-- all of those things are going to hopefully 138 3/25/09 - WHOLE - RES. 090226 produce jobs. So the earlier question I think was centered around the stimulus creating support for the General Fund in the out years, and I obviously haven't seen that reflected in your Five-Year Plan. So either you don't think this is going to happen as the Obama Administration proposed or it will be icing on the cake, and I'm okay with that, but I'd just like to --
Well, we show in our projections, we show a turnaround in the economy starting in about a year and a half.
So when Mr. Altman earlier in his statements talked about the business plan for creating jobs, when he referenced -- I think he talked about a green jobs strategy. Are you guys familiar where 139 3/25/09 - WHOLE - RES. 090226 there's a significant energy grant made available by the Obama Administration?
So when he talked about those jobs and weatherization and all of the things, that is reflected in your Five-Year Plan --
All right. Okay. Good response. I kind of led you into that response, but it's a good response.
The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Tasco for a follow-up question. 140 3/25/09 - WHOLE - RES. 090226
No. I'm sorry. I had turned my light off and I lost my spot.
I'm sorry. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Blackwell.
Thank you, Madam President. I just want to follow up on issues that have been raised all day with regard to the increase in taxes. We've debated the issue of full tax valuation -- and I've even spoken to the Mayor about it -- for years. We had hearings in front of our Housing Committee on the various tax structures. Certainly Councilman Clarke will remember when we talked about homesteading and other forms of tax relief for various communities. So we've been evaluating that, because we've been fighting it for some time. And we are really alarmed about 141 3/25/09 - WHOLE - RES. 090226 the question of percent the first year, 14 and a half in the second year with full tax valuation, because, Madam President, anybody who has been around here a while, you know that every time they say they're going to straighten out taxes, our taxes increase. I've personally experienced it. You've personally experienced it. Every time they're going to make it fair, it's not fair. So if we have a tax increase on top of full tax valuation, it could be catastrophic for people. I've been saying, Okay, if you want to talk about full tax valuation, let's have some standards and how will you measure a house at 10th and Rockland along with one at 10th and Fairmount and one in Mount Airy and University City? What are the standards to make these things fair? I haven't heard that. That's been my issue with all of this issue about tax. It remains to 142 3/25/09 - WHOLE - RES. 090226 be so, and I wanted to reiterate it for the record since we've been discussing that today. Thank you, Madam President.
Well, the one thing I just wanted to say to address at least some of what Councilwoman Blackwell said is that yesterday the Mayor announced his tax force -- his task force on tax and policy in the competitive economy, and we are very hopeful that that task force, which is on a fairly short timeframe, will come back and produce a new analysis of our entire tax system, make sure that the City is positioned to be competitive, not only competitive but that we have a much fairer tax system.
Certainly we appreciate that. I did hear that announcement, and historically if we are to deal with this, that makes sense 143 3/25/09 - WHOLE - RES. 090226 to those who have and those who have not. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Armbrister.
You're welcome. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Brown.
Thank you, Madam President. Gentlemen, I simply wanted to put on the record over a year ago I sent a letter to the Mayor asking to give the department heads a heads-up on these two items. I'm going to send a letter again in anticipation of the departments coming before us, and, that is, to hear the number and dollar amount of contracts that are made with external non-governmental agencies, because, again, in preparation for the hearings, particularly in DHS, I received some information that so many of those dollars are leaving the City when it comes to subcontractors. And also what are the 144 3/25/09 - WHOLE - RES. 090226 participation numbers for MBE, WBE and DBE firms for two departments: The Law Department and DHS. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair.
You're welcome. The Chair recognizes Councilman Jones.
Thank you, Madam President. I think it might have been on my turn where we started to look at the option of other tax options, and I think it's reflective of this body that all things should be on the table, and in concert with that, we need to get some idea, even if we don't pull the trigger, even if we don't use it, what wage tax reductions would mean in this scenario or slowing them down would mean in this scenario as well so that we can at least consider that option. The other thing that I would 145 3/25/09 - WHOLE - RES. 090226 say is at the end --
Decreases. I'm sorry. At the end of the day, we won't reduce expenditures our way out of this problem. We won't tax our way out of this problem. At the end of the day, we have to grow our way out of this problem by way of our economy. And I followed the line of questioning that Councilman Clarke has as to why we haven't moved on properties within our inventory, properties that we can acquire to develop so that we can increase the tax base, so that we can increase the real estate tax base, so that we don't have to burden the poor and the vulnerable that way. I don't understand why a developer can't come in and look at properties within our district and have a reasonable expectation as to a timeframe for properties that have been acquired or 146 3/25/09 - WHOLE - RES. 090226 can be acquired for development. I don't understand what the value of our inventory of real estate that we currently have could mean to our tax coffers and particularly in the domain of the Redevelopment Authority, and is there an estimate as to what those properties are worth?
