In honor of President Verna's request, I will table and recess my questions for now. Thank you, Madam President.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Mr. Ali and Mr. Cruz, and I'm not sure how many other members of the panel are contractors, but I just have a quick observation, a question. Do you know if at any time any of the contractors have ever made suggestions on how to do these tasks differently? You heard the part about the stuccoing of the walls. Have you ever looked 513 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 at that and shook your head and say, why are we doing this like we are doing it?
Thank you, Councilman, Rizzo. My name is Charles Chaka Trotter, I am from Skills Bank Building Association, and we do brick block and stucco. What I found interesting is, somebody has been misled. I know that -- oh, I am sorry. I would like to thank the Council for having me have the opportunity to express myself. Somebody has been misinformed. I know the last package we bidded on, the stucco, we had to bid it for $2 a square foot to be competitive. Do you remember that? Now we are sitting here finding out that the competitive bid is, what, $5 or $6 a square foot? 5.45. $9,000? If I could get $9,000 for doing the building, I would have me a condo down there on the waterfront. Okay? Now, this is not happening. Somebody is being misled. All right? Now, our struggle again continues to be for economic development. Now, somehow or 514 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 another it must be a thin line between economic development and economic exploitation. I know that we shake the tree -- I will try to keep it quick. Our family is from Raleigh, North Carolina.
You can go on, but I need to know, I just want you to answer the question. We are hearing today that it costs 9,000 bucks to do one of these walls. I am asking, has anyone ever suggested a better way, a smarter way, to do this? And now what I am hearing is that you bid at $2 and some change a square foot, and you are hearing today that the deal got done for 5.45. What I want to hear is, have you ever looked at the process and said, you know, you are wasting taxpayer's money doing it this way, there is a better way?
Yes, we have looked at that. The process, the methodology that is 515 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 used to do stucco, we looked at stucco. The only thing that really can be changed about that method is the scaffolding. And because that's the time-consuming thing, to put the scaffold up. Mr. Solvibile, he testified to the technicality of the application of the mortar going onto the wall; that they use it with a method like some type of powered method, then it wouldn't adhere to the wall. And what he didn't say, it would create a void behind the wire mesh. And during the winter water would go in there, freeze up, expand, and push the wire out. So that's why they shot down the sprayed application method. But the methodology that would change the total cost to a subcontractor is just only, we could use -- that would be an individual decision. And the market, if the market was there, the ingenuity of the contractors would come up with another method as far as putting up scaffolding, whether using mobile methods 516 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 or not.
In what you do or what you bid on, do you see any areas where things could be differently? Like we mentioned the scaffolding. I don't have a lot of experience in construction, but I watch a lot of property being built. And when I see a lot of scaffolding up, and I don't see us using the state-of-the-art equipment that could save the contractor money and in turn save the City of Philadelphia money, have you seen other things like not using mechanized equipment and scaffolding on the work that you are familiar with that we could do better, we could do smarter, we could save some money?
There is always a better method. Like I always say, if we have all the more minds putting our interest together, we are going to find the method. You will see when you ride across the city. What you will see on some of the 517 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 bigger brick jobs, you will see they no longer stack scaffold on top of one another. They use a mechanized thing that raises up and lowers down. But the market dictates that. And for small contractors, they have to have a continued amount of work to support the purchase of that equipment. So there is always another method. But what we are talking about, in terms of price, what Ms. Smith is saying and Mr. Solvibile is saying in terms of the market being driven by the prices, the real reality is, you have a limited number of contractors participating in that process, and that's what's driving the price up. What we saw by us being included at the last bid opening this week was, we had two disadvantaged contractors who within 20 hours put in bids and were second and third on that list.
Could you go back over and explain to me how you could bid 2 dollars and some change per square foot and it 518 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 turns out to be 5.45? Something is not right here.
What Mr. Trotter was alluding to, Ms. Smith gave testimony earlier that -- I'm sorry, Mr. Solvibile, he testified that their prices per square foot was 5.45 cents a square foot. And we take an average house that's 30 foot high, 50 foot in length, that would be 1500 square foot. If we multiply that out, that would be $8175. Round that up, that's $9,000. But that's what the GC would put in his package for a price for stucco, that when Hill International opened the bid. There was a line item, it would say $9,000 for stucco. But then when it said the minority piece, you can bet assured that the minority piece would be bid at the $2 per price. So you would see a line item that said, "Trotter," at $3,000. That would be his price. But -- and the primary contractor would be walking away with $5125 in profit. Now, if you do that out by 65, 100 519 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 properties, you can see it is pretty lucrative.
So what you are telling me, if they shop smart, instead of spending 5.45 for a square foot, they could have gotten it for 2 and how much?
What we are saying in reality is, the market from the subcontractor point of view is keeping it consist at $2, maybe 2.25 a square foot. However, on the primary market, they are telling Council they are paying $5.45, and that's disingenuous because they are really not paying that price.
And you guys that are actually doing the work are getting 2 dollars and some change, and the rest is going into the bank of the primary contractor?
I had a feeling 520 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 all along that there was going to be a story like this some day told.
It is out there. And the other thing the Council needs to look at, you need to look at, like the Chair just asked, who is participating? Let's look at it in black and white. What's the name of those firms? And Council cannot ignore the fact that some of these firms have a relationship with some of their other firms. So it is easy to see that you could, that this Council could, be being manipulated. You could have four firms, which I think the testimony was earlier that Hill International bid it. And I was surprised that Mr. Solvibile didn't name Mellow Construction, Molly Construction, DeNobo Construction, companies that have been dominant in the award of those contracts. He didn't name those. But if you look at the relationships that these people have, they have a social relationship, a social network that you cannot 521 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 ignore that might be driving the price up.
I got you. And I guess what I am hearing is the fact that we are hearing from NTI that the cost of this work is going up. What I am hearing is, the profit on this work is going up.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Good afternoon. Just a couple of quick questions. In the Contractors Roundtable, you indicated you have approximately 35 members. Of those members, how many of those members deal predominantly with demolition?
So far we have Luis Cruz and Eric Bonner, two. Two. I'm sorry; it is three. Charlie Trotter.
Three demolition contractors. All right. 522 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 In the earlier hearing, with respect to this issue, I had asked a question of the Administration about existing contractors. One of the concerns that we had, one of the thoughts that we had when we talked about implementing this program, that this would afford an opportunity to existing contractors the ability to grow their company because of the substantial amount of demolition. And I had asked was there a program in place to address those individuals. Didn't really get a specific answer to that. Understanding my belief that the Emerging Contractors Program was dealing primarily with individuals who were start-ups or had some minimal technical skills, would upgrade their technical skills to be in a position to become bonded, and things of that nature. Is your concern primarily around the fact that the Existing Contractors do not have a process in place administered by NTI or the city that helps those companies grow or be in 523 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 a position to better participate as primes, or is your concern that the existing Emerging Contractors Program does not include the ability to do that for those existing contractors?
