Certainly. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Tasco.
I was listening. I was at a meeting upstairs, and I was trying to hear part of the testimony about how you came to determine the closing of these facilities. 277 Whole - Operating Budget - 4/20/04 You know, one of the areas of my City that just continues to get shafted with very little City resources or City services is the Logan area. And I'm appalled to see that you have Barrett Recreation Facility on here, when Barrett is the only facility for miles around. There's no other place that they can go. And there's some young people who are working out of Olney High School called the City Year Program. And they have set up this whole program with the young people in the neighborhood to work on Barrett. And I just have a real serious problem with closing that facility. And I'd say the same thing with Fisher Park. Again, that park was under the Fairmount Park facility, so you might want to give it back to Fairmount Park, but not close it. Because those facilities serve -- The population in that area is growing. The community uses that park. The advisory 278 Whole - Operating Budget - 4/20/04 board is very active. And those two would be a serious disservice to those people. And I would underscore Barrett 1,000 times because there is no one... There is no facility over there in Barrett. The schools are overcrowded. There's nothing down in the Logan area. And you're going to close Barrett. That's an insult to those people over there. And I dare say if they knew it, they would be here. (Applause.)
You know, because I just saw this -- And, you know, on the other list there were no other facilities in the 9th that were being closed, because all of those centers are viable usable centers and nothing that has been vacant or unused. They are all in use.
Councilwoman, we're going through a process of meeting with 279 Whole - Operating Budget - 4/20/04 Council members and going over facilities with them. To the extent, based on that review some of these facilities come off, then those facilities wouldn't close, we'd have to find savings somewhere else in the budget. But that's part of the process that we're going through, I think, with each of you now, each of the District Council members.
Well, until today I did not know that these centers were on the list. There were no centers in my District that were on the list, until just now we get the list and there are two centers on. And I do know that the Commissioner has been trying to meet with me, but you all just came up with this list. There was no need to meet to talk to me about any centers in my District because there were none on the initial list. So now I find out today there are 280 Whole - Operating Budget - 4/20/04 two on the list, and two that are in communities where you don't have recreation facilities, because I do not have the number of recreation facilities in the 9th that you may find in someone else's that have through the years got recreation centers because of whatever. We don't have that many. They are far apart. And they're utilized by the people in the community. Thank you.
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Miller.
Couple centers on this list that we just got a copy of today are actually in my District, and they're on the list. They're actually listed as being in Councilman Nutter's District. 281 Whole - Operating Budget - 4/20/04 And that's Pleasant Playground and also Wissahickon Playground. That's on . And Pleasant is on . I have a couple questions regarding the... Say, what facilities could be transferred, leased or sold. I have a couple questions pretty much around the term transferred or leased. What exactly does that mean? The interest, the publicity around recreation centers being leased or sold or transferred has been interesting to many people. And I've gotten calls in my office where we have some community based organizations that want to in a sense take over a center or some other people that want to take over a center. But I don't -- I cannot describe to them what that exactly means. So, if we're discussing transferring or leasing, et cetera, to someone other than the City of Philadelphia, then we need to have more information so we can have an intelligent discussion around if a community 282 Whole - Operating Budget - 4/20/04 development corporation wants to now take over a center, what exactly does that mean for them?
Number one, it means to in anywhere possible where we can maintain the services, part of those negotiations will be that that property is still public property, and we would want it to still have public access. That would be the requirements relative to a transfer or lease. If the property is sold, quite naturally, it becomes private property. We're asking in the transfer or lease that any entity or persons that would go into this agreement or consider it, that they would relinquish the operational and maintenance responsibility on the physical plant, being the building itself. If a particular facility that becomes a item or topic for discussion or negotiations and recommendations, we are asking that the City, if that pool is not listed because of its proximity or 283 Whole - Operating Budget - 4/20/04 condition to be considered for no longer use, that the City would maintain operational responsibility of that pool as well.
Well, of the building. Doesn't matter how much money we save on it. One of the things that's confusing is that to relinquish or transfer one of these buildings to someone else and you still maintain the responsibility to maintain the facility, then how does that save you money? I don't understand.
