Thank you. Thank you, Madam President. Thank you, Councilman DiCicco, for your comments, and thank you for all your support that you've given to the rink over the years, both from 421 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget the activities fund and the capital fund, and all of the other funds that you've been successful, along with other elected officials in South Philadelphia in helping this rink. These comments that I'm going to make are really applicable to not only Rizzo but the Scanlon and Simons, and to Cobbs Creek and to Tarkin, and all the City rinks altogether. I've been associated with Rizzo for about ten years. I've coached there for eight, coached my son through his years. He has since gone on to high school. He plays high school hockey. And I felt a compulsion, a need to stay there and continue coaching because it is one of the few things that I do associated with this job that's actually fun and rewarding. It's obviously a lot more rewarding than it is today. But the comments about the rink are important because the City provides very little, with the exception of its dedicated 422 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget staff, in the way of money to run these rinks. The money that's raised to keep these rinks open, to keep these rinks extended hours, to buy equipment -- And let me tell you something: Hockey is perhaps one of the most expensive sports that anyone can play. A lot of times the issue of playing hockey or not playing hockey has to do with the availability of equipment. Rizzo Rink, along with all of those other rinks I mentioned, Cobbs Creek and the others, provide the equipment to their kids because they raised money to make sure that no kid is turned away. In the event that the small amount of money that's paid for a hockey program or a figure skating program or a roller hockey program cannot be paid by the parents, the Advisory Council through their hard work in selling concessions and in their having fund raisers and in beating up elected officials for more money, and by beating up the business community for 423 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget money, they don't turn any kid away. And one of the finest things I've seen, in relationship to neighborhood and race relations in this City, have to do with the interaction of those rinks in West Philadelphia in Councilman Blackwell's District; Simon... I think is up in Councilwoman Tasco's District; Scanlon... I'm not sure exactly whose District it's in. UNIDENTIFIED VOICE: Tarkin.
Tarkin. When we have our kids of different ethnic and racial backgrounds participate in a sport that African Americans have been traditionally excluded from because of cost and because of culture, because of experience and not having access to those kind of programs, and we can have kids from Cobbs Creek come down and play kids from 2nd Street and South Philadelphia and have the opposite happen out in West Philadelphia and Northwest Philadelphia, the fact that anyone in the Recreation 424 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget Department or in this Administration would consider closing these places is insane. The small amount of money it's going to save -- because the employees there, they're going to go get assigned somewhere else. So we're not saving personnel costs. What we are ruining and what we are losing are people who go down there like the Avalons and work those concession stands at 6 o'clock on a Saturday morning through the entire winter, and turn that money over to that program, that extends the rink hours, that buys equipment for kids, and that pays the fees for kids who can afford to participate in the sport. I can't imagine why anyone would have considered shutting these down and closing off this opportunity for neighborhood interaction, for kids to play a sport in the winter. You know, there's not a lot of sports you can play in the winter. The outdoor basketball courts are gone. the athletic fields are frozen. There's no 425 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget baseball. There's basketball and there's ice hockey. And if we can expand the opportunity for kids in our City throughout the entire City to play this sport and to interact with each other, we are being so penny wise and pound foolish to close these places down. So I think we need to be committed to putting these programs back. And let me tell you something: They want to find a place to cut, go look at the rampant overtime in this government, go look at the bad investments in the pension fund that's caused us to have to dip into the General Fund to make sure our pension funds are fully funded, and all the other waste and abuse that goes on in this City, and pay to play, on top of it, that adds to cost of contracts when we do no-bid contracts in this City, I think you'll find the money to put all this back and do tax reform, too. Thank you, Madam President. 426 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget (Applause.)
Thank you, Madam President. My colleague and I don't always agree on everything, but I certainly appreciate his involvement in the Laura Simms Skate House in Cobbs Creek Park over the years. And certainly a special greeting to the Sharpe family, and a thank you to all of you for coming in. Certainly many who have been around here a long time will remember Lucien Blackwell arguing year after year about the ice rink. And then when Rizzo was funded, he said, well, I'll take the money that Rizzo Rink got, because we were in the plans. And it was pushed back. And obviously both are built and have been for some time. And in fact, the impetus for the rink in Cobbs Creek passed, and we renamed -- this Council renamed it after 427 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget Laura Simms. And Lucien used to brag that the Flyers said it was the best in the region, not that we were arguing which rink is the best. But certainly we absolutely support the statements here, that our rinks and rec centers need to be exempted from cuts, and that they're very, very, very important to our communities, and that when we sacrifice, we have to draw the line someplace. Thank you very much.
Point of information. The Chair recognizes Councilman Kenney.
I won't argue as to what programs are the best, but I will admit that the Laura Simms Skate House has 428 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget the biggest and best ice surface of all the rinks in the City. Even our rink surface is a little small, but the hardest ice in the City is in West Philadelphia.
Excuse me, Councilman Rizzo. There's a point of information on the floor. The Chair recognizes Councilman Mariano.
I don't agree with Councilman Kenney on very much, but I do agree with him on this issue. Scanlon is in my District, Councilman. Scanlon won't get closed. Tarkin won't get closed because Councilman Tasco shares with me. I was listening to you upstairs. I 429 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget do agree with the Councilman. I just wanted him to know. We're all going fight to keep these ice rinks open. (Cheers and applause.)
We agree on something; wonderful. The Chair recognizes Councilman Rizzo.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Madam Chair, I want to echo my support for the recreation program. Specifically, since we have our friends from the Rizzo Rink here, I want to let them know that I'm going to join Councilman Kenney and every other member of Council in expressing my support, that this does not happen to this facility. It's named after my grandfather, Ralph Rizzo. A lot of people aren't aware of that, but... (Applause.)
But I had an opportunity on so many occasions, because 430 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget it had my family name, to go to the facility and visit. I was so impressed. Until you go and see what activity is there, President Verna, when I went to visit, I thought I was at the Spectrum. I thought I was at a professional ice skating palace, it was so beautiful and well maintained. And that wasn't happening by accident, that maintenance. And I knew that there was a lot of -- lot of effort from the community, and a lot of effort from the people that work there. So again, I just want to echo my support in retaining a program. And I don't want to repeat what Councilman Kenney said, but he said it very articulately. And I just want to again express my support to do what we can do to maintain this facility.