To answer that, Councilman Clarke, it is yes or both counts. When this thing started, we asked, from the inception of their concept, that it would have been better to include existing firms who have been out there, who know the safety, they know the regulations, they have insurance and bonding, to let's do joint ventures with Emerging Contractors. Because everybody needs a hand. But in this industry you cannot get your foot established if you don't have experience and if you don't have the money and bonding. So we asked that. We were told by, at the time I think it was Jerry Valerie, he was strongly opposing the fact that somebody would do something as a joint venture. Although Mr. Valerie has a 524 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 tremendous background in construction, he never actually was in the foot and in the trenches. So he really didn't know that you really, theoretically on paper, you might do one thing. But the reality of the world is those Emerging Contractors need to be locked hand in hand in with existing firms from the beginning. Our thing was shot down because the argument was, well, you know, I don't want somebody else's name on the contract. We want these guys to be primes.
I hear what you are saying. And I don't want to personalize the testimony talking about specific individuals, where we can talk about the programs, it would be better. Representing the district that I represent, you know, I obviously had a lot of interaction with contractors as it relates to demolition over a number of years. And one of the biggest issues from small contractors, that they didn't have an 525 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 opportunity to participate in various processes as relates to demo and other aspects of construction. So I think that we heard that personally. And I wanted to ensure that there was an opportunity. So I in no way want to limit a small contractor to get resources to become a sub, not talking about a prime but become a sub. Well, my concern is that I do not see in place a program that deals with existing contractors; not just in demolition, but in some other aspects of what we do as relating to construction. What I am trying to understand, if you are concerned, you are saying both, but what I would like to do is focus on the ability for existing subs to be able to bid on primes. If we/government had in place a policy or a program that would enhance the existing contractors who have some substantive level of skills both technically and ability to get some level of bonding in place to 526 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 enhance their ability, would that be something that you would be interested in participating in?
Let me shift my question to the Administration. Ms. Smith, through an amendment or a change -- and I won't say, "amendment" -- but a change in the policy as it relates to the NTI, could we put in place relatively quickly, at minimal, a policy initiative, and so we have a programmatic initiative, to assist the existing contractors, regardless of who they are -- because, again, I don't want to personalize any particular organization or names or individuals -- but from a programmatic standpoint put in place something in a short time because we want to access whatever we can as soon as possible. Because I do have a concern that I don't see the number of primes bidding on these contracts.
Yes. I know when we 527 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 met, when I talked with Mr. Ali last week, he wanted to talk about the concept of joint ventures. So what I wanted to do, and I know he has had some preliminary -- I believe he had some preliminary conversations, I am willing to follow up to look at a programmatic initiative that's more focused on established prime contractors, including everything from sizing of packages, to any other issues and ideas that you may have. And then, of course, seek appropriate funding, I guess, for that program.
What kind of time line would we put on the initial phase of that?
What I would like to do, if it is amenable to you, is to, maybe, when we come back with the FY '05 program budget and statement, to have something in place to talk about, an outline at least conceptually about that.
Usually we submit the 528 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 final May 1, the final program statement and budget May 1.
So by May 1 you can have a set of policies and procedures and targeted funding source or whatever to implement such a program May 1?
I can nod on policies and procedures. And funding sources, that's a little bit harder. But, no. 14 Again, I think one of the things I do want to emphasize, and I hope that we have been trying to do, is make those adjustments and changes. I think we have already done some changes. And I think if we look at the participation, even though it has been at the subcontracting level, it has been greater on demolition contracts than ever before. Like I said, the small bid program is going. And already you have heard the results, I think, of that initiative. And 529 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 there is always more to do. So we are committed that, as I said. And the focal point is established contractors, as opposed to emerging contractors.
Let me make sure I am hearing you right. By May 1, when you come back for the yearly sign-off on NTI, you will have in place a policy, procedures from a programmatic standpoint, and probably identify a funding source?
What I don't want to do is sit here and talk about a process, and knowing full well at the end of the day you are not going to be in a position to implement the program.
And I am just being honest. The resources, for example, for the Emerging Contractors is out of Commerce. We 530 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 look around government for --
That's fine. I understand our financial problem, I truly do. But at a minimum, you want to meet with the --
In fact, we already said we were -- I begged off to meet when we concluded this particular group of work. We have already touched base.
Can I ask the Chair, if at all possible, we have a member on staff, Mr. Rye, who is part of his responsibility in Council is to deal with minority contractors, if he can be a part of that process so Council -- I am assuming other Council Members individually are interested in participating; that's obviously something that that independently elected official can do -- participate in that process and receive notices of the status of that process? Because we don't want to have to come back here May and nothing has happened, you know, in terms of meetings and establishing a policy and procedure. 531 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04
Certainly. We are happy, and I am sure the president would agree, and certainly I as majority leader am happy to ask Mr. Howard Rye to participate. Before I call on Councilwoman Tasco, I wanted to ask a question, since I had an amendment today and there is some big question about funding sources. We are talking about setting up this process whereby the emerging contractors or existing contractors have the ability to participate. Where is the question about money? Are you talking about setting aside project money for them, or where are we talking about cost, since everything becomes a question of cost and our budget process?
That's one of the reasons, in response to Councilman Clarke's question, I think we got to look at everything in the context of, you know, our program statement and budget, you know, other resources that we may be able to bring to 532 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 bear. Because I understood you wanted not just a commitment -- like, for example, doing small bid packages doesn't involve a funding source issue. We put them out in smaller packages. But if there were other issues or ideas that the Contractors Roundtable may have that's more like a program that may be funding, we are going to have to identify resources. So some things we probably could do.
It was always my belief, upon the establishment of the program, that this was a great opportunity to help existing contractors grow their company because of the level of work that was going to be provided by this NTI demolition program in setting aggressive goals on participation. It was always my belief from day one that this was going to help first, primarily, the existing contractors; and then as the process evolved, we realized we needed to get additional contractors in the pipeline. I am 533 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 comfortable with that. But if we didn't establish the first criteria or priority, then I don't think we have done what we should have done. Whatever shape or form that you come up with that relates to establishing some strategy to get these contractors, existing contractors, in the process as primes, because we want to walk out of here having created a number of primes that could be self-sustained. Then, if we don't do that, then I don't think we have been successful in our approach to all of this.
I agree, Councilman. And it seems to me, and I have spoken with them, they are always willing to take someone new and bring them into the fold, is what they do, is what contractors do and what people do. Especially minorities, because they know through helping one another does anybody get the opportunity. But my question is still, I don't know -- it seems to me we are talking about a 534 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 commitment to -- I don't see where there is a big money issue. If they are trying to take advantage of projects that private developers and others are doing out there, it seems to me to be, the main issue is the question of how we do business and inclusion. If the city sets up a program, we have people in place, unless we are hiring somebody new to set up a program under NTI, or if that's the money, but it seems to me it is not about cost as much as it is about a program of inclusion for contractors so that they can get work that takes place in the city, whether it be public work or private work. And I don't see that as a matter of money. Now, maybe I am missing something. And I am happy to be corrected. But I don't understand where there would be any hesitation on commitment for this program.