We would recoup the savings in the money with the full-time rec leader and the full-time maintenance personnel.
Yes. It would be the personnel costs, but it would also be... We would be asking the persons to pay the electric bill and/or the gas bill as well.
284 Whole - Operating Budget - 4/20/04 Commissioner, I don't mean to interrupt. How about the liability?
The liability... Right now from the first meeting that we had, the Solicitor's Office along with Risk Management would ask the interested parties to maintain liability for their entity. We would also -- The City would keep maintaining responsibility of the playground, the play equipment, the operational expenditures, the staffing of the pools, as well.
Thank you. Well, for example, one of the playgrounds on my list which you have on the top of the on Carapucci's list here, Wissahickon. Now, Wissahickon you have, I guess from 1974 to 2000, personnel costs I assume, $115,000. Is that personnel?
That's Wissahockon Neighbors. 285 Whole - Operating Budget - 4/20/04
In the first column it says Wissahickon Neighbor, 1974, 2000, 115.
It is in my District, unless they have a wrong address.
That's the wrong 286 Whole - Operating Budget - 4/20/04 address, Councilwoman.
Oh. Okay. All right. So, the address is wrong, so that is in Nutter's District. Because I do have a Wissahickon on Pulaski Avenue in my District. All right. Okay. But in any event, I still want to talk about Wissahickon because on another list I've seen Wissahickon, and maybe it was that Wissahickon. But this particular playground is attached to a public housing development. And I know that the Recreation Department years ago had staff there. But they haven't had staff down there in years, correct?
So... But this group runs a basketball league in the summer there. And I know right now, according to the people in the neighborhood, they believe the court needs to be redone so that they can run a 287 Whole - Operating Budget - 4/20/04 basketball league there this summer. And I know we've talked to people at recreation about this. We talked to Carlton. When I saw Wissahockon on the list, I'm like, what do we do with this? The City is saying, we want to not have responsibility for Wissahockon, even though I'll take that back, since the address was incorrect on your list, which really put it on my list. And that's the problem. There's just too many lists going around. And I would hope that this is an official list or we get a typed version of this because there's just been too many lists going around. I know what we've talked about in our meetings regarding the 8th District. And then when I see another list, I try to not really pay attention to the other list because I know what we've talked about in our meetings. And that's basically the official information that I'm going by. So in the meantime, what I did, in 288 Whole - Operating Budget - 4/20/04 any event, was to talk to PHA to ask them if they would take over Wissahickon Playground. And I met with Carl Green last week about other issues, and this one came up. So, at some point I guess we need to talk again. But I just want to be clear on when someone takes over, for example, even right now, who's going to do Wissahickon's courts so they can run... Because they have a very good basketball program in the summer. And so all of these lists kind of throw me off. One week I'm thinking I'm doing one thing. Another week I'm thinking I'm doing something else, even though I keep saying my official -- for me, my official information is what I receive from the Rec Department. So... But in the meantime, some of us are starting to move and talk to other people. You know that we've been in discussion with the church and with other people regarding one of the other 289 Whole - Operating Budget - 4/20/04 playgrounds on our list. And we have had churches and business people and all kinds of people call to say that they are interested. But we just have to help them understand what will be their financial responsibility, if they actually do want to lease or transfer, whatever, regarding these facilities. Because I think most people are just interested in keeping them open, and doing whatever they can because recreation is an important issue in this City. (Applause.)
So, if we can get something that's really kind of definitive about what all that means.
The mixup where I think it came in at, Wissahickon was... A little place Wissahickon which was next to the housing project.
Was on the list. I put that on that list because we haven't 290 Whole - Operating Budget - 4/20/04 used it --
-- for over 5 years. I thought it would be something 6 that possibly, since it's next to the 7 housing project, they could take it over. 8 And that's when we spoke to you about 9 taking that. 10
Wissahickon Neighbor 12 here has been added on because we were 13 looking at the smallest of the smallest 14 facilities that we have, to meet the 15 number. And then somewhere in the office 16 it got typed up with the wrong address, but 17 that's... 18
Okay. All right. Thank you. 291 Whole - Operating Budget - 4/20/04 Thank you, Madam President. I'm totally confused.
