COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA PUBLIC HEARING AND PUBLIC MEETING BEFORE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - - - Room 400, City Hall Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Weds., 12/9/98, 10:15 a.m. - - - BILL 980799 - Creating West Philadelphia Retail TIF District and approving project plan of PAID for redevelopment of West Philadelphia Retail TIF, being the area generally bounded by 52nd St. on the west, Jefferson St. on the north, the West Parkside Industrial Park on the east, and the Amtrak right-of-way on the south; making certain findings and declarations, all in accordance with the TIF Act, being the act of July 11, 19980, PL. 465, No. 113, as amended; authorizing the Director of Finance and other officers of the City to execute documents and do all things necessary to carry out intent of this ordinance. RES. 980752 - Appointing Michael McMahon to Board of Directors of City Ave. Spec. Svcs. District. RES. 980753 - Appointing Lou Adler to Board of Directors of City Ave. Spec. Svcs. District. RES. 980754 - (Withdrawn) RES. 980755 - Appointing Charles Warfield to Board of Directors of City Ave. Spec. Svcs. District. PRESENT: COUNCIL PRESIDENT JOHN F. STREET COUNCILWOMAN JANNIE BLACKWELL COUNCILMAN DAVID COHEN COUNCILWOMAN ANNA CIBOTTA VERNA COUNCILMAN JAMES F. KENNEY COUNCILMAN MICHAEL A. NUTTER COUNCILWOMAN MARIAN B. TASCO COUNCILMAN FRANK DICICCO COUNCILMAN RICHARD T. MARIANO COUNCILMAN W. THACHER LONGSTRETH COUNCILMAN FRANK RIZZO - - - VINCENT VARALLO ASSOCIATES, INC. Registered Professional Reporters Eleven Penn Center, Suite 600 Philadelphia, PA 19103 (215) 561-2220 2 12/09/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill No. 980799 I N D E X Bill No. 980799 William Hankowsky, President, PIDC. . . . . . 4 3 12/09/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill No. 980799 P R O C E E D I N G S
Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. This is the Council Committee of the Whole meeting. We would appreciate it very much if Councilmembers who are in their chambers and, undoubtedly, listening to this box, we would appreciate it if you would come to the chamber, please. We need a quorum of Councilmembers in the chamber. We have one bill in front of us and several resolutions, but we do need a quorum of Councilmembers in the chamber. We would appreciate it very much if we could get a quorum. This is all Councilman Nutter's legislation. He informs me that if -- he just uninformed me. If we could have all Councilmembers in the building, please come to the chamber. I'm informed that a quorum of the Council is now present. Today we will have a public hearing on Bill No. 980799, which is an ordinance creating the West Philadelphia Retail TIF District and approving the project plan of the Philadelphia Authority for Industrial Development. 4 12/09/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill No. 980799 The Chair recognizes Mr. Hankowsky. Please identify yourself for the record and proceed with a summary of your statement.