Majority Leader Blackwell, I think you hit the nail right on the head. That's exactly what we are talking 535 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 about.
I have a couple of quick questions. One of the issues, Mr. Cruz, you had indicated earlier that you were a union contractor and you were not able to in actuality participate based on the number that was provided for demolition contracts. And you said you have seen a substantial escalation in the available money per house; is that what you said? The numbers have gone from, I think, Ms. Smith said, the numbers were around $8,000 back when we had bid some of the first packages, and now the numbers are about 15, 16 thousand dollars. And that was based on the original bids, Redball being one of the originals. And he was a nonunion contractor provided to the city --
So the numbers now are reasonable for someone like ourselves to be able to feel comfortable to bid on the packages. 536 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04
One other thing, last thing. Can I ask Ms. Smith, if you could get me -- and I don't know if this information is available -- but was there an analysis done or can there be an analysis done on participation prior to the implementation of NTI on contracts, prime, subs, and employment, and since its inception of NTI for those categories?
Councilman Clarke, just for a point. Understand that the curb-side bids and those bids, the majority of those contractors that do that work are nonunion and aren't mandated to follow the prevailing wage act. So that's why they are able to -- I mean, for numbers' sake, they could pay their guys 6 bucks an hour and get away with it. Where we, you know, pay --
I understand. I 537 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 participated in a number of curb-side bids by virtue of standing on the corner with some angry constituents. Just get that property down. We call in, we get on the phone, they get a knock-down, in two days the constituent is happy, I am happy. So I guess Mr. Solvibile is happy. But the union work force that didn't have an opportunity to participate is not happy. I mean, that's just the reality. Like you said earlier, the average person on the street doesn't care how it gets done or who does it, they just want it done. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you very much. I am not sure, I have been distracted several times, what the answer was, but we are not finished this issue by a long shot. But let me defer to Councilwoman Tasco, who has been waiting to ask her question.
Thank you, 538 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 Madam Chair. I kind of agree with Councilwoman Blackwell on this issue. It is a matter of how you do business. Ms. Smith, who develops the specifications for the contract? Does that go through the procurement department or through Hill International?
The actual -- there's two parts of the contract. There's what I would call the standardized boilerplate. At the beginning of the program we may, in working with the law department and procurement, there were a number changes in what we will call the boilerplate. But each time you put out a bid, we develop a specific -- what we call design a specific package for the houses included in the bid. For the targeted program, that work, that written documentation is done by Hill. So, for example, one bid package may have ten three-story houses and five two-story houses and different, you know, requirements. 539 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 Another bid package can be the exact difference. So they have to be customized. On the emergency curb-side program, they are generic bid specs. But just as the Councilman explained, you are usually going out and you are usually making on-the-spot decisions. So I think that's much more flexible. Mr. Solvibile can talk to that. But Hill does the bid specification or what we call the design the bid package for each group of houses we do.
So my question to the gentlemen at the table is, what has been the impediment to you being successful in bidding on some of the contracts that have been led?
Jamal Johnson, I am involved with the Contractors Roundtable. And we initially formed our contractors group to solve that problem, the lack of inclusion on NTI and other contracting projects in the city, whether they are public works, private works, capital improvement, and et cetera. 540 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 And what we wanted to do was figure out a way to get included in these projects. So one of the reasons we got together was to get involved. So we initially thought that we was going to come up with NTI to establish a program to help the existing contractors. But what came out of it was a program that wasn't designed to help us. They did come up with a program which was the Emerging Contractors Technical Assistance Center, which we don't have a problem with. But we needed a program or a vehicle of opportunity for the existing contractors, and that's what we missed on setting up.
You didn't answer my question. If there is a bid package put out for demolition, how many of you participated, how many participated in the bid? And if you didn't get the bid, what was the impediment to you being successful, if you did bid on the contract?
Councilwoman, initially 541 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 we were one of those contractors that bid on the first packages, as I had mentioned earlier. What was the impediment was that, as a businessperson, we didn't feel that we could make the numbers work. At the end of the day, we didn't feel we would make the numbers work. We did bid on one of the packages. And after being unsuccessful with that one, we tracked. Because we had tracked some of the first ones, and then bid, and then continued to track it. While we were tracking them, the numbers were fluctuating back and forth, back and forth. Now the numbers are more realistic. So talking about the numbers, the numbers now are more realistic to be able to bid on these packages.
So as opposed to being, let's say, a minority contractor -- let's get that out of the way -- and small business, as a small businessperson bidding on the contracts, I want to know what is the 542 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 impediment for a small business to compete against the people who are winning the bid? When you look at the specifications for the project, what prevents you from being, the small business which tend to be minority, what are some of the impediments to you being successful?
My name is Eric Smith. I would like to answer that question. The program that was set up as far as the Emerging Contractors is concerned helps to assist contractors in more things than just learning how to do the work. It helps in financing, bonding, all types of issues like that. Those are situations that we as small contractors still have to face. So what stopped us or prevents us is, basically, the fact that we don't have our businesses developed enough to participate in a program like this. The NTI program has quite a bit of paperwork. There is a lot of administration required, a lot of requirements that you might not have to necessarily follow if you weren't 543 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 doing city work. So, you know, our businesses, basically, just need support to be developed to have the capacity to win those bids, to be able to bond the projects and to do the work.
So are you saying that in the Emerging Contractors Program, there is assistance to help those small businesses obtain bonding?
Sure. They help them to develop their companies. In other words, the emerging contractors are helped to develop a company, to acquire bonding, et cetera. How successful they have been, I don't know. But that is a part of the program.
So there is nothing in place to help the existing contractors obtain -- because bonding is a problem, and it has always been a problem.
So there is no 24 support there to help you with the bonding issue? 544 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04
Bonding capacity. Bonding capacity, right, for established contractors. Because bonding capacity is more than just how much money you can borrow; it is a lot of things involved in that criteria.
So the ability not to obtain the bond will always keep you in the -- don't you have to have bonding as a subcontractor, too? Or does the majority, you would use the majority bond?
Let me ask you a question. These large contractors, they are sort of like the corporate head; right? But do they subcontract out most of their work? All of the work is subcontracted because they subcontract to -- subcontract out. How much do they have in-house?
I think that depends on what type of company it is. If it is a demolition company, then they may only subcontract a minority portion 545 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 of it.
And they do the rest it have in-house with their own employees?
Right. But if they are a general contractor or someone that's just gotten involved to try to take advantage of the NTI program, then they may, you know, sub out the majority of their work.