Councilwoman, are you finished with your line of questioning?
Yes, Madam President. And also, on , though, they have Pleasant Playground. And that is in my District. You have Nutter's name there. And we have not talked about Pleasant.
All right. Okay. Thank you. What do you mean "added on"?
We had to meet more numbers in the recommended budget cuts. So it was on; it wasn't. It's on.
We need to talk again, then. Okay. 292 Whole - Operating Budget - 4/20/04
Commissioner, now that we have the list, I'd like to ask you a question.
Your final answer. Is this the list that we are all to go by? Will this be the last list that we're going to --
I'm going to get this typed up as soon as we get out of here. Yes, ma'am.
Don't worry about it being typed up. I understand there's the writing on the back. I'm asking, will this be the last list that we will see to be considered or are we going to see something else before 293 Whole - Operating Budget - 4/20/04 the conclusion of these hearings?
What was the name of that show? Is that your final answer. (Laughter.)
Who Wants to be a Millionaire? We all do for the City, don't we?
Okay. Commissioner, let me ask you a couple questions, if I may, now that I have this list before me.
So, are we to understand that, putting that handwriting aside, that the typed list and some corrections that need to be made, now plus 294 Whole - Operating Budget - 4/20/04 the last page, which is the handwritten list, this is now the complete list of all the proposed closure of rec facilities?
Yeah. Recreation facilities. And then there's another one for the pools. That's the rec facilities, correct.
Chew. On here you have spray pool. So, I would assume... Are you simply closing a pool? Talk to us. Talk to us.
That's on 295 Whole - Operating Budget - 4/20/04 the first page.
Chew Recreation. It says passive park, spray pool.
If I could answer on Chew, it's both facility. And if you look on -- I have a page here with pools. That's also --
One moment. Do we know from the list that has just been provided to us if the pools are also included?
Well, I have a list 296 Whole - Operating Budget - 4/20/04 here of pools which you could print up.
All right. We will run off enough copies to be circulated. You know, it's a surprise that we're having these hearings today.
Right. It's just amazing. It's been on the schedule I think for a little bit. Can I ask a question, Madam Chair?
Please go ahead because I have a couple questions I want to ask, too.
Commissioner, 297 Whole - Operating Budget - 4/20/04 you are obviously operating under a tremendous amount of pressure.
To try to respond to these issues. We have... We had a first list. We had a second list. And now we're getting ready to get the third list. Your response to the questions from Capital which I have indicate the less-than-a-mile-away list. You have what you're referring to as an analysis of other recreation centers in comparable cities. And then the third question was, provide the process for involving the community in right-sizing decisions, which I don't see attached to the material that I received. That's one. Second, your testimony indicates that, again, this discussion about how many centers Philadelphia has, as compared to New York and Houston. Now, your testimony indicates that 298 Whole - Operating Budget - 4/20/04 New York City, with a population of million people, has 35 centers and 43 pools, which given the size of New York I thought was somewhat astounding. From information that we've held onto back from the late '90s, when we were looking at developing an inspection system for our recreation facilities and work I did with your predecessor, Commissioner DiBerardinas, I just want to read to you from a report. This is from New York City. It is a Park Inspection Program Manual, most recently revised and updated January 10, 2000. And what it says is... This is about their inspection program. The approximately 2400 ratable sites citywide include 937 playgrounds, 503 large park zones, 500 green streets -- I don't know what they are -- and 468 small parks under 6 acres in size. Now, what was your research in the context of telling us that there were only 299 Whole - Operating Budget - 4/20/04 35 centers in New York City, as compared to a document from the City of New York that indicates that they have 937 playgrounds? Can you tell me what the discrepancy is there?
I would have to get some help on answering that because I had help on... Yeah, I would have to get back to you on that because this document was done through conjunction with help through the MDOs office. But I'll get right back to you.
Can you tell me who told you that there were 35 rec centers in New York City?
It's a couple years old, but I'll find out and get right back to you, sir.