Thank you. 431 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget I want to thank you all for coming in. And I think the children deserve a round of applause. They've been very, very well behaved. (Applause.)
Thank you all so very much. And as you walk out, be assured that we will fight very hard to keep the rink open. Thank you. Our next witness. MR. McPHERSON: Robert Cheetham.
You have been one of the most patient men I've seen. You were here Monday, and I believe you were here all day today; were you not?
Thank you. Please identify yourself for the record.
My name is Robert Cheetham. Madam President, members of City Council, I want to thank you for the 432 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget opportunity to speak before you today on the subject of tax reform proposals that you're currently considering. I'm a small business owner, and a homeowner in the Spring Garden neighborhood. I came here as a student, I stayed to work in the City, and then started a business, and bought a home here. My wife is a new immigrant, working for a nonprofit theater. (Applause.)
My business, a small software development firm, has done well here. We've added employees over the past couple of years and expanded our office space. Our company was set up as an S Corporation. This is a business structure designed for small businesses with small number of owners. It simplifies taxes by allowing us to pass through our business net income to our personal taxes. It's sort of a cross between a conventional 433 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget corporation and a partnership. The federal and state governments both recognize this corporate structure, but Philadelphia does not. Consequently, we are forced to pay both net income tax at the business and then school tax on our personal return, all on the same money. And unlike dividends, we must recognize that income and pay the double tax on it, even if we invest it back in the business and do not ever see it. I'm in favor of paying my fair share of taxes, but this type of double taxation would not exist for me in any other jurisdiction in which I would like to live. We're growing and profitable now, but in our first two years we did not turn a profit. We had losses. Yet even with these losses, Philadelphia taxed us on our gross receipts. And what is this tax called? A business privilege tax, as if it's a privilege for me to have a business. 434 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget The amount I actually paid came to only a few hundred dollars a year. It wasn't the amount that was important, but its symbolic significance was very powerful. We're all here to talk about tax reform and budget cuts. But my chief challenge as a business owner today is hiring great people with the technological -- technical qualifications that I need. And with few exceptions, we've had enormous challenges recruiting locally, so we've recruited nationally. But many of the candidates we've interviewed don't want to move here. Part of that is image, and we work very hard to sell Philadelphia, sometimes successfully. It's a place that we believe in. But part of it is also the tax structure. Last fall I failed to convince a terrific candidate to move from the west.
Excuse me, please. We're still trying to conduct our 435 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget business. Thank you. Please proceed.
Last fall I failed to convince a terrific candidate who was considering moving from out west because the tax burden he would face here was much higher than what he would have in his own city. And as a small business, we couldn't afford him to substantially -- We couldn't afford to substantially increase his salary to compensate. This spring I managed to persuade another new employee who lives in Delaware County to join us. But again, a significant part of his decision-making process was the additional tax burden he would be obliged to pay. I don't want to dwell on the undesirable aspects of living and having a business in Philadelphia. In many ways Philadelphia has been a good home for us. My wife and I live near downtown. We walk or bicycle to work. 436 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget All of my employees either walk or take public transit to work. We love the architecture, the restaurants, the theaters, and the museums. As a former City employee, I know how difficult it can be to work with the City government. But when I started my business, both L & I and the Revenue Departments were very helpful to us, in terms of working through the necessary forms and registrations. I realize not everyone has the same experience, but mine was a good one. But the amenities that my wife and I value, the historic fabric and active art scene, great restaurants, walkable streets, and vibrant neighborhoods also exist in Boston, London, Paris and San Francisco. You see, in my mind Philadelphia isn't competing just with Bucks and Montgomery Counties, it's competing with every major city in the world for attention, for investment dollars, for businesses and for workers. 437 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget I believe Philadelphia can meet that challenge. I believe it could become a mecca for new immigrants, like my wife. I believe it could have a busy Convention Center and an active technology sector. But I also realize that this may not happen. The formation of the Tax Reform Commission was a positive step in my mind. Most of its recommendation, I believe, are good ones. I want to mention one other thing, and then I'll wrap up. I know that all of you have been here a long time today. I want to mention the proposed cuts to the arts and culture. This may not seem like it's connected to tax reform, but for us it is. The arts, culture of Philadelphia are one of its chief assets. And they're one of the main reasons we decided to stay here after school and start a business and buy a home here. In short, I'd urge you to implement 438 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget the tax reform package and to reconsider the arts, culture and library funding cuts that have been proposed. And I want to close by saying that I'm not necessarily opposed to paying my fair share of taxes. I'm not looking for a handout, and I'm willing to pay, for example, either the wage or the business privilege taxes on our net income. I think those are fair taxes. Reflecting on the gentleman that was speaking earlier, I am willing to pay an increased real estate tax, on the basis of the increased value in my home. But every year my wife and I sit down, and we have to make some very tough decisions. Are we going to stay in Philadelphia or are we going to go to some of these other wonderful places in the world that we would imagine living? Are we going to stay in Philadelphia and create new jobs here or are we going to go somewhere else and create new jobs there? 439 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget And so, we've paid a great deal of attention to what the Tax Reform Commission has said, to what the Mayor has proposed, and to what you're all considering here. And the decisions you make over the next few months are going to directly impact us in a very big way. I'll close with that. Thank you.
Thank you so very much. I think your testimony was right on target, and I think most of what you said is conversations that Council members have had, I guess in the last several years, how we want people to stay in the City. And we compliment you on that. And we certainly want to see people like you stay, and have a family, and send your children to schools, stay in business, hire more people as you go along, and perhaps with whatever we do, that may be encouraging you to do that.
I'll look forward to 440 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget that. Thank you very much.
Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, and good luck to you. MR. McPHERSON: The next witness is Joseph Powell. Patrick Starr.