So when you go back to when they write in the bidding, and they are writing the numbers, they put in $5, so that they make the difference and they pay you $2 as a subcontractor? So that increases the costs. Wherein, if you were a small business and you were doing the $2, then it would be less because you wouldn't subcontract out, you would do the work yourself and pay your employees.
Yes. That also contributes to why we need assistance in developing. Because as long as the system is in place the way that it is, 546 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 then we are always subject to getting the work for a lower amount, which doesn't allow us to develop our company, to get to a point where we can act as majority contractors.
So small bid packages that could be developed so that you could do a portion of the work, and so two or three could do the work, you would bid on and get the same $5 for demolishing, and you wouldn't have to subcontract out. So you could meet the dollar amount and meet the figures; right?
Okay. Mr. Cruz, you said that the numbers are beginning to work now. Did you review the other bids that came in from the companies who were successful in obtaining the contracts? Have you reviewed those, their submission of their bids?
No; they just give the numbers. But the numbers were close enough -- like, in other words, our number was off by $2,000. So -- you know, to the other 547 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 contractor. So, that's pretty good.
But you do have an opportunity to review their submissions, don't you?
I guess you could. Under the Sunshine Act you could probably request it.
I think it would be helpful, then you could see what numbers they are putting in the bid package. It helps you as a businessperson understand how they are bidding on those projects.
Then it gives you some way to compare your numbers that you submitted and the numbers they submitted, and what they are doing in terms of the project and what you may or may not be doing.
Councilwoman, I just wanted to make a point on that. If they take out -- now, Ms. Smith took out the whole building and put packages -- or NTI, Hill, put small packages, if they did the same thing, say, for the 548 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 stucco, then Mr. Trotter could bid. If they put them out in two, that's $10,000, or $20,000. They could do that equally across the items that are actually being subcontracted to the disadvantaged firms.
So that the contractor bids on the whole package and subcontracts each thing. Where you are saying, if they put out stucco, they put out this, they put out that, then you would be able to bid on that entity, that portion of the contract?
Yes. And we have existing regulations that have certain exemptions for a certain dollar level. So we could capitalize on what this Council has already put in place, if we just got more cooperation and we were included in the process.
So let's just go back to bonding. So, then, just answer for me, what do you think would be a solution that this body or this city can do to help you with your 549 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 bonding issue?
Currently, Councilwoman, the city has a services bid bond program. You pay a percentage, and the city will bond your jobs, I think, up to a half million dollars. I don't know what the exact number is. And you might pay like $100 for a year of that bonding under services contracts. I think that we should look into doing something like that for these bonds. Because, at the end of the day, if you don't perform the job, you are not going to get paid. So that's the guarantee right there. The bid bond is only a second insurance, let's say; that if something down the road comes up, maybe go back on your bond. But, basically, if we have the inspectors, which there is several of them, you have the city inspector, you have an NTI inspector, you have your own staff that you are supposed to have there as your inspector, so the bases are basically covered. And if you have your insurance policy in place, I don't -- I think it is 550 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 undermining to have the bonds in these particular projects, at least for NTI's, because your bases are covered with your fee. We don't get paid until the job is done. There is your guarantee right there. If we are not getting the job done, we are not going to get paid.
But who picks up the cost of doing the job? So the money is still there to complete the job, if someone else needs to --
Yes. But that's why you are prequalified. So you do have a track record, you do have a record. Because one of the things that affects us from participating out in the market is being able to get bonds. So, basically, we are always begging from scraps from majority contractors or general contractors or owners to be able to do their projects. But in this aspect, if you qualify, your prequalification, then you are an established contractor. You don't want to 551 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 fizzle out and destroy it because the city is giving you an opportunity to be able to go out there and participate. Like my colleague, that's what impedes him from being able to go out there and get these jobs, is because he can't get the bonding himself.
Is there a fee for the bonds? It is like an insurance cost; right?
It is not the cost of the bonding; it is getting the surety companies to feel that you are capable or competent enough to be able to be given the bond. It is not like an insurance bond, where you just go pay your premium. Basically, you have to have enough assets. And they want to see liquid assets. They want to be able to go in and for you to have at least 20 to 50 thousand dollars, where they can just go to your bank and just grab it. 552 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04
You never get to that point because you are never able to generate any profit to have that cushion for you to continue on doing the business.
But, also, a bonding company is not going to give you a million dollar bond, and all you have done for ten years is put doors on and fix kitchen sinks. Do you see what I am saying? So you are pretty much in a vicious cycle. You are limited to your development and expansion.
I guess the question -- and I asked you all those questions --
What is the answer? Because it has been a systemic issue for the last -- forever.
I think Ms. Smith 553 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 wants to acknowledge that.
In fact, this afternoon at 4 o'clock I actually have a meeting scheduled with the City Solicitor, the Procurement Commissioner and our Risk Manager. As I stated last week on the issue of the performance bond, for the small bid packages, the law department has been working with the Procurement Commissioner, who under the Charter has to establish, you know, performance bond requirements for the city, to look at a variety of ways of how we can address this issue. Is it feasible to use the program that's applicable to the purchase of goods and services, like tissue paper or something? Some people say there is a greater risk in demolition activity, so using the master surety program for the purchase of goods and services may not be as good. But I raised the very same questions when I asked for an opinion. I said, let's look at how we are operating the small bid package program; the 554 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 fact that, if for some reason the contractor is unable to complete the job, the way we structured the small bid -- the NTI targeted program is that the majority of the monies are held until the building is actually done. So that actually kind of limits your risk. And then the rest is paid when you finish the stucco work. And that way we get accountability. Because a lot of times if you pay on a monthly basis, they may walk before or not finish it or not -- what usually doesn't happen is that people don't do it, it is just that they take a long time to do it. They don't feel incentivized. So I just wanted to state this. I mean, these are conversations that I know contractors, small businesses, have been having. And, you know, we have been hearing it, you know, often. It is working between all of the legal opinions and risk management and procurement to get an issue. But I have put this very question forward. 555 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 Again, I think another thing that we have done is, I think the small bid package initiative -- which actually the concept was put forward, I am almost afraid to say it, but we have gotten beaten up by the Chamber for not putting out more small bid packages. So we have gotten that piece, I think, off the ground. Finally, I asked not to put out anymore -- we put out, I guess, maybe the last three weeks, I said, don't put anymore in case we come up with a different program.
Ms. Smith, may I make a suggestion, please? We have had people waiting here since 10 o'clock this morning to testify on this bill. We have people waiting to testify on another hearing that was scheduled at o'clock. You indicated that at o'clock today you are meeting with the City Solicitor's office.