All right. Well, let me say this to you: Let me say two things... And I know the latest list is floating around. First, given our experience here today, the issues that have been raised, 300 Whole - Operating Budget - 4/20/04 the questions that have been asked, and many not answered, as we go into the upcoming fiscal year which is 70 days away, it does not appear that the complete plan for what is being proposed is fully worked out. Would you agree?
No. That it's not worked out. Yeah, I'm agreeing that it's not worked out. No, it's not.
All right. I'm going to state the question again to make sure that it's clear on the record. We have 70 days before the --
We have 70 days before the start of the fiscal year. We've got three lists here today. We've had some conversations with Council members. 301 Whole - Operating Budget - 4/20/04 We've got spray pool costs and expenditures; capital costs that are unaccounted for; the inability to, I think, clearly identify how all the services are going to be maintained. As we sit here today, the proposal to close 5 ice rinks, 20 swimming pools, 40 summer camps, and 40 recreation centers is not ready for implementation. Would you agree with that?
And based on the discussion today, I think it is highly unlikely that it will be ready in 70 days. Would you agree with that?
They may be certain parts of it. But the total piece? No, it won't all be ready.
All right. You came to see me about ten days, two weeks ago, with a group of people, including the 302 Whole - Operating Budget - 4/20/04 Managing Director, the Secretary of Education, members of your staff. You came to talk to me about three rec centers, which also includes a pool. None of them are on the list that have facilities within a mile of them. They're all relatively small. They serve a dedicated population. None of them are under utilized. Issues with the building, and a small pool. I have done the due diligence that I shared with you that I would, with regard to those facilities. One's in the 52nd Ward. One is in the 34th Ward. And I've talked to Congressman Brady about the center in his ward. And the other is in the 4th Ward. And I've talked to the ward leader, Miss Carol Ann Campbell, about hers. What I can share with you -- And I've talked to community people who have expressed concern about this now. What I can tell you at the moment is the response is: No, no, and hell no on those three 303 Whole - Operating Budget - 4/20/04 facilities. (Applause.)
So, I think that there is a significant amount of work to be done, but that would be the position on those particular facilities. I haven't had a chance to look at the new list that just came out. And can you tell us -- And we'll work through this, I'm sure. But when will there be a complete, stapled-together, typed one list that everyone can operate from?
Get all the addresses correct, I'll have it in Madam President's office by lunchtime on Thursday morning, typed, address corrections, everything.
Okay. All right. Thank you. Thank you, Madam President. Thank you.
You're welcome. I don't know whether I should refer 304 Whole - Operating Budget - 4/20/04 to this as the first list or second list. (Laughter.)
I see here Finnegan. Finnegan. That's on the March 8th, 2004 list. I am assuming that in FY '04 we spent $173,000 to make some repairs to that building; is that correct?
Very well. And I noticed on the savings block it's vacant. Why would we close it if there are no savings? It is my understanding that we have a part-time employee there. I further understand that the Finnegan family has donated 400 or 500 books to Finnegan Library, and they have recently purchased outfits for the drill team. Why are we closing it if there's no 23 savings? And we have -- And it's -- And the building is truly being utilized?
It's just a 305 Whole - Operating Budget - 4/20/04 recommendation, where we're not closing it as of yet. And the other piece is, we have the deal and work with the community once we get to, I guess, the final, final list.
I don't understand. You have to have some rationale to put it on the list.
The rationale is the facility, the size of the facility, and the location of where it is.
Well, I know that it's located... What is it? Maybe seven blocks away from there. But with that being said, if we're closing a facility that's really being utilized, and there are no savings attached, why are we closing it or why do we even propose that it be closed?
Once again, some of the issues that we have to address was to look at smaller facilities in a relative size. The savings would be computated if that property would be turned over for sale 306 Whole - Operating Budget - 4/20/04 or maintained, and also to try to use --
Oh, Commissioner, there are so many vacant structures in that area. Believe me, anybody that was interested in buying property really have their choice out in that area.
They don't have to wait for a recreation center to be closed to decide what they're going to buy the building.
I would also like to understand this... I guess it's the second form that we got, and then the third form. Mr. Carapucci, I guess you'll understand what I'm saying.