Yes. Good morning, Council President and members of City Council and Committee of the Whole. My name is William Hankowsky. I'm the President of the Philadelphia Industrial Development Corporation and appearing today on behalf of the Philadelphia Authority for Industrial Development, or "PAID," and in support of Bill No. 980799 creating the West Parkside West Philadelphia Retail Tax Increment Financing, or TIF, District. My written testimony, I believe is at every Councilperson's chair. And in deference to the president, I'll summarize. This TIF has been reviewed by City Council, by Council staff, and has been worked on with representatives of the School District, community groups. The School District approved this by resolution on November 9, 1998. It sets up a Tax Increment Financing District for a proposed retail project that will range between 80 and 160,000 square feet, including a supermarket 5 12/09/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill No. 980799 and other retail activity and surface parking for between 320 and 640 cars. And it may include a community center for the West Parkside neighborhood. This range was established because what we want to do here is put the TIF in place and then seek a developer, and so we will have final both financing and project specifics once that developer has been selected. In the case of the lower range of 80,000 square feet, we would estimate the total project cost to be million. 1 million of taxes. We are TIFing real estate, use-and-occupancy, sales, and business privilege taxes. We expect it, again, in the lower-end scenario, to create 200 permanent jobs and 150 construction jobs, and that there would obviously be new revenue still coming to the City and to the School District. In the larger scenario of 160,000 square feet, we estimate the total project to be in the range of 28 million. There would be, then, 6 12/09/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill No. 6 million of incremental revenues. We would estimate there to be 400 in the larger scenario, 300 construction jobs, and, again, revenues to the City and the School District. There have been a few changes in the project plan since introduction, which I want to note for the record. One is that the community center was listed as an absolute in the original project plan. Now it is a "maybe," to be determined by the developer and the community as the project proceeds. In the amended and restated plan, we have new schematic site plans that show potential configurations. 5 acres. This was done because, with further analysis, it was determined that the 280 acres which we had acquired from CONRAIL may include certain underground utilities related to Amtrak and, therefore, may not be buildable. So we wanted to make sure that we had a net buildable area of at least eleven and a half acres. 7 12/09/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill No. 980799 This particular change also affects the ordinance, because in the ordinance, we do need to define the TIF district. So we have and we will pass around -- we have an amendment to the ordinance which simply changes the metes and bounds description of the TIF district. I'd like to close by simply noting a few facts on this TIF. This is a project that's been worked on over the last several years by the community and particularly the Empowerment Zone Community Trust Board, the District Councilperson's office, PIDC. We are in the process now of finalizing the acquisition of two and a half acres of private property that was done with Empowerment Zone funding. We've actually begun the demolition of those buildings. I should note that the remaining acreage is being provided by PIDC from our West Parkside Industrial Park. Currently, the community, PIDC, and the District Councilperson are finalizing our request for proposal, which we will issue to the selected developer. And then the intent is for the community to participate in the financial return from this project by an 8 12/09/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill No.
980799 agreement with the developer. And, therefore, believe that by having this TIF process move along, we will be able to provide for the strongest developer interest and the overall best project for both the City and the community. I should also note that since we've prepared this project plan, we have been successful in receiving an additional million dollars from the federal government from HUD under the Brown Fields Economic development Initiative Program, which will provide an additional source of funding for the project. In closing, again, I ask for your approval of the bill, 980799. Given that this is a TIF and has statutory requirements, we are not looking for, nor would we want a suspension of the rules, and we understand that this will get final approval after the winter recess, but will allow us to issue the RFP so that the TIF is pending. Thank you very much.
Thank you, Mr. 9 12/09/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill No. 980799 President. I will be very brief. Mr. Hankowsky, just on the one issue regarding the community center, you're aware that there are ongoing discussions about whether or not there may or may not be a community center at this particular location, right?
Okay. By way of the project plan and your testimony, do you have a comfort level and can you affirm for the record that that is a decision that can be made at a later point in time but that there is flexibility with regard to the plan such that the fact that it is acknowledged that there may be one does not necessarily require that there be a community center; but that if the subsequent developer and the community agree that there will be a center there can be. Is that correct?
In the alternative, if there is no mention made of such a community center or even the possibility of a community center, and there is a subsequent discussion with the community and the developer that they want 10 12/09/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill No. 980799 one, you would then be required to come back and amend this particular project plan at that point in time that the decision was made to have a community center; is that correct?
That's right. And, as you know, because of the mandated legislative process, it require about a two-month-plus cycle to do such an amendment.
Right. So by putting forward the project plan in this fashion, acknowledging that there is a prospect or possibility of having a community center, we afford ourselves the flexibility of making the decision later on, but we do not have to go back through a legislative process if the decision is made to go forward with the community center.
That is exactly correct. And given that, I think, all parties would love to select a developer next year, reach an agreement, and get the project going, that would save us that delay. That's correct.
All right. Thank you. Lastly, I will be putting forward 11 12/09/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill No. 980799 amendments to this particular project. We've had some brief discussion about them. One of them, I think, is rather general. It just puts some reporting requirements on this particular project. From time to time, some of the projects that come through Council, members of the public ask, Whatever with that project and did it match up with the various proposals on jobs and contracts? What happened with minority participation and the like many years down the road? And from what I've seen at least, there are often not strict requirements for reporting later on down the line. With this particular amendment, I would like for this project to ensure that there is reporting on what happens with this project for the life of the district. Do you have a particular problem with that?
