was wonderful. And the people there were so happy and 152 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379 thankful to have an opportunity to have affordable housing that was quality housing. So I think that that should be our primary focus. So with all of that, I just want to say that I'm a little concerned about -- and if I didn't hear this 'cause I was not here -- this process, as it relates to being in the position to meet the October timeline, as Councilwoman Sanchez said. We have tax credit submissions due in October. It will conceivably be -- and I hope I'm wrong. The possibility is it's the last time we'll have a friendly governor in place -- a friendly government; I'm not going to say "governor." Mr. Hudson is somebody that we've worked with all the years. And he's very, very receptive to Philadelphia-based projects. So my understanding is, the way this works, we have to be in a position to show site control. So that October 153 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379 deadline, particularly as it relates to PHFA, will require that we have site control. So if do not facilitate the acquisition process as quickly as possible, 'cause you now say that that process won't start till after the comp grant, that: One, we won't be in a position to show site control, which is critical. Two, the way the projects are awarded -- 'cause, contrary to popular belief, Councilpeople don't actually select funding for projects. I know most people think we get to decide what's financed; that's just not the way it works. So understanding the fact that you all have a process where you would determine what projects get funded, and given the way the process currently works, they may not coincide with what Councilmembers are interested in having acquired to facilitate a project down the line. 154 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379 How do you -- do you see my concern about the possibility where those two things may not... MS. McCOLLOCH: I haven't received confirmation that the PHFA tax credit applications will be due in October; but if that's the case, then we're going to have to deal with that deadline.
I'm only repeating what the director told me. MS. McCOLLOCH: Okay. I'm just saying I haven't -- I heard it from you, so that's great. I'm happy to hear that. The current -- we currently have a set of tax credit applications at PHFA, not all of which do we expect will receive funding. So some of those that are currently there will be held over until the next round. So I expect that we'll have some there already. And then we need to, as you say, line up whatever the next set are. So the Office of Housing and Community 155 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379 Development will have to issue an RFP because it will depend on part of our subsidy for part of it so that there's the question about how much subsidy is the City willing to contribute to the deals, and they also have to have site control. Now, the question for PHFA will be: Will a resolution of Council be sufficient for site control? And that has been a debate that we have gone back and forth with PHFA about what PHFA will consider as site control. Because if there is an October round, we could have a resolution of Council for any new properties that are needed.
A resolution authorizing condemnation. MS. McCOLLOCH: Exactly.
Mm-hmm. MS. McCOLLOCH: And so, if that will be sufficient for site control, then we'll be okay. If that won't be, we'll have to negotiate with PHFA about what we 156 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379 can give them to demonstrate site control.
So this is my concern, though, and I understand that. If the Councilmember says that they are interested in acquiring these set of properties and you all may decide that you don't want to fund a project there, then what happens to that property and what happens to something that you fund? Or are you going to be in a position -- 'cause I need to know this. Are you only going to fund that there's current site control? 'cause I think that's going to limit us dramatically. Do you understand what I'm saying? MS. McCOLLOCH: I want to make sure I understand. You're asking, will we only support where the subsidy developments that have site control?
Correct. 157 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379 MS. McCOLLOCH: Because our expectation is that PHFA --
Correct. MS. McCOLLOCH: -- will only accept developments that have site control.
Correct. MS. McCOLLOCH: And I think there, again, the question will be: What do we think PHFA will accept as site control, that if a resolution of Council authorizes --
Yeah, but it doesn't matter. If there's no site control, they're not going to accept that. I'm not talking about whether or not the resolution suffices; I'm talking about if -- assume they do accept the resolution -- MS. McCOLLOCH: Because --
It's not the same -- MS. McCOLLOCH: I'm -- 158 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379
If the Councilmember is interested in acquiring "Parcel A" -- MS. McCOLLOCH: Mm-hmm.
-- you all don't fund that; you want to fund "Parcel B" that may not have entire site control. So I guess what I'm trying to say is: Are we going to be able to get on the same page in terms of what should be funded? 'cause you're not going to issue our RFP until the fall. MS. McCOLLOCH: Well --
I don't want to go out here and acquire property 'cause I'm assuming we're going to start this acquisition process relatively soon. MS. McCOLLOCH: Mm-hmm.
And then that property not be given consideration for funding from the City, 'cause, 159 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379 frankly speaking, it's just a waste of acquisition dollars. MS. McCOLLOCH: I understand what you're saying. So we have to figure out how to coordinate the RFP for the subsidy with the acquisition.
Correct. That's my -- and normally, you know, if there's this long timeline or pipeline, eh. MS. McCOLLOCH: Right.
But I'm just -- you understand what could potentially happen. MS. McCOLLOCH: I understand the issue. Let me sit down and think it through and go over it with you what an appropriate schedule would be.
All right. You understand it? MS. McCOLLOCH: I understand the issue.
All right. Thank you. 160 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379
Thank you very much. And the Councilman confirms what we know, that income is different from the quality of housing. We have, in Lucien Blackwell Homes, rental and homeownership side-by-side. And he said they had a dedication, he and Councilman Greenlee, at market-rate housing across the street from low-income housing. Now, all of it rises. You know, if we subsidize those things we need to, the quality of life improves. And we have found that from homeless people to people at the lowest level, when it comes to income. If you give them a good product, as Carl Green says, they will treat it that way. So the quality of life rises for everybody when we do the right thing. Having said that, I think we should go to Public Property.