Fine. May I offer 556 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 a suggestion? Before the end of the week, I think you should meet with the gentlemen seated at the table here. And whatever conclusion you have reached with the City Solicitor, that the gentlemen be informed so that they will know what right they have and when they can actually start this process going. As I said, I am going to have to suggest that we conclude this, because it is really getting late. It is a very important and very interesting issue, and something that we are all concerned about. But, as I said, there have been people waiting since 10 o'clock. And, Ms. Smith, I want you to put in writing the conclusion of your meeting with the gentlemen so that we are all informed. And, hopefully, next year this time we are not going to be sitting here asking the same questions.
Within the next few weeks we will be in '05. You are 557 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 absolutely right. Thank you, gentlemen. Our next witness -- I am sorry, gentlemen, just one more minute, please. Councilman Ramos.
I have been here a very short time in City Council. And for the exception, maybe, of the Public Safety Committee, this issue of minority participation comes up in every committee meeting. And every time it comes up, it goes on and on and on for all the obvious reasons, at least from my vantage point, at least, for lack of participation by minority business community contractors, in particular to the concern that the Chairman of the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce made about money allotted. I assume you are talking about an allotment of money that's in the Mayor's budget has been presented to us. It is my understanding there will be a proportionate percentage shared with the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce. And if that is not so, I will take that up during the budget 558 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 hearing process.
And I would think in two months we will be considering Year '05. So, gentlemen, that will be your time to come back again and let us know how you have made out.
It will be in a couple of weeks. Now, I know we have other witnesses. And to be fair with everybody, we will give each witness five minutes to testify. Again, I would ask my colleagues to please be brief with your questions. Our next witnesses are The Panel for the Philadelphia Coalition of Affordable Housing, David Koppisch, Marie Blocker, Phyllis Gibbs, Veronica Howard.
Would you all approach the table, please. Good afternoon. Thank you for your patience. Please identify yourself for the 559 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 record and proceed with your testimony.
Good afternoon. My name is David Koppisch. Thank you for giving us the opportunity to speak. We will try to be as brief as possible. My name is David Koppisch, I work for the Women's Community Revitalization Project. In that capacity I serve as the coordinator for the Philadelphia Affordable Housing Coalition. The Coalition is comprised of 13 member and allied organizations from around 14 the city. All of us here are members of those 15 different organizations that make up the 16 Coalition. 17 I am here to remind us that 18 Philadelphia is experiencing a housing crisis, 19 a crisis that affects nearly one in four 20 Philadelphia households. This is a crisis that demands decisive action and it is a crisis that we can deal with and conquer starting today by rethinking the proposal to add million more 25 dollars to this year's NTI budget for 560 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 demolition, and instead invest some of that money to increase desperately needed construction and repair of affordable housing. Let me just say a word or two about this crisis. Every day hundreds and hundreds of voting tax-paying Philadelphians come to each of our organizations in dire need of affordable housing and housing assistance. These are people who are living in unthinkable conditions, conditions that no one in this room would probably tolerate. Last year we released a study called A Call to Action, which I am going to submit for the record. It is based on research conducted by Dennis Culhane and Amy Hillier of the University of Pennsylvania School of Social Work. It documents the systematic reduction of public resources dedicated to permanent affordable house for low-income persons over the past several decades and the resulting crisis of affordability, quality, and accessibility that now affects nearly a quarter of all Philadelphia households. 561 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 This study found that 130,000 Philadelphia households are living on incomes below 20,000 a year and can't afford their housing costs. It found that 60,000 Philadelphia households have major repair problems with their housing that they cannot afford to fix. The study revealed that 65,000 disabled Philadelphians are in need of accessible housing, that 31,000 Philadelphia households are living in overcrowded conditions. The study also found that the waiting time for the adaptive modification program can be five years long. It also found that the waiting time for the basic systems repair program could be as much as two years long. The waiting list for the Section 8 voucher program has more than 10,000 families on it, and the average waiting list for most CDC-run rental housing developments is about 300 families long. It also revealed that Philadelphia 562 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 lost nearly 12,000 public housing units since 1993 mostly due to demolition. And the study calculates that 60,000 new rental units of affordable housing are needed immediately to get us out of this crisis. This crisis demands a long-term strategy to increase resources for the production and repair of housing for very low-income Philadelphians. Let me be clear we are not anti-demolition. We understand the need to remove imminently dangerous buildings from our neighborhoods and we understand that in order to construct new, large-scale affordable housing, some demolition has to take place. But we have an immediate crisis of housing affordability, quality, and accessibility. This is a crisis that affects nearly a quarter of our city's residents. Therefore, we need to balance demolition investments with more construction and repair investment. With that said, we recommend to Council that you not transfer the full $25 563 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 million in NTI bond proceeds for more demolition activities this year.
Instead, we urge you to use some of this money to make increased investments in desperately needed affordable housing development financing, basic systems repair, adaptive modification, and homelessness prevention. Specifically, we urge you to earmark at least $15 million of remaining NTI demolition money to help create an affordable housing trust fund starting in Fiscal Year 2005. Seeding a trust fund with remaining NTI demolition dollars would be a long-term systematic strategy to deal with our housing crisis, a crisis that afflicts nearly one-quarter of our city's residents, a crisis that is tearing the fabric of neighborhoods across the city, a crisis that prevents us from becoming a world-class city. Thank you.
Madam President and to the Council, my name is Marie Blocker. I am a social worker at New Jerusalem, which 564 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 is a spiritual, non denominational drug and alcohol recovery program. We are located at 2011 West Norris Street, and we are also a member of the Philadelphia Affordable Housing. And while I am testifying on behalf of my clients, it is because that when they come into recovery, one of their main goals is obtaining housing, something that can belong to them, whether it is apartment housing or whatever. Because when they were in their addictions, they were living in abandoned buildings, and they were doing their crack, heroin, whatever they were doing. So a lot of them come in in recovery, is gaining back their self-esteem, learning to become an asset to the community instead of a liability. So there is a lot of things that they have to correct. Some of the women, their children are in the system, or DHS. And one of -- they are mandated to be in our program and also obtain the housing. So we deal with usually between 59 565 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 and 70 people that have come into our recovery program. And some of them have a year, two years clean time. But the problem they have is getting housing, low-income housing, something that they can afford. So that's why we are for using that money to build up some more low-income housing for them so that they can afford it. Because even some of the jobs that they get, they don't make that much, they don't make or 30 13 thousand dollars. So, therefore, they really 14 do need something that they can afford and be 15 proud of, and also live with their 16 self-respect. Thank you. 17
Good afternoon, 19 my name is Jovan Watson, and I am an advocate 20 for residential -- I am an advocate -- I am part of an advocacy program for WCRP, but I am also an advocate for women and children in a community that's not aware of what's going on. What I am asking is that some of the money that they are using for the NTI program 566 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 be put aside to build safe, affordable housing, safe, decent affordable housing. Because although we may see housing going up, a lot of people are not qualified for it. So although they are not qualified for the program -- they are not qualified for these houses. Lower-class people -- they move the middle class people into North Philadelphia, building these houses. And although they are moving them into the community, we are not qualifying for the houses. So we need organizations like WCRP, who is willing to house us and give us a chance to have decent, safe, affordable housing. WCRP also provides subsidy, they provide social services. When they house people in the community, they are not also providing social services. So these social services, along with helping people get housed, will benefit altogether. The lower-class resident that does not meet all the qualifications of these profit and nonprofit companies do not fit the 567 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 criteria of what they are asking for these housing units. So what we are asking is that people that don't qualify, that don't meet the income guidelines, that has bad credit, and has bad background, they are not qualifying for the houses, either. But WCRP is willing to give people a chance to have a place to live. Thank you.