Okay. If I could ask the chief clerk to circulate the amendments on this, it would be helpful. I'm sorry, I asked for the chief clerk. I think I meant the sergeant-at-arms. I'm already thinking about 12 12/09/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill No. 980799 tomorrow. The second has to do with an issue that was raised in the public hearings on some other TIF projects that we had a couple weeks ago. Your office was kind enough to provide a chart that indicated, as you did with the project plan, what the revenues are that are generated by these projects even with a TIF, 'cause there are certain tax revenues that come to the City and the School District as a result of these tax increment financing projects, not withstanding what taxes are being TIFed, and then everyone should get one. And then there was a chart that indicated what the project would generate tax-wise if there were no TIF. And we don't have to go back through the "If you didn't have a TIF, you might not have a project," that debate and discussion. But you're aware of my long-standing concern about maximizing tax revenue returns to the School District primarily because of their precarious financial situation. I also care about tax revenues to the City; but between the two governmental institutes, the City is in a better 13 12/09/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill No. 980799 position than the School District. And through this amendment, what it talks about is the difference, as laid out in the project plan, between the taxes that would be generated if there were no TIF for the project versus the actual taxes to be accrued as a result of having a TIF, and that difference, which I refer to as "a TIF differential," proposing that the City would, in fact, make up that difference so that the School District would always be at a maximum point of tax receipts. I will assume for the moment that you might have some brief reaction to that.
As you indicated, Councilman, based on our discussion this morning, where you advised me that you might be proposing these amendments, and given that the second amendment, which deals more with sort of the fiscal policy issues between the City and the District, my view is, though I care about them personally, they're outside the purview of sort of PIDC's role in this process. I did consult with the Administration, and the indication I received from the 14 12/09/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill No. 980799 Administration is that they would oppose such an amendment in terms of, you know, mandating the fiscal relationship between the two bodies, being the City and the School District. And we're concerned also about whether, from a legal basis, there could be a prospective obligation placed on the executive branch to submit an appropriation for consideration by the legislative branch. So. . .
Well, I mean the basic obligation that's created is that there would be a calculation of what that difference is, and that the mayor would at least send over an appropriations transfer to make that happen to the Council. Whether the Council enacts it or not is an entirely separate story and discussion.
We also know that there is the rule of severability with regard to the various bills and ordinances, and we can have that discussion at a later point in time. But I guess, at least for me at the moment, this is the particular bill in front of us, this is a project in the West Philadelphia 15 12/09/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill No. 980799 area, there's great concern at the impact on the School District and the various schools out there. I would certainly like to go forward with it. I would respect and understand your concern, but as you indicated, it's not necessarily completely within the purview of PIDC; you're more interested in trying to get a project done, and it's an issue between the Council and the Administration.
That is an absolute a fair characterization. We hope to create the taxes and then, among all the mechanisms in place, you will decide how believe they should be spent. That's exactly correct.
Mr. Hankowsky, this TIF will use a Section 108 loan. What 16 12/09/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill No. 980799 happens in the event of a default on the 108 loan?
Councilwoman, you go through tiers, so if there are insufficient revenues to pay the 108 loan -- and in this case, what we're proposing is that a portion of the 108 actually fund the TIF notes, so it would get paid by the taxes, and then a portion would be paid by the project rent. And if that's not available, we would have a mortgage position on the property, probably a second mortgage because we're presuming the developer would find private financing on the first mortgage. So we would seek to use our collateral position either to get the developer to pay it, keep the loan current out of other revenues, or seek to foreclose and then get our payment via the value of the real estate. If all those fail, and in the worst case, we cannot find the revenue anywhere in the project or in the asset, then in the worst case, the federal government is permitted to subtract what would be the annual debt service on the 108 loan from the annual community development block 17 12/09/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill No. 980799 grant allocation provided to the City. That's what would happen. That has never happened yet. And, as I think we all know, the portion of the 108 that would be funded by the taxes, I think one would argue, is in the best financial position because the first lien on any property is paying your taxes. So if they don't pay that loan, not only can we foreclose 'cause we have a mortgage that the City can foreclose because you end up with a tax lien and a sheriff's sale scenario.