Apparently not at this point, Councilman Jones. I mean, we're in the process now of working on our inventory process, our acquired inventory process. I don't think that we have a valuation at this point as I look to the Deputy Mayor for Economic Development, but...
Madam President, does the slow walk to the mike count on my time?
The answer is no, we don't have the valuation at this point, but we're certainly working on that issue.
Well, as we start to -- and I heard Deputy Mayor Altman talk about a vision and growth for our city. At the point that we aren't measuring that, it's hard to estimate what we can do, what we can gain by way of development, and I think that that's an integral part of our growth strategy to get out of this mess so that we're in our Five-Year Plan not talking about this in our fifth year. So it is important to me and I would imagine my colleagues that we consider this, that we look at -- I mean, we're literally looking around in the sofa for quarters to try to balance a budget. So this can't be -- this is like one of those treasures that you find that you didn't figure was in the other suit 148 3/25/09 - WHOLE - RES. 090226 pocket and might be something that helps us out in tough times. So as we progress in this budget process, that is something I will have as a question.
You're welcome. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Miller.
Thank you. Just a quick comment and question for the Commerce Director.
Why don't you wait until he approaches the table, please.
When I read the Five-Year Plan and it gets to the economic development, et cetera, portion of that Plan, it talks about a comprehensive strategy for neighborhood revitalization, and I'm just working at a 149 3/25/09 - WHOLE - RES. 090226 disadvantage here because I don't know what that is. I have never seen it in writing and have some difficulties similar to Councilman Clarke's that I won't go into detail today regarding questions, feedback from the RDA, et cetera, and I guess if the Plan is written, then could I have a copy? Maybe everybody wants a copy. And we can get a copy sent to the Chair?
It's the page that talks about the role of the Commerce Director creating jobs and economic opportunity, , and the specific paragraph -- DEPUTY
You can 150 3/25/09 - WHOLE - RES. 090226 find it in the introduction. DEPUTY
Yes. I have it. Yes, Councilmember, I have it. It's not a document. What this is intended to say is that the role is to bring together the different agencies around neighborhood revitalization. It's not a document. I mean, we have different documents. We have a housing plan, as you know, that goes through the Consolidated Plan that comes before Council and various other things. The idea is to bring those together.
Well, we need to probably have some type of discussions. Many of us were moving forward with a plan because NTI brought the resources needed to -- that we needed to the table, and right now our plan is on halt and there needs to be some type of format, and we can discuss this later as the departments come up. So I, for one -- and I'm just going to speak for the 8th District. 151 3/25/09 - WHOLE - RES. 090226 Other people will speak for their districts. I, for one, can act like I have some kind of knowledge of some type of plan, some type of goal, what we want to accomplish here. In the report it says that you want to provide housing for 25,000, I think, homeless people or provide -- what does it say exactly? DEPUTY
Exactly it says -- I mean, it should be it's housing units, but not to homeless, but let me look.
But I know you want to provide housing, 25,000 units of housing. Well, I sure don't think they're going to be in the 8th District, because no one is talking to Donna Reed Miller, and I have contractors and developers and we sent a proposal over to do some affordable housing. You know, maybe it's lack of communications. I don't know what it is, but -- DEPUTY
Let me just speak to that, Councilmember, on 152 3/25/09 - WHOLE - RES. 090226 that one issue, that, for example, last year, many of the housing resources are through the Consolidated Plan. So you'll be having a hearing on the Community Development Block Grant dollars and how those get distributed for housing. We had a number of tax credit projects that we worked with your office on last year getting funded, so there's -- and we'll have that hearing actually shortly. The Consolidated Plan will be before the Council, which will have how to allocate resources for -- which is really the principal -- that is the resource now for affordable housing in the City for housing production.
So we'll look forward to having that. That's not part of this budget, but we're looking forward to having those meetings with Councilmembers very shortly.