Good afternoon, Madam President. My name is Veronica A. Howard. And what I am is a homeowner. I am a member of WCRP, who is affiliated with the Philadelphia Affordable Housing Coalition. From what I have heard here this afternoon and what I understand, it is actually more expensive to tear it down, a house, than it is to rebuild it. Since I live in what you call North Central, which is District 5, Councilman Clarke's district, I live in such a home. It's been cited as the Mayor's blight projects, one of those. 568 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 And right now we actually stand alone because we are the last of 1839 North 8th Street. We are the last house standing. I live right across the street from the Philadelphia Gas Works. I have been there since I was 4 years old. I won't tell you my true age, but it has been over 50-something years now. My family and I still live in this house. We call it a family home. And right now the Mayor's project, the NTI, has targeted for demolition. So rather than actually destroy the last of our kind, why don't you help us rebuild it so we can preserve some of the history. And I thank you very much. (Applause.)
Thank you. Thank you very much. MR. McPHERSON: The next panel is the 46th and Sansom Street Panel, Beverly Murphy, Denise Ripley, Lillian Ford, Theresa Ransom. 569 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04
Again, I want to thank you all for being so patient. But by the same token, I am again going to please request that you try to be as brief as possible with your testimony. Thank you. Good afternoon. Kindly identify yourself for the record and proceed with your testimony.
Good afternoon. My name is Theresa Ransom, and I live in the 4600 block of Sansom Street. I have been living on Sansom Street since 1968. At the time it was a lovely, lovely area, it really was. And I have been there all this time. Now -- and I have worked hard all my life, I really have. So I finally was able to buy this property in 1989, paid cash for it, for the reason that, where I was working, they gave us a lot of money because they were leaving the area, in department stores. So now last year I find out that they are going to make the block the most gorgeous place in the world, this is what they 570 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 are telling us. So they are going to tear -- in order to do that, they have to tear the block down. And now I understand they are not only going to do from 46th, but they are going to do from Chestnut all the way to Walnut. Now the problem is, I can understand with the progress and the area and getting into Center City and the University, and all that, I can understand that. But what I cannot understand is, after you buy your house, you have paid for it, I am 71, you are going to be there for the rest of your life, and then they are coming along with a project of making it a livelier area, and you are going to have to move. I don't have any money, I really don't. Over there in that area the houses are ideal. They are big, they are beautiful. Not a lot steps, all on one floor. Ideal for when you get older. Well, I am not going to have it much longer because it seems like they are taking it. 571 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 But now my point is this: And I understand it is a done deal, they are going to take it. But my problem is this, which I would like to know, is: Since they are going to take a duplex, they asked me how many bedrooms we have. We have five bedrooms, two on the first floor, three on the second, they are going to take that. Lovely area, really is nice. Has changed because people moving in, couldn't pay their bills, set fires. So, therefore, the area that I am in is really, really fairly bad. The block next, which is to 47th, is still nice. But now the block that I am in is terrible. All I want to know is -- and I know where I want to go once they want to take this place. And I don't want a senior citizen place, I really don't. Where I want to go is over on Lindbergh Boulevard, 70th, between 70th and 71st. Since they are taking a duplex, they are taking it, then I would like to have a duplex put back. I would like to have a 572 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 duplex over at 70th and Lindbergh.
I don't think you want to go to 70th and Lindbergh. Isn't that where they had the --
Here's my point. They asked me when I came around about a mortgage. I said, I don't have a mortgage. I am 71. Like I said, I am not working; I am living on Social Security. And I understand that Social Security is getting ready to go in the Year 2047. Medicare is going to go three years before that. So, therefore, you have no money to pay for something, to take a mortgage. So my point is, they are going to take this area, they will take the property, 573 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 houses. So how much money are we going to get to move or to buy something else? See, because you can't pay it back. Thank you.
Thank you. That's something that I can't answer. Somebody from the Redevelopment Authority would have to answer that, unless the Councilwoman has some knowledge. But that's not what we are considering today. I think that in a couple of weeks we will be getting -- actually, by this week we should be getting the NTI for FY '05. So, Councilwoman Blackwell.
I wish. I have been saying since the year started that we wanted to be ready for NTI, but obviously I haven't received any information. I did want to make a statement a little later that included Sansom Street, right before we recess, with regard to my amendment. But we have been talking about 44th, 45th, and 46th and Sansom Streets for quite 574 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 some time. And, in fact, as recently as Friday, because there is a plan for 4 properties, neither one half of the block, and 5 not the other. 6 And as you know, Madam President, 7 you can't plan for half an area, because the 8 other half is going to fall down. 9 So I commend all of these 10 individuals, Ms. Murphy and all the others, 11 for coming here today. It is a serious issue. We work on this issue every day. And they really deserve special consideration under this NTI agenda. We have had them on our list from the very, very beginning. And it looks like just when we think we have a developer and we think we have a process in place, somebody comes and it doesn't happen. But we are committed that before we will approve this CDBG NTI budget, that we are going to have a sound program for Sansom Street. Hold me to it, and I am going to hold the Administration to it. Thank you. 575 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04
And I would just call to the attention of the Administration that the ordinance that we passed does say that at least 90 days before the beginning of each Fiscal Year the Mayor or his appointed designee shall send to each member of Council a preliminary annual program statement and budget in the same detail that will be contained in the final annual program statement and budget for which the Mayor will request approval from Council. So I believe that Wednesday will be 90 days, and hopefully we will be getting that this week. So I think, ladies, I know you have been very, very patient. So when that bill 18 comes up for a Public Hearing, I think that's the time that you should certainly be making your feelings known.
Council President, are you saying we should come back on Wednesday?
No. We should be getting the information from the Administration no later than Wednesday, 90 576 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 days before the end of the Fiscal Year. But there will be Public Hearings scheduled on that ordinance that will be introduced. And I would think that in the next month and a half we should be having hearings on that program. And I think that's when you should certainly be making your voices heard. Today we are considering the demolition issue. Please identify yourself for the record.