Mr. Hankowsky, are there any economic analysis from other cities and/or states that have had TIFs in place for the last 15, years? Do you know? 17
There definitely is 18 literature in public policy periodicals, etc., 19 that talk about tax increment financing and sort 20 of the pros and cons of what has happened. And there have been articles written about them, some of which I've gotten copies of and read. So I try to keep track of, for example, what's happening in Pittsburgh, where they're doing TIFs under the same legislation, obviously being in the 18 12/09/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill No. 980799 Commonwealth. And what is -- Chicago has very aggressively been using them over the last several years also. But there is literature out there.
Have you read the program evaluation performed by the state of Minnesota regarding the TIFs?
Well, in reading it, it says that one of the recommendations in that report is that the legislature should consider placing additional restrictions on the use of tax increment revenues for general public improvement projects and community projects. According to this report, it evaluates TIFs back to the 1970s, when they were first utilized in Minnesota. Some types of public improvements may contribute to development activities, but that most improvements have little direct impact on tax base or employment growth let me repeat -- most public improvements have little direct impact on tax-based or employment groups. 19 12/09/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill No. 980799 What research has been done on this concern?
Well, let me start with -- I'm going to respond, assuming I understand how the Minnesota program works. I may be slightly incorrect but my guess is I think I probably understand. Minnesota, California and a few other states were states that have used TIFs going back much further, as the cite indicates, back into the '70s. And the way tax increment financing has been used, I generally call it the sort of -- the stereotype TIF model was where the public, the government, would go and borrow money, issue bonds, borrow money, put in streets, put in utilities, maybe put in a parking garage, on the basis that around it some private party would build development and that those taxes would pay for those bonds. And that what, in fact, has happened is that the development did not occur, the taxes did not occur. And either the bonds went into default or the government entity was forced to take the payment for those bonds out of the general fund, 20 12/09/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill No. 980799 to use our terminology. When we looked at using TIFs in Philadelphia and looked at that model and consulted with the City's financial adviser, Public Financial Management, we made a determination that that model was not a good model to use here; that we could, in fact, have that exact instance occur, which is, you would have to disconnect between the public borrowing, putting in some sort improvements and no taxes being generated. That, in fact, Wall Street would look less favorably on those potential bonds and would look for what's called coverage; you know, you have to have more taxes than you actually needed, look for debt service reserves, etc. So we made a determination that the most, quote/unquote, efficient way to use a TIF was to link it directly to a project that was going to happen. And there would never be a borrowing unless the project happened. In other words, you'd borrow for the project, sort of the private side of the equation. So, for example, in the model that we have here today, you're authorizing this district. 21 12/09/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill No. 980799 If we don't get a developer and that developer doesn't put a project together where this is a part of a total financial package, he's never going to borrow against the TIF, we're never going to give him the 108, the taxes are never going to flow to them. And the result is that though you run the business risk that the project could fail, as, you know, any retail project or office building could fail, you know at least from the initial point of the TIF that there is a physical project that's paying taxes. We would never have the instance, in the Minnesota example, of where we would have spent the money and then find the disconnect that the taxpayer never showed up, the project never showed up.
And, in fact, the way we use TIFs has intrigued a number of other municipalities. Just about three weeks ago, I had Baltimore economic development officials up who wanted to understand how we were using TIFs and they how worked and how we used 'em in 108s because they had heard that there was a way that 22 12/09/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill No. 980799 we were doing 'em that was, again, sort of more efficient. And though you still have risks -- you always have risks -- that we had sort of sort of mitigated much of the risks. So I think that's the comparison between how Minnesota or California had used them historically and how we're using them here.
Thank you very much. The Chair recognizes Councilman Nutter.
Thank you, Mr. President. Mr. Hankowsky, I just wanted to go over a bit of the information that you had provided. How many TIFs have you testified in favor of here in City Council?