Good evening, Council President Verna, and good evening to all the other members of Council, and members of the audience. My name is Patrick Starr. I'm Vice President of the Pennsylvania Environmental Council and a founding member of the Northeast Riverfront Task Force, chaired by former Congressman Bob Borski. And we're going to deviate from the focus on tax reform to a completely different issue. I'm here this evening to speak in support of Mayor Street's fiscal year '05 budget, that calls for the creation of a new economic development 441 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget fund, with an initial investment of $125 million, to make Philadelphia the New River City. As some of you may know, in 2001, thanks to the leadership of Councilwoman Joan Krajewski, Mayor Street, and then Congressman Borski, as well as other elected officials and community leaders, the City Planning Commission developed a new vision plan for the nearly 3500 acres that comprise the North Delaware Riverfront, stretching from Penn Treaty Park to the Bucks County line. The plan provides a recipe for converting thousands of acres of post-industrial, environmentally contaminated brown field sites into a revitalized riverfront, with vibrant new communities and a new urban greenway. Given my organization's metropolitan efforts to fight suburban sprawl and save open space, we believe strongly that the Delaware Riverfront, with its excellent highway access, dramatic views, potential 442 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget recreational amenities, can become a new high value Philadelphia neighborhood that will retain existing Philadelphia residents who might be looking to buy up and possibly out of the City, as well as attracting back to the City those who will seek the riverfront's unique amenities. 8 mile Kensington and Tacony railroad corridor is nearly final, one of the first major investments in public infrastructure on the riverfront. The funding for buying it, designing it, building it, and signing it is already in place from state and federal sources, and a new recreational trail for Philadelphia families will result in a few years. Similarly, other projects on the riverfront have moved along, with federal support and state support, including the demolition of the Tacony Warehouse where 443 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget new housing may become a reality, and a new public park at Lardner's Point. The Streets Department is working on extending the Delaware Avenue north from the Betsy Ross Bridge through Bridesburg, with a vision to eventually pick up again at Tacony Palmyra, continuing to Pennypack Park. This is planned as a new river road. This is also being funded largely through federal funding, which will complete the river road. All told, approximately $14 million in state and federal funds have been spent or committed to these riverfront projects, and another $11 million has already been requested. It is now critical that the River City Initiative dollars be invested to leverage these state and federal commitments and lay the groundwork for the new development. Mayor Street's economic development fund provides an essential tool to leverage these very sizable state and federal 444 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget investments. The $125 million investment in a new River City Initiative is critical to unleashing private market development. Sites in Bridesburg such as the former Philly Coke site, the former Dodge Steel site in Tacony, and the Army Warehouse site in Tacony are being targeted by private developers who would invest millions of dollars in new communities. But to start the transformation of this currently vacant landscape, the City must invest in streets, water and sewer utilities, and in the public greenway that protects the riverfront for everyone to enjoy and view. The market is waiting to happen, but there is a gap between the vision and the current reality of rusted and abandoned warehouses.
The City must do its part as a partner in making new development less risky and stimulating the tide of transformation. Philadelphia can take advantage of 445 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget this tremendous river asset to create an attractive new housing community and connect our City to its great rivers. I urge you to support the momentum of opportunities for new development on the City's rivers and tremendous new recreational amenities by approving the economic development fund initiative and the New River City investment. I dare say, just relating to the other testimony we've been hearing this afternoon, this is certainly a case of investing in the future development, and the future tax base of Philadelphia. And I believe it is an investment that you will be very proud that you made and one that you will certainly not regret. And so, I thank you for hearing our testimony. And if there are any questions, I'd be very glad to answer those.
Thank you very much. And may I say, we miss you in my neck of the woods.
I miss you, too, 446 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget Councilwoman Blackwell.
Thank you, Madam President. Mr. Starr, it's a pleasure hearing your testimony. I just wanted to bring your attention -- I'll drop a copy off to you before you leave -- that back in 2000, March 30th of 2000, we issued an extensive report on just what you're talking about. And although some work started in 2001, it's certainly sooner than 2004. And hopefully we would have been living in River City before today. So, on the way out the door, I'll make sure you get a copy of it.
That would be excellent. Well, it is going to happen. You're going to see the beginning of some of that investment very soon.
It's going to happen before we approve or disprove the 447 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget $125 million a year?
I think that we need that $125 million to make sure it happens.
I understand. But don't get too far down the road before we approve the $125 million, if in fact we decide to do it.
Thank you again. MR. McPHERSON: Next witnesses are Louise Turan, Nancy Carroll. Identify yourself for the record.
My name is Louise Turan, and I'm the Executive Director of the Schuylkill River Development Corporation.
My name is Tracy Childress. I'm Director for Business and Community Development for SRDC.