I think the second form here, Madam President, is the pools.
Okay. But 307 Whole - Operating Budget - 4/20/04 on the second form or the third form?
The last one we got was the pools. The second one we received.
We have two on the second, and we also have two on the third. Does that mean that we're not going to have anything at all at Chew? Is that what's being proposed?
How about the ball fields? Are they going to be...
If the ball fields would stay, the building would come down, and it would be made into a passive park with a possible spray ground.
We can't say for 308 Whole - Operating Budget - 4/20/04 sure.
I know. Let me ask you something. We're going to do away with the building, we're going to maintain the fields, and we propose to put a spray pool. Do they have supervision with the spray pools? Because I will tell you: At Chew, for instance, that pool is utilized because we have Lincoln Day Care that's adjacent to it. So the children from Lincoln Day Care use the pool, children from the community use the pool. We close the pool and we put a spray pool with youngsters of that age. Wouldn't there need to be some supervision, Commissioner? Mr. Carapucci? Somebody?
I could answer that. What we'll do is, if this goes through with a spray ground, we would -- if we don't have present full-time permanent staff at the site, we would hire a seasonal person in the summertime. And their job would be 309 Whole - Operating Budget - 4/20/04 to oversee the spray ground, one person, instead of a full staff.
Well, we estimate... We estimate in a season at each pool it costs around $50,000 a pool. So, if we just hired one seasonal, maybe it would only cost us $5,000. So, it would be around a $45,000 saving.
You know, I think we're all sitting here. We all know what the financial problems are with the City. And it's not that we want to be argumentative. We certainly don't want to fight each other. I just think that there's a right way and a wrong way of doing things. When this was being proposed, wouldn't it have been nice if we were able to go to the community? The community, I'm sure, would certainly want to cooperate in whatever way they could. Wouldn't it have been nice if we 310 Whole - Operating Budget - 4/20/04 were able to go to the community and say, this is what's being proposed. If you don't agree, then just meet us halfway until such time as we are financially able to go back to the services that we once had. I mean, don't you think it would have made everybody's life just a little bit easier? (Applause.)
Yes. And that is part of the plan, Madam President, to get down to the final.
Commissioner, that's part of the plan? When? I mean, we're supposed to be passing this budget by the end of May.
And I think that's part of the process of going and talking to Council members, was part of that process of making sure we went to you first.
Okay. They've come to me. Okay. 311 Whole - Operating Budget - 4/20/04 When are they going to the community? Am I going to go to the community by myself? Or does somebody from the Recreation Department whose idea it is to do this go along? And I would still like to see the report on the usage because I have no idea, and I'm sure that nobody else does. I know that some facilities are overused. Some of them, as you say, may be underused. But we have no way of knowing that. And we don't know how you reached your decision.
On the usage, those numbers were provided by my staff. And I'll make sure that we have a copy printed out for you and delivered to your office for distribution. The issues involving the community is not really an issue. It's about trying to get some definitive answers. So, I have no problem doing that. And to answer it, no, it is not your responsibility to go out, and we wouldn't 312 Whole - Operating Budget - 4/20/04 expect you to go out. And I appreciate that. Thank you.
Well, we do represent the people in those particular areas.
Yes, it is part of my responsibility. And I will take that on myself.
However, I did not come up with this list. And I don't know how we reached the point that we have. So, as I said, people in the community realize what's going on. They're not unreasonable, but I think they want to be made a part of the process. And I think it would be very nice if you did that. (Applause.)
Could I follow you on something he said? 313 Whole - Operating Budget - 4/20/04
Could you describe, Commissioner... These locations that have buildings, I assume they have restrooms facilities? What are we going to do if -- I mean, if we leave a ball field and we leave other activities at a particular site, what are supposed -- what are supposed -- describe now the restroom facilities that are at a facility and what you propose.
Some -- Some -- A lot of the facilities do have restroom facilities. Some of the facilities and a lot of the parks or ball fields we have now don't have. So, if we do take out those little small buildings, we're not proposing to have any restroom facilities. If there is a special event or something that is taking place, we'll do what we presently will do now. If we need to rent porta-potties or what have you for that particular weekend or that day.