I've testified in favor of thirteen. Next week, I'll be doing my fourteenth. We have one pending, so. . .
Right. And what's been the range of the TIF notes on these various projects?
The range in size of the TIF notes? 23 12/09/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill No. 980799
The size of the TIF notes have ranged from, I guess, as small as 4 or 5 million to as high, as I believe. . . to as high as 62 at Penn's Landing. And then the Navy base, of course we have the district, and that number could be higher there, but that has to happen overtime.
At least a plurality, if not a majority, are in Center City, if that's the question. And then, of course, we have one in Southwest Philadelphia.
There's one in North 24 12/09/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill No. 980799 Philly, which is the --
Actually, we have two there. We have both Cecil B. Moore and Jump Street. And, actually, a third, Brewery Town, is in lower west north Philadelphia.
That's the Eighth and Walnut. That would be Washington Square West. The Navy Yard is, of course, South Philadelphia. And the one today is in West Philadelphia.
Right. So the majority of them have primarily been Center City, and then a couple out in neighborhoods.
Well, again, I guess we always -- one, two, three, four, five, six, -- 25 12/09/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill No. 980799 there are six to seven in neighborhoods, the way I would define neighborhoods. Almost half.
Okay. And from your perspective, neighborhood to neighborhood, do you make any evaluation of the impact that any of these projects can have not only at the location but in the surrounding community in terms of revitalization and bringing a neighborhood back? Is that a part of the decision-making process?
Well, I think part of the decision-making -- well, I think there are two aspects to that, Councilman. One is that if a project would come to us in what I would call a vacuum, somebody brings -- and I'll use the example of a private developer that says, Here, I've finally decided in this neighborhood, I'd like to do this project. Well, have you talked to the community? Where are you, what else is going on? And if none of that has happened, we tend to say, You should go talk to the community, you should probably see the District Councilperson to find out if, in fact, the project has viability independent of whether we're going to consider it for a TIF. 12/09/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill No. 980799 So we do it at that level. And then at the second level, in an underwriting sense, we'll -- you know, we would like to make sure it gets paid off, the TIF note gets paid off. So we want to know the project has some viability. So we would question a project that's in an area that had -- where not -- where quote/unquote, nothing else was going on and how that worked in an underwriting sense.
All right. And, lastly, your summary sheet on all the various TIFs seems to indicate that with the projects, we 14 will have $460 million in various TIF notes as a result of the 14 projects; is that correct?
Yes. In the maximum. Again, the Navy base sort of disproportionately skews that, but that is the maximum potential outstanding amount.
Right. And this project is scheduled for $4.9 million.
Yes, 1.something, 27 12/09/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill No. 980799 right.
Mr. Hankowsky, I know you mentioned the Navy Yard as a TIF.
How many businesses have relocated to the Navy Yard, to your knowledge?
Off the top of my head, Councilwoman, I'd say we're probably in the range of about that are there, currently operating. 15
Is that more or 16 less than you anticipated at this point in time? 17
It's probably a little 18 less than I anticipated at this point in time. 19 I think we've struggled with a host of 20 issues, from issues of land disposition, 21 environmental cleanup, utilities, etc., and just, 22 unfortunately, things tend to take longer than you 23 think to get resolved. 24 I think the past year has seen a very 25 strong foundation built between the Kvaerner 28 12/09/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill No. 980799 transaction, the cruise ship terminal. We have Building 100 under renovation. We are now talking confidentially at the moment to potential companies who would supply Kvaerner and would want to locate on site so that we're beginning to see kind of the seedlings of how that project could yield. Other companies will take facilities to provide -- a simple example is, if somebody needs a place to put all the welding and equipment supplies that they would supply to Kvaerner, then they're going to need a warehouse, so we'll have jobs on the site. 15 So I think it will pick up apace with 16 that anchor. 17
Well, I would 18 just, in closing, like to say that with the TIFs 19 that we have given out, most of them have been in 20 Center City, as has been said. I would really 21 like us to start concentrating on neighborhoods. 22 I think we've got to start revitalizing our 23 neighborhoods, and I really wish you would look 24 into that. 25
Fine, yeah. 29 12/09/98 WHOLE COMMITTEE - Res. 980752, 980753, 980755
Thank you very much. Councilman Nutter, what is your pleasure? The resolutions in front of us today are all resolutions for the Board of Directors of the City Avenue Special Services District of Philadelphia and Lower Merion.