Thank you very much for having us here today. And I wanted to thank all the City Council members and also say I certainly have a greater appreciation 448 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget for all your hard work, after listening to a full day of testimony today. When Mayor Street told the Greater Philadelphia Chamber of Commerce that we can make Philadelphia a New River City in America, he was articulating the spirit behind many exciting projects that will soon bring our City to life and reconnect communities to the Schuylkill River. I should also add that we're delighted to follow up on the heels of Patrick Starr and the Pennsylvania Environmental Council's great work on the Delaware. Our initiative will feature along the Schuylkill new recreational trails, streetscape, bridge improvements, tourist attractions, and a re-energized business and residential community, as well as restored environmental and industrial areas. Along with the prospects that lie ahead for the Delaware, the Schuylkill transformed will indeed re-brand 449 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget Philadelphia as a New River City. And I do hope it will happen, Councilman Kenny, before the budget is approved or not approved. And I would like to add a footnote that we already have funding in place for many of our projects which we can get to at the end of the testimony, if you have time. Since 1992 SRDC has been coordinating several billion dollars worth of improvements along the riverfront, for the benefit of current and future generations. However, we are at a critical juncture. And like our other projects along the river, it is vital that we maintain our momentum and bring our pioneering venture to complete fruition. When City Council votes on Mayor Street's budget later this month, members of Council will have an opportunity to inject new life into an under utilized riverfront and create a regional jewel that will kindle economic growth and enrich the 450 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget quality of life for our citizens in this area. Imagine a riverfront immediately adjacent to residents and businesses that includes access to first-class outdoor recreation: Running, walking, boating, biking, picnicking, and a reduction of the number of vacant and industrial parcels along the Schuylkill, lower Schuylkill between the Fairmount Water Works and the dam. All of these will inspire green and beautification projects. The broader gains for the City and the residents include the retention of student and workers, more tourism venues, and heightened tax revenue from industrial reuse and new businesses. The effort that we are coordinating is actually a partnership between the City, the state, and federal agencies, as well as local foundations, private businesses, area universities, and through the process of coming up with our plan for the Schuylkill River, we have coordinated and touched on 451 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget 40 different communities and neighborhood organizations along the Schuylkill. For example, some of our projects include a new pedestrian and bicycle ramp, connecting to the South Street Bridge that, will bring -- actually provide a first-time access for many West Philadelphians to the lower part of the future Schuylkill River Park. We also envision docks at Bartram's Garden and at Walnut Street, and Fairmount Water Works, to promote travel and tourism. We are going to improve the Schuylkill bridges, Market, Chestnut, Walnut, and South Street, to improve pedestrian crossings and relieve traffic congestions, and improve linkages between east and west sides of the river. Eventually we hope to see a Schuylkill Trail Program that will provide a green edge along the river, connecting Center City, all the way down to South and Southwest Philadelphia. We continue to make progress every 452 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget day toward reaching our goal.
In fact, on Thursday, on May 20th at 6:30, instead of a ground breaking, we're going to have a light breaking, and we hope you all will plan to be at the ramps at Market and Chestnut when Mayor Street turns the big switch on and turns on the lights in the long-awaited Schuylkill River Park. In closing, Majority Leader Blackwell, I'd just like to say that it is impossible to overestimate the positive good that will be generated for this region, once all the phases of our ambitious project are completed. We are acting now and hope that everyone will join with us. We urge City Council to please support this important initiative. The Schuylkill is a new river. Philadelphia is a new City. It is a new river city, and it is overflowing with pride, energy and determination, to make our region a better place to live, work, play, learn and visit. 453 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget
Yes. Thank you very much. Thank you. Any questions? (No response.)
Thank you again. MR. McPHERSON: I think there's only a couple more. Ed Izore can be next, and then Fred Mauer.
Good evening, Council. My name is Nancy Carroll. I am the Director of the Citizens to Save the Horses Committee. Our committee was formed in late March of this year, in response to the closing of the Police Mounted Patrol Unit. Our group was originally made up of the families and friends of the units of police officers and civilian employees. But the repeated media coverage and our petition campaign, numbers of supporters has gone well into the 454 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget thousands. I have prepared a brief statement on our behalf. Mayor Street's, in his budget proposal, has stated that the closing of the Mounted Police Unit will save the City $400,000 a year. The Managing Director, Phillip Goldsmith, has put the savings at 500,000 a year. Police Commissioner Johnson places that figure at $700,000 a year. Which of them is correct? None of them deny that their projections include the salaries of the civilian employees or the police officers assigned to the unit. When Johnson was before Council on April 19th, he stated that the police officers would be transferred to other areas of patrol, and the civilians would be assigned as fingerprint technicians. Since they will all continue their employment with the City, how can they conclude [sic] their salaries in part of the savings? And what, then, are the 455 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget correct numbers? Based on expenditures list [sic] for mounted patrol from 2003 fiscal year, the numbers are not all what they seem to be telling us. From July 1, 2002, to May 30, 2003, the unit spent less than $111,000. This amount not only includes the feed, bedding, supplies, equipment for the unit, but also veterinarian and furrier services. In fact, the unit was reportedly more than $48,000 under budget, with only one month remaining in the fiscal year. How then can anyone justify the closing of this unit? The value of this unit's service to the department and the City by far outweighs its operating costs. The Mounted Patrol has proven itself time and time again. In the First District, there are certainly the undisputed favor of business owners and the citizens alike for patrol and crowd control in the areas of South Street, Penns Landing 456 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget and Delaware Avenue. In the Second District, their presence at the stadiums has played a key role in public safety. And with the national championship win by any of our sports teams being only a matter of time, perhaps much sooner than we think, the need for this unit will be overwhelming. In the Third District, at the 52nd and Market shopping area, the unit's high visibility has been a welcome presence. In the Fourth and Fifth Districts, along Kelly Drive, and throughout the 9100 acres of Fairmount Park, the need for a mounted patrol is just plain common sense. Especially now, with the Fairmount Park rapist still on the loose, the mounted patrol not only serves as a deterrent to future attacks, but also provides a sense of safety for park-goers. In the Eighth District, along Germantown Avenue, the Mounted Patrol has been a welcome addition, as a way to 457 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget address the high volume of crimes in the area. Captain Singletary of the 14th District can certainly attest to it. In the 10th District, when the auto thefts at the Franklin Mills Mall had become a problem, the Mounted Patrol was the solution. And there is so much more that this unit could do for the citizens of Philadelphia. In the Sixth District, along the waterfront, with the blight of abandoned warehouses and overgrown lots being replaced with new park grounds, what better way to have police presence in this natural environment than the Mounted Patrol.