Can I ask one more question? 161 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379
Yes. After Councilwoman Miller asks her question.
Thank you, thank you. All right. Good afternoon. And, hopefully, this is my last question for RDA. RDA has reported new hires 11 during this period since you came there? 12
That's -- that sounds right. I don't know if that's the right number, but I think so.
Probably. Okay. Do you have a minority recruiter there?
Are you specifically looking for minorities? 'cause it looks like 73 percent of all 162 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379 your hires are non-colored folks.
Well, we work very hard to try to get as much diversity as possible, including, you know, minorities, African-Americans, and Latinos. So, yes, it's a significant goal for us.
So there's a diverse population of folks that are applying?
In some cases, yes. And I'd have to check on all of them. I do know that, in most cases, we have really worked very hard to -- when people of color have not applied, to 163 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379 do some outreach and to try to circulate the job description and get more people of color to apply. So it's something that we have to work at.
Okay. Can you give this committee, through the Chair, information on your recruitment process, how many jobs have you -- how many positions have become available and how many folks have applied and how diverse that group is, where your needs are?
Because the report I have says that your hiring has actually been 73 percent Caucasian, 27 percent African-American. And then we look at salaries. So I'd really like to get some additional information.
Okay, all 164 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379 right. Thank you.
And let me mention that we've heard rumors about Wayne King, a minority, who's been in the City as long as many of us, and they say he lost his job, got a cut in salary, had his office taken, and he's in a little cubby. And we all know him to be a excellent worker. Obviously, it's rumor. I don't know the details of it, but it's an issue that concerns us since he is one of the minorities who had worked his way up to having a decent job and one who's committed to our city and its neighborhoods.
And I support the Wayne King comments too, Jannie. I know that he's been very professional and has worked well with our office, extremely competent.
Exactly, that's right. So you can figure 165 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379 out how you respond to that with us, but it's an issue.
Thank you. So we will need you, Ms. Gillen. Maybe you can stay while we call up Public Property, because many issues overlap. Deb, we think you can probably sit back. Thank you. I'm sure you regret it. (Laughter.) (Commissioner Joan Schlotterbeck comes forward.)
Thank you. And thank you for letting us go to -- Mr. Herzins is sick. Please give him our best. COMMISSIONER SCHLOTTERBECK: I will.
We appreciate the work that he does. And our issues are issues that we mentioned. 166 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379 Many of them overlap; Public Property owns some, RDA has some. But we are concerned about the side yard issue with VPRC and the urban garden issue as well as the policy for public surplus property. So it's kind of the same issues in adjacency. I guess those are the issues. So we'll maybe start with side yards and urban gardens. COMMISSIONER SCHLOTTERBECK: Okay. Joan Schlotterbeck, Public Property Commissioner. Urban garden agreements? In an effort to simplify the process, it's a license agreement. There's no reason for them to go through the VPRC process. So we figure we would just do a license agreement direct and have the Mayor's Office of Sustainability work with us and get it done quicker. In your correspondence, apparently it stated that I had suspended it, and that's not the case, so there's a 167 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379 misunderstanding. We're just trying to make it simpler by doing licensed agreements.
All right. Then would you ask your people -- because our people have gotten formal notices that everything is on hold so that they know that this continues. COMMISSIONER SCHLOTTERBECK: Okay.
Also with appraisals -- in fact, we just went through all of that with RDA. We had one in two small blocks in West Philly. The people wanted the side yards. One was appraised at 10,000 on Montrose Street; and on Mantua Avenue, one was appraised at $15,000. And they're just side yards that people have been taking care of for years. So my office asked them then to for an urban garden agreement. That's when they were written that they were contacted, saying that the urban garden 168 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379 agreement policy was on hold. But can't we -- it seems to me -- and that was one of the values of the Vacant Property Review Committee, that people who had side yards could get them nominally. They're taking care of them, they're keeping them clean, they're planting gardens and flowers and that sort of thing. And if they get them nominally, then they help maintain the block. But if we ask them to pay fair market value for them and then at times the value is not taken narrowly by that area, then it makes it untenable; it just makes it not reasonable for them, and everything falls down. Can we look at that? COMMISSIONER SCHLOTTERBECK: Sure. And I think it's two separate -- what I'm trying to point out is that the agreement is simply a license agreement. So rather than have it go through the Vacant Property process going forward, we 169 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379 would just issue them directly. The issue of value -- and that's a function of the Office of Housing now. It used to be in RDA, but it's now in OHCD. (Indiscernible; parties talking over each other.) COMMISSIONER SCHLOTTERBECK: So the answer is yes. I mean, with the new policy, that's what we're going to do; we're going to address all of these concerns.
Absolutely. And we ask Miss McCulloch -- we won't pull her back today on that 'cause we still have to do Curtis Jones's bill, and there is another hearing, they tell me, at 1. So we'll try to wind down. But, at any rate, maybe our next time, you can talk a little bit -- if you are doing the whole issue of property appraisals for Public Property, you can respond to that at our next 170 6/7/10 - HOUSING COMMITTEE - RES. 100379 meeting, okay?