Yes. Mr. President, there are four resolutions. One of them needs to be withdrawn because, unfortunately, between the time of introduction and now, the person no longer works at the particular location. That would be Resolution 980754, pointing to Dr. Linda Dunn. That resolution needs to be withdrawn. I have talked to the other three nominees. They all wish to serve. I do have a copy of a letter from Mr. Charles Warfield, from WDAS. He had planned to actually be at today's hearing but, unfortunately, is now out of town, but he does wish to have a letter indicating his agreement to participate entered into the record. With regard to the others, I would like to move them forward Mr. President. They are looking forward to serving on the City Avenue 30 12/09/98 WHOLE COMMITTEE - Res. 980752, 980753, 980755 Special Services District.
And, Mr. Dunn -- I'm sorry, he's been withdrawn. Then there's Mr. Warfield. And then Mr. Michael McMahon, is he here?
All right. Councilman, did you participate in the process to select these various members' recommendations to the board of directors?
Yes, I did, as well as many other stakeholders in the City Avenue Special Services District.
That I'll need to 31 12/09/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill No. 980799 get back to you on, Mr. President. (Laughter.)
All right, I figured that. All right. Well, thank you very much. It is my understanding that there are two sets of amendments to Bill No. 980799; is that correct?
That is correct, Mr. President. There are some amendments put forward by PIDC that have to do with metes and bounds. The area has to be expanded because of some technical reasons. And then I have my own.
All right. Now, it is my understanding that all of the amendments have been circulated. Is the Administration supportive of all the amendments?
No. I consulted with the Administration earlier this morning, Mr. President, and they support the first of Councilman Nutter's amendments, but not the second.
To be fair, Mr. President, they're not supporting the first.
Oh, I'm sorry. 32 12/09/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill No. 980799
I stand corrected. The first one deals with the issue of the mayor submitting an appropriation ordinance to balance the TIF differential.
Do you have any testimony on the ordinance -- on the amendments?
I think fairly to say, I became aware of it this morning. I sought out the Administration because it's a fiscal issue. Obviously, it's outside sort of the purview of PIDC's role. Received that response and share with you, which is the best I sort of was able to do in the time frame available, Mr. President.
Councilman, have we done such an amendment in any other TIF?
No, not to my knowledge, Mr. President. This came out of a discussion that we had about two weeks ago when there were four TIFs in front of us, and we engaged in somewhat of a lively discussion about the impact on the School District of TIFs. We've made it, I believe, clear for the 33 12/09/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill No. 980799 record that the School District does not lose any money. This is more a debate about the difference between what they would get with no TIF versus what they'd get with a TIF. Although the argument can be made that if that there were no TIF, there would be no project. That is certainly often used as a defense. Notwithstanding that, since the City is in a better financial position than the School District, and the City also receives usually, with the exception of one project coming to us, significantly more tax revenues than the School District, because normally, its real estate taxes, and often for some projects, use and occupancy tax, that the City of Philadelphia is in a better position to assist the district under these circumstances. I think when there was some discussion going on about this, you may have been in a conversation with Councilman DiCicco at the time. What I said, Mr. President, is that it would be difficult for PIDC to resolve this particular issue. Certainly if there is a dispute about it, all of these ordinances are subject to 34 12/09/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill No. 980799 severability clauses, and we can fight that out with the Administration and/or the Law Department at a later point in time. I would like to at least move the amendment and keep that discussion viable.