In the Seventh District, along Kensington Avenue, where prostitution has become an ever-increasing problem for the area residents, this, no doubt to have a high visibility presence [sic] of the Mounted Patrol would have an effect on restoring a higher quality of life in the neighborhood. 458 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget In the Ninth District, along Rising Sun Avenue business district, again, the visible presence of the Mounted Patrol would be an extremely effective deterrent in crime, while providing a sense of security, and not -- let's not forget the Mounted Patrol has always played a major role in community relations for both the Police Department and the City of Philadelphia at the multitude of parades, festivals and public events throughout the City each year. The police officers and civilians of the unit have already been reassigned, and all of the horses have either been given 17 back to their original owners or donated to other police departments. But it is not too late to save there unit. All of those who accepted horses have stated they would be glad to return the horses, should circumstances change. Unfortunately, it play only be a short period of time before the unit's remaining equipment and inventory are sold. 459 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget So the time for action is now. And our community has been hard at work in this endeavor. Unfortunately, the countless phone calls, letters and petitions, with approximately 5,000 signatures by supporters of the Mounted Patrol Unit to the Mayor, Police Commissioner and City Council have been ineffective in reversing this decision. We have been forced to begin a new campaign, to seek alternative funding. And we are confident that much of the real operating costs of the unit could be obtained through private funding, and possibly through grants. Other police departments throughout the United States, such as New York, Denver, Tampa, Indianapolis, and Rochester, whose mounted patrol units faced the same fate as ours, were saved by the city and the private sector joined together, and committed the funding needed to keep the units in operation. On April 28th, a letter was faxed to 460 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget the Office of the Police Commissioner Johnson, requesting not only his support but also his written terms and conditions of reinstating the Mounted Unit, through private funding. We have not received a response. So we ask you now, ladies and gentlemen of City Council, please support our efforts. Do not let Mayor Street take this vital service for over a hundred year tradition away from the citizens of Philadelphia. Reject the Mayor's decision to disband the Mounted Patrol Unit, by rejecting his budget proposal. Thank you. )
Please identify yourself and proceed with your testimony. 461 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget
My name is Fred Mauer. I am an officer in the Friends of Tacony Creek Park, and I monitor the Fairmount Park budgets. I want to testify on the Capital Budget for Fairmount Park, the ordinance 8 for this fiscal year of '04 and '5. Tacony Creek Park has had major capital budget problems because the park had minimal park development features. Only a cinder trail was made in 1938. Outdoor playgrounds were placed in the park plan of 1947. That's 57 years ago. The north section had a recreation plan in 1976, so that's 28 years ago. That is the park recreation capital development investments of 92 years. Park capital plans has not replaced any picnic tables of park benches or play equipment for our park users, and the place looks decrepit and little evidence that parks are meant for people. 15 years ago we had three public 462 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget playgrounds, but the Park Commission removed all playgrounds, and now we have zero. They even removed a donated softball cage, thus eliminating any free play. The park attitude has been to demolish everything and never to maintain or to rebuild. The evidence is that we went from three to zero playgrounds, and that there is no Tacony Creek Park capital commitment or no park recreation plan in these current budgets. Zero playgrounds satisfies the Park lawyer, that zero playgrounds is ultimate public safety and absolute cost savings. But I think having no playgrounds in a public park is a public emergency need. I think that this neighborhood of a three-mile park through three Councilmanic Districts, with public pedestrian access and a waterway that serves a full tenth of the City population deserves more care under a capital plan. I ask for City Council to amend the 463 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget next year's capital budget to direct monies to refurbish the Garland Street Hill -- which is adjacent to the Hill Creek Public Housing Authority Playground, and to institute a full Tacony Creek Park recreational plan. We also have a major capital back issue in the current fiscal year '03, '04, from a line item that was intended to correct the negligence of the natural lands manager. He removed a 60-foot steel pedestrian bridge number FB03. That bridge was placed in the Frank Rizzo bicentennial capital plan, and was never authorized for removal, and never declared unsafe. Our public petition and testimony before the Public Park Commission secured this line item from the City Planning Commission Capital Budget in the line items of fiscal year '03, '04. The line item, as it states, says that bridge improvements City wide, funds will be used for rehabilitation and 464 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget replacement, including Tacony Creek Park. And it had these fiscal year authorizations from fiscal years on up. Says all the years. The numbers are here. These bridge improvements that were dedicated for this fiscal year were not done in this capital year, and we have no 9 information about where the money went. We note now that in the next fiscal year the Planning Commission Capital Budget in their line items, I examine to see what they're going to do. And budget line number 36-1, where we define this past bridge line, does not include Tacony Creek Park at all. And I ask, how can this line item be deleted from a six-year capital budget? I think we need an audit as to why this budget line was deleted, and why the work was not done after the Capital Budget was adopted. The old bridge is still in storage and easy to rebuild. I think park bridges are needed until we learn how to walk on 465 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget water. And we need some answers. I also note the City Planning Commission Capital Budget also omits anything about Poquessing Creek Park. Poquessing Creek Park, which is at the far end of our City, it never had a master plan or a WPA project to preserve this watershed into a stream valley park.
The whole City Planning Commission and PIDC are currently interested to sell off all adjacent lands, including the whole Byberry track before making creek protection and park land, and to protect water quality. Every loss of Poquessing Creek riparian land diminishes the quality of this public park into an open sewer. More Poquessing Creek land acquisition and a park master plan and a full length trail is needed. Bucks County is on the north side of the creek, and they are doing their part. I think we should do our share to make Tacony Creek Park. 466 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget We need to fund Poquessing Creek Park in this fiscal year and in future capital years to make it into a public park land, and to integrate it into the Benjamin Rush State Park, and to connect it to the Delaware River Trail, which Patrick Starr just talked about. I think the funds requested in my testimony can come from internal savings within the City Planning Capital Budget of this fiscal year '04, '. 05 under line item 34-7, Kelly Drive Recreational Path lighting, that is an excess that we park users do not need. There are too many lights and too many lighting systems on Kelly Drive. This well-lighted road is pushed by the City Planning Commission and the Center City District for their own economic development plans, and the Fairmount Park Commission bows down to them. It is time to end waste on Kelly Drive and return to natural lighting. The electricity and operations alone cost more 467 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget than enough operations fund to fund our Fairmount Park Rangers. I favor more Rangers and less lighting. The Kelly Drive 300,000 item under code CN can be assigned elsewhere. And I also note in the budget that Fairmount Park has evaded some costs by selling Memorial Hall. I don't see that the cost savings was transferred over to support our other missions in the park. And I think that Capital Budget information needs some explaining. Thank you.
Thank you very much, sir. Any questions or comments from members of the committee? (No response.)