My name is Beverly Murphy. With the demolition, two things happen. One, you devalue the property, the existing properties, by creating vacant lots -- and I got this from a developer from South Philly that I worked with -- and the fear factor. Because when you live in a house, and two houses that are adjacent to your house are torn down, you get scared. You know, you think your house is going to fall. Maybe it will or won't, don't matter, you think it 577 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 does. So if you are fearful, then -- and we are fearful that either it is going to fall or the drug addicts will go in there and take up residence or start fires or anything. So is it possible to stall the continuing demolition until something else has happened, until we are given -- some sort of settlement is made with us to start to move us out of the area before they continue to demolish it?
Part of the issue is that -- they want to hold up demolition; is that what you are asking?
Well, it is absolutely possible. Because before we can continue, we have some relocation issues that we have been trying to get the city, you understand, Madam President, to pay for relocation. And that's an issue. 578 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 So we are stuck anyway. We are worried about these houses falling in, and the city hasn't made a commitment to us that they are going to pay relocation fees. So it is stalled anyway, Ms. Murphy. So nothing will happen. And we will make sure that we call you directly. Thank you all, all of you.
My name is Denise Ripley. I am from North Philadelphia, and I am a community leader in that section 15 since I was born 1957. So I have seen the deterioration in the community. I would like to read the Fifth Amendment. Nor be deprived of life, liberty, property without due process of law, nor shall property be taken for public use without just compensation. And I feel that the people in North Philadelphia are being taken without justice. We are not being able to have justice in our community. Because we have people who have 579 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 lived there over 30, 80 years, and still living, but now they are about to lose their home. We know we are about to. We have to vacate the community because it is becoming slow death every day, not knowing when they going to get on this side of our street. We just see houses torn down every day. You know, to live in a community where you have put your life in, you know, your everything. Myself being always involved in trying to make a difference in the community I live in, even though I see it falling apart. You know, having the opportunity to move from out of the city, but continue to just stay in the city, in the area where I live at, to try to make it better. And this organizing with the seniors that live there, to make sure that they get properly housed and relocated. And not knowing, you know, what to tell them. Because they always asking me questions because they know that I be involved with certain things, 580 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 you know. And some of them, they write letters, you know, and they don't get response back about their houses. And the basic repair program, like you said, it could take five years, you know, in that process. But I grew up in North Philadelphia, and I seen the deterioration of the community. I seen it when it was a good community and I seen the houses fall in. And they were being reported, they would be tore down. And it could take five or three, you know, a lot of years. Because I took pictures down to my Councilperson's office, which is the Fifth Council District. And then they told me to go to NTI. And I just ran around and ran around and nothing seemed to be done. It was just like the neighborhood, the study, is still crumbling. And I know other people are going through the same thing. I would like to read a letter. Because I called some seniors together. And 581 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 one of the seniors that came to my meeting, he explained to me, the appraiser came to his house, him and his wife they are in their 70s, and was told that he would get $3,000 for a house that him and his wife lived in for 30 years, and that that could help them get into like a senior citizen home. And at the meeting, we was telling everybody, don't sign anything, you know, just make sure -- you know, don't sign anything. Let's wait and see this process out. So I also have a letter from Mr. Sweeney, and I would like to read it. And this is what it says. The letter is addressed to Mr. Herbert E. Wetzel. "My name is Mr. Sweeney Brown, Junior. I have a house at 2702 West Susquehanna Avenue. This house was forced from me by what the Redevelopment Authority calls imminent domain. "In November 2003 I signed a paper that for the Redevelopment Authority to get the house for 3500. And any lien or taxes would be taken out of this 3500, leaving me with a mere $1500. 582 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 "The appraisal by your appraisal estimated that my house was a shell, which I never agreed with my house being a shell. I would like to have a second appraisal. I don't think you can buy any house at any condition for $1500 and anywhere. "I was not represented by anyone and I don't know real estate law. I feel that I was taken advantage of. If the Redevelopment Authority has sent me a letter of ineligibility for relocation, they should at least pay my fair market value for my home, and I am not happy with this. Mr.
Sweeney Brown, Junior," and he gives his address and stuff. But what I am saying is, this is what is happening all over the community. It is a sad thing to be in the community where you have had your whole life, your roots, you know, everything, your whole life, and it is just being taken away. You don't know when they are going to tear your house down. Or they might just take it here, like they are taking Mr. Sweeney 583 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 Brown's house. And we just want this NTI to really look at what they are doing, Council to see what they are doing to people in their homes. Because myself, you know, I have been committed to a lot of things in this city. But if they take my house, I am leaving the city. And I know a lot of other people have already left the city. And we shouldn't be forced out like that because we low income and we working hard. You know, families, we shouldn't be forced out of our home and our community and told that we could come back. You won't have no 40,000 or 50,000 dollars to come back into a community where you have to pay $250,000 for a home. So I think you should really look into what NTI is doing to families in North Philadelphia and around the surrounding city. Thank you.
Thank you very much. (Applause.) 584 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04
A couple of quick questions. Good afternoon. Do you know Mr. Brown, Sweeney Brown?
No; I am just speaking on behalf of him. I told you, I am a community leader, so I read the letter.
Do you know if he lived in that house that he referenced?
The point is that the man is losing his house. I mean, I'm not -- because I read his letter, because it is a lot of other people case. I live in a house that is going to be tore down. 585 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04
I think the Councilman is asking a question. Just answer the question, please.
Because I know Mr. Brown. I know the house. And I know Mr. Brown did not live in that house. So why -- the testimony with respect to his letter --
Well, he did own it at the time of the settlement. But I just want to note for the record that he did not live in the house. And we assisted him in getting his name on the deed so he would be compensated. But there are some questions around the house, for the record. I don't want people leaving here thinking that he was relocated, because he was not relocated, because he did not live in the house. He lives in Germantown. So, just for the record. You referenced him specifically. 586 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04
In reference to the record, I came to your office about Mr. Green, which lives on the 2100 block of Jefferson Street. And he did get a letter for his house for $3,000. That's for the record. And I asked you could you form a committee together for us in reference to negotiate for us pro bono. And I never heard from you back in regards to that situation. You said you would.
I did at the time, and I don't know if there was a pro bono lawyer provided for you.
I recall the instance, and we had the hearing. And I asked Mr. Wetzel to provide assistance.
Thank you for telling me that. But I have kept abreast, 587 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 actually, from one of my good friends in the audience about some issues associated with that. And I agree with you that although the appraised value may come back as a particular number, that is truly not enough for that person to reasonably relocate in a comparable position. And I have instructed the Redevelopment Authority to not attempt to relocate anybody.
His house has already been boarded up. I don't know where they are at. And I looked around. Behind my house was a senior citizen had been there for 30 years. And I went to a birthday party for my friend's mother at a convalescent home. And there she was, my neighbor behind me, in the convalescent home for the last two years. There is nothing wrong with her. She says that her people from her church picks her up every Sunday to go to church. And she asks me what's going on in the community, would you please come and see 588 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 me. I don't want to see that happen to a lot of other seniors. If they are not ready to go into a senior citizen home, they shouldn't be forced to.