I understand that. My concern is procedural, not substantive. And I'm not sure what happens. I'm not sure whether or not this amendment would cause the mayor to have to veto this thing if he felt like it for some reason, and whether or not that now causes us to have to start all over again. Can I do this. I really -- I mean, I have some reservations about whether or not we should do this. I would like to know the implications of it and what complications it might make. Would you have any objections if we just recessed this stuff until tomorrow morning, talk to the City Solicitor, find out what are the implications of putting this in now and then 35 12/09/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill No. 980799 having somebody having a problem with it, whether or not that slows this whole thing down. Does that put us in a position where you have, you know, potential veto problems and all of that? I don't think anybody has any concern about the TIF itself. The only concern I have is about this language and what procedural questions might get raised depending on how strongly the Administration feels about it.
I think, Mr. President, what I'd rather do is, at least at this moment, move forward with it. We can't vote on the bill until we return so we will have an enormous amount of time to try to make that decision. If the ultimate decision is that the bill would either be vetoed or that the Administration wouldn't take the severability route, I would then reserve the right on the floor to amend the offending section out. And it would not slow the process down.
Yeah, but it doesn't slow the process down if we do this in the morning. 36 12/09/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill No. 980799
Well, I understand that. We do have community people here and I think the President is quite aware that we have three other hearings scheduled for tomorrow morning, one of which at least could be rather lengthy, potentially. I mean, obviously, I want the project to happen, and I think -- I mean, I'll make it very clear for the record. I am not going to do anything that's going to potentially slow the project down or damage its ability to go forward. If a final conclusion is made that the piece needs to come out, then I'm going to be responsible, and I can do that right on the floor during the second reading and final passage.
Councilman Cohen, there are some of us who have to leave here because we are being waited for at another meeting.
Yeah. I'm among 37 12/09/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill No. 980799 those. I'm just saying that I think it would be good if we accepted Councilman Nutter's suggestion because for those of us that have many concerns about TIFs in general and have been dragged along, that amendment would make the road much smoother. And for that reason, it makes a TIF much more acceptable if it leads to protecting the School District from any potential harmful effects. It doesn't seem to me that it would involve much money. I can't see it possibly endangering the TIF. But I'm sure that, you know, you will be looking into that and discussing it with the mayor. But I think makes a TIF far more acceptable financial tool if this amendment is accepted, not only for this particular development, but I think in these kinds of development. Thank you, Mr. President.
Thank you very much. Any other discussion on it? (No further discussion.) - - - 38 12/09/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Public Meeting
The Chair recognizes Councilman Nutter for a motion that the amendments be adopted.
Mr. President, are you taking a motion for all amendments or just --
Okay. Mr. President, I move the adoption of all of the amendments that have been offered either by myself or PIDC. (Duly seconded.)
All those in favor, let it be known by saying aye. Those opposed, say nay. The ayes have it. It is so moved. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Verna for a motion on the amended bill.
Mr. President, I move that Bill No. 908799 be reported of committee a favorable recommendation, as amended. (Duly seconded.)
All those in favor, let it be known by saying aye. Those opposed, say nay. 39 12/09/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Public Meeting The ayes have it. This bill will be reported out with a favorable recommendation and without a rules suspension. Just before -- would Councilman Nutter please approach the chair. (Councilman Nutter approaches the Chair.)
This committee will stand in recess until tomorrow morning, at 9 o'clock. I'm sorry, the Chair recognizes Councilwoman Verna for a motion on the resolutions.
Thank you, Mr. President. I move that Resolution No.'s 980752, 980753, and 980755 be reported out of committee with a favorable recommendation. (Duly seconded.)
All those in favor, let it be known by saying aye. Those opposed, say nay. The ayes have it. It is so ordered. The Chair recognizes Councilman Nutter.
Thank you, Mr. 40 12/09/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Public Meeting President. I'd like to formally put on the record that Resolution 980754 is being withdrawn.
Thank you very much. The committee stands in recess until tomorrow morning, at o'clock a.m.. 7 (Adjourned at 11:00 a.m.) 8 - - - 9 41 C E R T I F I C A T E I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing proceedings of the Council of the City of Philadelphia of Wednesday, December 9, 1998, were reported fully and accurately by me, and that this is a correct transcript of same. RE: COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE BILL NO. 980799 RESOLUTION NO.'S 980752, 980753, 980755 __________________________________, JOSEPHINE CARDILLO, Registered Professional Reporter