Thank you again. Our next witness is Ed Hazzouri. Good evening. Please identify yourself for the record and proceed with your testimony. 468 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget
Madam Chairman, members of Council, I'm Ed Hazzouri, H-a-z-z-o-u-r-i, representing the 4,000 Delaware Valley employees of Sunoco and about 2700 employees here in the City. I'd like just to speak very briefly on the land value tax and its impact specifically on our South Philadelphia facilities which many folks know as the old Atlantic and Gulf Oil Refineries, and also our Frankford Chemical Plant, a long time known as the Allied Signal Chemical Plant. In these... In the tax proposal, the idea is to encourage folks not to simply own and hold on to property, but rather, to either develop the land or sell it and have it developed. In these facilities, there's a different dynamic at work. I think both folks in the community and certainly we at Sunoco believe that we want additional land at the perimeter of our facilities and even within the facility itself. At the perimeter, the idea of 469 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget additional land to serve as buffers for the community, so that they're not faced directly with our units and with our tanks; and then, in addition, within the facilities themselves, to have additional property, again, to serve as buffers between units, between tanks, so that if there would be a problem, there's plenty of space for containment quickly and efficiently.
Thank you. Are there any questions or comments from members of the Committee? Mr. Hazzouri, thank you very much.
My name is Joan Sage. And interesting that the gentleman talked about Sunoco because Sunoco is one of the few places that, as the previous gentleman had said, would hardly move, like people can move, but they won't move. My name is Joan Sage, but also I am all those other names of the hundreds of 470 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget Philadelphians who came to this chamber on Monday. We came from every District of the City, just as we did two years ago, to ask you to enact the land tax because we think of the City as a whole entity. They came because they knew that the land tax would not increase their property taxes, but rather lower them. And that's why you saw so many people here. So, for all the talk about property taxes going up, it wasn't for the ordinary house -- homemaker -- homeowner. This trend must not miss the big picture. Think out of the box. When we bring all neighborhoods up and equal, then everybody benefits, even those few blinded by shortsighted self-interest who pressure you for the status quo. And that big picture is how this extraordinary People's Tax Commission has produced the machinery that will only work with all of its parts in place. Otherwise, it will not function at all. 471 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget Any shredding of any part of the tax reform package, whether it be the land tax or any other part of the legislation, will destroy the machinery as a whole and continue the disastrous way Philadelphia now functions as bits and pieces of special privilege. We can see already where the City is going into decline, just a City paved with asphalt car parks, with reference to you know who. It is not slot machine gambling we need, but our chamber leaders to gamble on a complete change in the way Philadelphia operates, well studied by the Controller's Office a few years ago, which also looked at the whole picture as the Tax Reform Commission did. Gamble and then even take credit for turning Philadelphia around to become a competitor with Harrisburg, as the most livable City in the state. Yes, Harrisburg is a land tax city. And in fact, Allentown has in a 472 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget referendum voted to keep it in spite of the special interests that were trying to fight it with lots of money. As one of the general citizenry of Philadelphia, I'm appealing to your hearts and souls to lead us to real total tax reform. Let's stop the collateral damage that has been and still is killing the City. Radical change in the way Philadelphia addresses its taxes has to be done. Dreams can be visions can be realities. Expanding recreation centers and parks, having libraries open every day and evening, as they were when I was a kid, and continuing to support our arts communities, which are the mainstay of our economy and what Philadelphia is known for. We are part of the whole. And the Tax Reform Commission has given you a chance to make history for Philadelphia and turning us in a new and fairer direction, if you act now. 473 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget You can do it if you have the will. You have the support of the people who came here on Monday, if you accept the entire Tax Reform Commission's work as a whole. It is a remarkable achievement. Thank you.
Thank you, Mrs. Sage. And Mrs. Sage, I want to thank you for coming in on Monday and again today. You've been extremely patient. Thank you very much. Do we have anyone else to testify? (No response.)
Seeing no 16 one, I am then going to call upon Mr. Schwartz. Good evening. And I want to thank you for your patience also.
...for many years. My name is Ed Schwartz. I'm President of the Institute for Civic Values. 474 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget
Well, I think you were called back because there were some questions that my colleagues had that they wanted to address to you. And the Chair recognizes Councilman Nutter.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Mr. Schwartz, thank you for coming back. Sorry for the delay, but your past experience tells you what this process can be like. I had a number of questions coming from a variety of places. So I want to start laying out some of these issues, so I can get a better understanding of some of the testimony from the other day. And Madam Chair, if there are other... I saw them earlier, but I've lost track of them. If there are other Tax Reform Commission members here, I'd like to have them as well. So we have Mr. Schwartz, Mr. Mandel and Mr. Vanderbilt. Mr. Schwartz, let me start with you. 475 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget You're the former Chair of the Philadelphia Tax Reform Commission. And we went over some of this the other day. Now, I just need to refresh on some of these specifics. The Commission issued its report on 11/15/03; is that correct?
And then you testified in February, based on a resolution sponsored by Councilman Tasco, in our Committee of the Whole, based on laying out what the position was of the Tax Reform Commission and its report at the February 24, 2004 hearing on the TRC report. Do you recall that?
Okay. And then you also served on the committee. I don't remember whether you chaired that particular committee.
I did not. You're talking about the 21st Century Committee? That was chaired by Jeremy Nowack.
Okay. And you were asked by the Mayor to be on that committee?
Okay. And that report was issued on March 11, 2004. And then, I'm not sure what the capacity was, but certainly there was... because I don't remember the introduction, but there was an assumption that either in your former capacity as Chair of the Tax Reform Commission or as a member of the 21st Century Review Forum subcommittee, you also participated in a press conference sponsored by Philadelphia Forward, which is made up of a variety of people, some of whom are former Tax Reform Commission members; is that correct?