I agree with you. Okay. I just wanted to clear that up for the record about Mr. Brown. Because I know of him, and he came in the office and we talked about the issue. And he actually thanked me for helping him. And we are looking for a property so he could vacate the property based on what he initially wanted to do with the Susquehanna Avenue property. And I have been told by the city that we will get a property for him so he can continue the renovation in that particular community.
What are you doing on our behalf as far as helping us with legal negotiation and reference to our properties that we own? I actually have been in my house for 589 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 like 37 years, because it was a family-owned property. And I chose to stay in Philadelphia, which I had opportunity to leave and go to Florida, but I was committed to the community, you know, and helping the people that's there, you know, with information that they might not be readily available to them. I didn't stay just because I could make more money or, you know, it is a pretty city. I stayed because I was committed to the area and the people. You know what I am saying? But it seems like people are not being committed to what they say they are committed to as far as, you know, the people's agenda, we are going to try to do this. It is not happening. Do you know what I am saying? So I would like to see you, as our Councilperson for the Fifth District, try to help us get legal negotiation with a pro bono lawyer, whatever it may take, so we can get treated fairly with our homes, you know. And if we able to come back, so be it. If not, then people just not be 590 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 displaced, it is not fair.
That's more than a reasonable question, and I will follow through.
Thank you very much. We appreciate your attendance and patience. Our next witness is Anthony Fullard. Good afternoon, are you Anthony Fullard.
Please identify yourself for the record and proceed with your testimony.
I am Anthony Fullard from the African-American Chamber of Commerce. My title is Director of Economic Development.
Okay. Madam President and City Council members, it just saddens me to hear that I have to come before this Council to defend what we associate as a 591 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 successful program that has been opened up to every minority in this city. And each Council leader here should know that, because we came personally to your office. I have had a meeting with you, Madam President.
And I laid out everything that we were trying to do when we first got started back in, I believe that was, May of last year, of 2003. So we sat down with each Councilperson of what the program was about and what our intentions were to ensure that we had more minority contractors to be involved into the NTI program. And I believe that since that time, we went hard to work to ensure that we took off -- all of the excuses off of the table. Those excuses or those impediments were, as you heard, was bonding, was financing, and also understanding of the specifications and how the NTI program was administered. Also we -- I want to correct one 592 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 thing. The Emerging Contractors Program was specifically designed to bring more prime contractors to the table, not subcontractors. Even though, for whatever reason, if you could not move into that prime status, we did not leave anybody at bay. But we said, well, you can work as a subcontract status with one of the primes that did graduate, and but only at a short time, because we wanted to see all of our minority contractors at a prime status. And that's what the ultimate goal is for. But at the same time, because of the specifications and how NTI is designed, that you have to have some type of training of their policy, and how this work that is there for you to bid on, how all that worked. What is expected of you as a prime contractor, what about your submittals, what about your insurance. All of those things are there. So that we had a fast-track. Because we didn't want to have no 24 long, drawn-out training program. We didn't haven't to have no four-year training program, 593 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 as you will get with the unions. We wanted a fast-track training program so that those contractors that are in those communities could go through this training program, get the understanding, also receive bonding, also receive funding. Because I didn't hear anyone mention that we also have the eight largest banks to the table that was there to provide. We also brought PIDC to the table to provide start-up loans. Okay? Because you can go through the training. But, Madam President, if you don't have the right financing, if you don't have the right money to implement your work, it doesn't matter how many bids that you win, you still have to pay your men.
Mr. Fullard, if I recall correctly, wasn't that a four-month training period?
No; it is an eight-week training period, two month. Then we actually run our contractors through a field training, which you actually 594 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 bid on a house and you go through the whole process. And you will win a house, you have to go through a procurement process where you would bid. And you go through the whole practice that you would do as if you were in the procurement process with the city. Okay? We mimic that whole action to ensure that those companies know that whole practice, that procurement practice. And that procedure, process. So when we developed that, and we had an eight-week training course. And this is available, as I said, for all minority contractors. We contacted the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, Asian Chamber of Commerce, the African-American Chamber of Commerce, of course, and all the CDC groups, all of the grass-roots groups. Now, Madam President, I am not just sitting here pulling this thing down. We submitted a full-blown report. Because this is funded by the city. 595 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 And there is a contract that we are -- that we have to abide by what those rules are in that contract. And we submitted a full report to Pat Smith, the Director of NTI, the Commerce Department, and also to Joyce Wilkerson our chief of staff. So we submitted a full report of every single thing we did.
I don't mean to interrupt you, but how many graduates have you had since --
It is in our report, Madam President, we had 31 graduates. We had bondable contractors that we could begin to 16 put out on any procurement process to bid on 17 bonding programs. 18 But the only issue that was there, 19 and as Mrs. Spencer said, it was how those bid 20 packages was packaged. And, so, we went to 21 the city and said, "Listen, we need you to make these bid packages smaller so that these new prime contractors could bid on smaller packages, such as three-house packages, four-house packages, seven house. 596 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04
And that would be for every phase of the demolition, the removal of the asbestos --
Madam President, small packages include all of those disciplines. That is a prime package. Once you are awarded a prime package, you are responsible for the removal of the asbestos. As a prime contractor you are responsible for the stucco, you are responsible for the seeding. You know, you are responsible as a prime contractor for every aspect of that bid package. Okay? So for someone to come before this Council and say that they were not included, they did not have the opportunity, is a lie. Because we went out and we submitted information to everyone in the whole City of Philadelphia as far as our outreach. We also documented it and we said who we have contact with. We all -- and we also list everyone that comes through our door. And we write their names down, which companies they are from, so that we have a 597 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04 documentation of who comes to the door. Now, as far as the roundtable, we have minutes. Because at that time I was the Chairman of the roundtable. And we do and provide and we take minutes of every meeting. NTI is a part of the agenda on all of our meetings. So we have minutes of everything that goes on in those meetings, what the dialogue was, and what we spoke about. And all those things are all written down, and we have minutes that we can provide to you letting you know that every person that was at this podium here got all of the information, they had all opportunity to bid or to participate in this program.
Thank you, Mr. Fullard. I believe Councilwoman Tasco has had her light on. Do you want to be recognized?
Oh, yes. Out of the 21 graduates, how many are doing work or got contracts in the NTI program? 598 RESOLUTION NO. 040095 - 3/29/04
Right now we have approximately contractors out there right 4 now finishing up their work now. And they are 5 in the process of -- and they will be bidding 6 on another 35-house package. 7
Were the small 8 packages put together for them to bid on? 9
So when the 15 program was designed, were the gentlemen sitting here at this table today, would they have qualified to be a part of the program?