So you're telling 314 Whole - Operating Budget - 4/20/04 me you have a number of rec facilities today that have no restroom facilities at all.
Well, we have -- Yes, we do have facilities. We have properties, we have passive parks or we have some ball fields that we have that are used, that just... they're there for passive recreation.
Maybe I'm not expressing myself clearly. Are we going to be getting -- These locations where you're going to be demolishing the locations, they presently have restroom facilities, correct? What are you going to do to replace those facilities that people are accustomed to and I think required to have a restroom? Are you going to have a porta-potty all summer, boy/girl at these locations?
No, sir. At those facilities we recommend no restroom facilities.
Are there some 315 Whole - Operating Budget - 4/20/04 kind of... Are there any laws that you have to abide by, like having attendants at certain types of facilities? In other words, has the Law Department looked into exactly what you propose, to make sure it's even legal to do what you want to do? In other words, are you required to have attendants at certain facilities or are you putting yourself into a situation where you may be liable not having some oversight or supervision?
Those are the things that are being spearheaded by the Planning Commission. Earlier in some of my response to the testimony was the recommendations of taking out maybe some of the small facilities or if they had two smaller ones, to build another larger one. So, yes, legally and also to make sure that we're meeting service need capacities, based on the per capita. Those are the things that are being considered. We haven't got to the part yet where 316 Whole - Operating Budget - 4/20/04 the Law Department has actually yea or nayed anything.
The Chair recognizes Councilman DiCicco. Oh, I'm sorry. Councilman Goode didn't have a chance.
Thank you, Madam President. Good afternoon, Commissioner.
At some point I think you were going to delineate for us which of these facilities are just obsolete and which are being proposed for closing for financial reasons. Are you able to do that now or will that be done in the final document that we're expected to receive by Thursday morning?
I can talk about it. 317 Whole - Operating Budget - 4/20/04 But in order to have it all the way properly correct, I'd prefer to talk about it or give you the document. If I may, to answer more of your question, there's five lists that we looked at and that we put together. The first list we identified the properties that we would like the City to consider to just relinquish, to sell outright, put them up as surplus properties. Those properties are undeveloped. Those are properties that we have to continue to either cut grass or to continue to eliminate from becoming short dumps, and that they haven't been developed. Those are some of the properties that we've identified. The other list we thought about as we went through this process as the budget was being presented with the cuts, how can we take a look at approaching community groups, personal people or whatever, to see if we could maintain a facility but 318 Whole - Operating Budget - 4/20/04 transfer the fiscal responsible and still maintain. So that was an innovative way that we looked at would we be able to maintain some of them and still meet the City's fiscal piece. So that was another list. And it's the transfers last on lease list. List three and four; quite naturally there's one list that has just the recommended closures on it for the recreation facilities. The other list has just the pool listing for recommended closing. And the other list is by itself just an outright list naming the five ice skating rinks.
I let you go through all that, yet that wasn't my question.
My question was: If there was not a fiscal crisis at this point, you stated earlier that there are facilities that are just obsolete enough that you would close them anyway. 319 Whole - Operating Budget - 4/20/04 And you said that at a point at which there was a list that you could refer to, you would distinguish between which facilities on that list would have closed without regard to fiscal condition and which are being closed because of fiscal condition. So my question is: At this point, now that the list is in front of us, one, can you delineate which facilities would have been closed strictly because they're obsolete, and which are being considered for closing because of fiscal condition? And in the final list that you will provide to Council by Thursday morning that's retyped, in that document are you going to delineate which are being considered for closing because of fiscal condition and which are being closed because they're obsolete?
I'd appreciate just a brief response now, and then 320 Whole - Operating Budget - 4/20/04 something in writing and typed and as a final document later.
But I'm just interested in looking at this list right now, which facilities you can identify that would have been closed without regard to fiscal condition.
Councilman, there's a few on one of these lists that we haven't operated in years, places like -- 13
Not on the list 16 here. One of the lists that's being 17 circulated -- 18