Okay. And then, 477 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget from what I've been able to read from the Tax Reform Commission report, to the transcript of the Committee of the Whole in February, to the 21st Century Review Forum in March, to your comments as I at least recall them from April 15, 2004, there has been a consistency and a theme of the need to reform the taxes in the City, support for the Tax Reform Commission package of bills. And I would say in your own way you've been pretty outspoken in that regard, as you are often outspoken on a variety of issues. What I'm now trying to understand is, from the press conference on April 15th to your testimony two days ago on May 10th, days, what changed your view on a report 20 you spent almost a year working on, gave 21 fairly extensive testimony at the Committee 22 of the Whole in February, participated in a 23 process that resulted in second endorsement 24 of the Tax Reform Commission, based on your 25 service at the 21st Century Review Forum, 478 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget and the press conference on the apron of City Hall. What happened in the intervening 5 days that has caused you to have an 6 apparent different opinion? 7
I have no different 8 opinion on the report or the need for the 9 things that we called for. 10 The question is whether we can 11 afford them in the rate and pace at this 12 point and projected five-year strategy for 13 doing that. 14
From the TRC 20 report, to the Committee of the Whole, to 21 the 21st Century Review Form to the press 22 conference... 23
In the 25 intervening 25 days, what new piece of 479 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget information did you get --
About affordability, that we have to contribute over the next five years $288 million more in the pension than was anticipated. Maybe that was out there before this month, but I became fully aware of it this month. And that we lost $18 million a year in the Gas Works. So now, you're dealing with a $375 million fiscal problem that was not at our attention last summer or even in the fall or even at the time of any of the things that you described. And yes. Did that have a critical impact on my thinking? Absolutely. This is about money. It's not about ideology.
It's about jobs, but it's also about the way in which the City budget can be handled, and what the City 480 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget can afford.
Okay. And your position is is that since the budget was introduced and a unilateral decision was made to forego the $18 million, with no 7 explanation as to how that budget gap would be filled or the movement of the date by which we were supposed to get the $45 million loan repayment by PGW, with no 11 pre-decision or discussion about how that decision was made or a lack of recognition in the five-year plan or the budget that we would forego $5 million in interest earnings by taking the Water Department's Debt Service Reserve Fund and use it for a different thought or strategy, and that was not accounted for in the budget. All of that has happened in the past few weeks, not subject of any action by this body at all. And you've now arrived at the conclusion that $17 million as a first-year cost which is in the report by the Tax Reform Commission, that the City can't 481 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget afford that.
No, that's not what we're discussing. If the debate were over the $17 million, I think that there's more the City can do. But that's not what we've been discussing. We have been discussing whether or not there should be a pre-fixed tax reduction schedule that carries beyond this year into the next five years, and sets tax rates that will have to be included in the five-year plan.
We created the schedule. And the disagreement over what it represented was whether or not this would be mandated by law; and the second question really does -- Whoa.
Do you have a copy of the report? 482 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget
And I have to tell you -- I've said before -- the legislation was drafted at the very end of the process, after we had more or less agreed on the plan. And I guess it was negligence on my part as Chairman that we never really did have I serious, extended discussion at that point, of what the bill said, and what they represented. So people are left with different impressions about what we agreed 483 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget to. But let me just add that even if we agreed --
Let's put the legislation aside for a movement. The report... We should look at Volume I, first page. There's a letter to the citizens of Philadelphia. Now, you were authorized by the citizens to be in business, correct?
Okay. So, this 484 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget letter to the citizens of Philadelphia, dated November 15, 2003, when you go to the second page, it says, our study of Philadelphia's tax system demonstrates that as a city we tax what others do not. Our taxes are too high, and our taxes are unfairly imposed. We've also found that Philadelphia compounds the problem of a high overall tax burden by relying too heavily on wage and business taxes, the taxes that are most likely to drive residents, businesses and jobs from the City. The City's incomparably high wage and business tax rates have damaged Philadelphia's economy over the past three decades, ultimately reducing tax revenue and the ability of the City and the School District of Philadelphia to finance citizen services. Our tax system is broken. It didn't break overnight, and it can't be fixed overnight. The recommendation in this report provide the City with a ten-year 485 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget plan for fundamentally reforming its tax system. To regain its competitive edge, the City needs to abandon its historic, piecemeal approach to tax reform and adopt the ambitious, comprehensive reform program recommended in this report. Respectfully submitted, Edward A. Schwartz, Chair; Raymond Jones, Vice Chair; Al Taubenberger, Vice Chair. Now, what did you mean when you said that you had a ten-year plan for fundamentally reforming the tax system?
We had laid out a blueprint as to how do go about doing this, in the same way that the Convention Center several years ago had laid out a blueprint for what it meant to build a convention center, that we had offered a blueprint and a timetable that we thought appropriate for the City to pursue this.
Which is now embodied on in the Volume II as an ordinance. 486 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget Now, I mean, you know I mean this with every possible respect. I mean, if anyone knows what an ordinance looks like, it's you.
Okay. And did you see the bills before the TRC signed off on the report?
Probably, yeah. I mean, it was a rough week that week, but I probably saw them.
I have a report, yeah. I know what you're talking about with the bill.
So, if you look at this, your first page to the citizens talks about a ten-year plan. Doesn't this bill seem to indicate that there would be a ten-year schedule?
That's true. It does. But as I'm saying, and I'm acknowledging, during that last week after 487 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget we did the report, we never really discussed the bills, nor did I focus on them and what the implications of that in the legislation would be. This was not something that --
Well, when you were going to release it to the citizens, and expressed your support for it -- and you've done it consistently in at least four different very public ways -- and obviously you've had other discussion with other people, I'm sure, in the interim, were you thinking that it was a ten-year plan or was it a one-year plan?
Let me -- Let me say what I am thinking, apart from the issues of the legislation. See, I think the obligation that I assumed was to keep my eye on this ball for as long as you can. 488 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget So to me, what was first in my head, was the $17 million in costs for this year. And I worked very hard, for example, to persuade the Administration that they needed to put single sales factor apportionment into this year's budget. It was a really important thing to do. At one point they weren't, and now they were. Now I'm looking at next year, $34 million. So I --
-- talking about single factor for a while longer than that, but I'm glad --
No, no. I'm just saying -- (Mr. Schwartz and Councilman Nutter began speaking simultaneously, not reportable.)
No. I'm just saying that -- that now the next step -- There are some other things that I think within this budget we could do in this year. 489 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget I testified earlier in the week that I would be prepared to vote for a reduction in the Police Department, and... because I think that's where the money is. And I wrote about that before even being part of the Commission. So that's this year.
Now, what I'm saying to you is that there is a series of things projected for next year. Between now and next year, to me this is -- always had to be affordable. So the question then is, what steps do we need to take between now and this year -- next year to make affordable the things that we're trying to do, so that we're not breaking the budget, which was a constant discussion on the Commission, and at the heart of the premise of social and fiscal responsibility. So to me the issue this year was, what do we do next year? And what do we do the third year? And as I say, the other intervening 490 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget event in the midst of all of this was learning that we have to pay $288 million over the five-year period more in the pension fund. Both of those things worked together. If I looked at a budget that had big holes in -- you know, in all of these departments, in terms of, you know, they were funded at the current levels, et cetera, and we weren't dealing with this, my attitude about even the legislation might be different. But what I see is a budget which has cut virtually every department, but including the police and prisons, but many of them five to seven percent, service cuts that you are listening to here and claiming that you're very concerned about, a $288 million additional investment in the plan.
It's more than a claim. 491 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget
Your comment was service issues that I claim to be concerned about.
Oh. I'm sorry. That you are concerned about. I wasn't meaning to demean it. You are, and legitimately so.
I'm merely saying that you're looking at a whole bunch of departments that are being cut, some really badly, some disappearing. And that's part of whatever savings would have to --
Right. And we will deal with that in this budget. But what I'm still trying to understand is, notwithstanding this schedule, because even this schedule, your issue seems to be this new-found concept of locking in rates, as if --
Well, I don't think that's new found. 492 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget
-- as if you vote for a bill, it has a rate in it, you cannot return to it, we'll never touch it again. You send the planes out. They have no radio, no communications, and you cannot bring them back. This bill interrupts a locked-in five-year schedule itself. The Administration has sent a bill to disrupt a five-year schedule that someone would say was locked in place. We voted for a bill two years ago that gave for the first time a guaranteed schedule of five successive years of wage and business tax cuts. We did that. But now there's a bill in front of us to change a reduction that's supposed to happen in July to January. And it can happen again. Or you could have this schedule in place; and, actually, we're going to have budget hearings next year because it's what we do. And if things aren't working, we'll be having this same discussion. 493 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget
And we could stop the prospective cuts or leave them at the rate where they are, and whatever they're going to be on July 1st.
I know you are. But you see, the added problem which was sort of in my mind, and then resurfaced, is that what we passed this -- what you passed this year must be included as a premise for revenue collections in the five-year plan for the next through 2009. So if the law mandates a level of reduction in wage and business taxes by law over the next five years beyond what's there, then that will have to be reflected in the five-year plan...
...in additional cuts in services, given that we are talking now about a fixed additional payment of roughly 494 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget $288 million. And as I mentioned, by the way --
Over five years, yes. But ironically -- and I made this point in my testimony -- that's roughly not too far from what, in fact, the Tax Reform Commission recommended. I mean, that is over the -- It's close. In fact --
-- it covers the first four years. But now we have that as a fixed payment that we can't for the moment get out of. Maybe the stock market's doing better last year will reveal that we have slightly less to pay in the pension fund. Next year we have no way of knowing what 495 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget that's going to be.
Well, maybe we need to figure out what's going on with our pension fund...
...or seek to reduce some of the costs over there, because depending on the number of money managers you have and the fees that are generated, all of that comes out of the pension fund.
And Councilman, you may recall I listed that as one of the five or six things that I think we absolutely need to do this year to respond to --
Yeah. Well, other than you and I maybe a couple other people around here, I don't hear anybody else talking about that because, you know, that might disrupt or interrupt some other things that happen --
-- that are much 496 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget more positive in other people's pockets.
Well, let me just say, I can't speak for other people. But as an investor who lost a certain amount of money myself, when I started looking at -- When this happened with the pension fund, I am totally outraged by it. And there's so many hours in the day. We're dealing with this now. We got to deal with this, as well as to some extent the way we deal with Blue Cross, which seems to be to their advantage, not ours. And these are the issues that we have to solve to make affordable the things that I think need to happen to implement the tax reform.
As you well understand, and I'm sure you've read through the five-year plan, in the outer years of the plan, any plan that we passed over the past few years, are all of the cuts accounted for? I think there's been a line in the 497 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget five-year plan that has usually made reference to cuts in the future, but they're undetermined.
Well, then it's a question of the magnitude that you're talking about, aren't you -- isn't it?
And also what PICA thinks about the integrity of the --
Yes. No; I understand that. We're dealing with two -- This is about not an abstraction. This is about the real dollars that are facing you. And maybe somebody else has a different judgment.
The only real dollars that are facing us, sir, are the $17 million in FY '05. That's the only dollars in front of us.
But there is a $288 million -- What did you say it was, in 498 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget terms of the pension payment?
It's $30 or $40 million. It's $11 million, I know, for 2004, that we anticipated. And it's sizable over the next three years. That was new information. And the question, you see, is on the notion of we have to adjust to contingencies. If having that kind of increase over the last six weeks, coupled with the fact, as I pointed out, that the City has been operating on a deficit spending basis, operating --
You may have gotten information over the past six weeks. I don't think it happened over the last six weeks. I don't have much in the way of investments, so I don't necessarily have to pay that close attention. But I don't 499 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget think the market has collapsed in the last six weeks.
No; but the amount of money that we have to pay in the pension fund probably was revealed at some point in the fall, and I focused on it over in the last month to six weeks.
I'm going to explode here in a minute. I've been hearing consistently from members of the Commission who have testified here and are consultants, that it was not this Commission's mission to budget. It was this Commission's mission to give to us a road map of reforms that we needed to implement, to get ourselves out of this death spiral of loss of jobs and residents. It was our job to deal with the 500 Whole - 5/12/04 - Operating Budget budget implications of that, if we decided to implement it, not you as Chairman of the Commission's job.
You're speaking about nothing but changes in the budget down the road that we're going to have to adjust.