All right. So we can get into this a little 153 3/25/09 - WHOLE - RES. 090226 more specifically. But I wanted to raise the issue today, because it's very important. It's an important issue to me and to our constituents. When we start to do demolition, we have lots out there, and I want to rebuild. We got to find a way to get this done. Okay?
I guess my question is, in formulating your economic development plan for the City, how do you envision including those ten district Councilmembers who have been working in their districts around this whole issue of development? Is there a plan to include us as stakeholders? DEPUTY
Because I'm kind of running into the same problem that Councilman Clarke and Councilwoman 154 3/25/09 - WHOLE - RES. 090226 Miller are running into, because we have a plan for the 9th Councilmanic District, and particularly of the Ogontz area, that we're moving on, and then I get blocked on an issue I want to deal with because somebody else thinks there should be another -- something else should go in that place. Now, I just can't -- I don't see -- I think any change or any new ideas for development, which we're all open to, particularly if we're going to get help from the City, should incorporate and recognize what's going on, what's gone on for the last few years, what neighborhoods we've done. We worked with the City Planning prior to this Administration, come up with neighborhood plans. But we don't want to see a new effort come along and negate what we've done and don't include us in the discussion. So I think as you move forward -- and certainly everybody has to 155 3/25/09 - WHOLE - RES. 090226 have their vision and what they see the City might look like, but there is -- there are already existing plans and we need to be included in the discussion of what you envision before you complete the plan without our input. DEPUTY
First of all, let me -- yes, absolutely. We're not releasing a plan without the input, and a lot has been building on the existing plan. So we're not coming forward with a document that would be out anywhere before we would talk to the City Council. I mean, part of it has been as we've gone through this budget process is reconciling the resources. We're trying to do two things right now to connect a couple of these things for you, which is that the environment has changed so dramatically, as we all know. I mean, as we talked in the budget presentation before, the City resources, we're getting our arms around what the federal resources are, because those could -- 156 3/25/09 - WHOLE - RES. 090226 although they don't help with General Fund, those could help a lot with our economic development and jobs plan. So this is very much, to be honest, a work in progress, as you probably heard yesterday. We're getting our arms around the federal resources that we can use for our recovery, because many Councilmembers have alluded to. So, for example, new Community Development Block Grant dollars that will be coming to the City, how do we use those, the Energy Block Grant dollars, how are we going to use those. So right now the federal departments are just formulating guidance. I think you probably heard some testimony yesterday. So we have an opportunity now, knowing that where our -- that we have very limited City resources, how do we maximize these federal resources coming in. So over the next month, we will be sitting down with all the Councilmembers and actually going through the plans that have been done in 157 3/25/09 - WHOLE - RES. 090226 your districts and how do we take these resources and hopefully apply them to some of these projects that we can get done with the new resources and use those, because we're not allocating those resources before any of those conversations happen. We're right now trying to get a handle on those resources, because they may be the only resources we have for the next couple of years in terms of economic development, because we don't have the bonds that we had before to do neighborhood development. We don't have the ability to do that kind of bonding. So we are at a time of scarce resources, which means we just have to be very strategic. So we will be doing those over the next month. We frankly want to get through this, submit the budget, get a handle on the recovery funds and then sit down and say, Okay, now where are we, what do we start funding, what do we start doing. 158 3/25/09 - WHOLE - RES. 090226
I know that there's lot of stimulus money coming in to PHFA and I'm afraid that we're not ready and Philadelphia is going to lose out for funding, PHFA stimulus dollars, for some of our projects. And the other thing that I want to just encourage -- and I've asked the Mayor this question -- when is this audit going to be over? I need my acquisition dollars. You are holding me up.
It should be done actually within a couple of weeks. We're just about finished.
Thank you very much. The Committee will stand in recess until 1:30. Thank you. (Lunch break taken.) 159 3/25/09 - WHOLE - RES. 090266 (Proceedings resume after lunch break.) (Second-shift stenographer Josephine Cardillo relieves first-shift stenographer Michele Murphy.)
The Committee of the Whole is now back in session. And the Chair recognizes Councilman Green.
Thank you, madam President. During the testimony -- thank you for coming back. During testimony today and in many public statements, et cetera, the Administration has often pointed to a study by Robert Inman of the wage tax. And my question is: What academic studies do you have that show what the impact of a 19 percent property taxes, or what academic studies have you found that show what the impact of a property-tax increase is on our local 160 3/25/09 - WHOLE - RES. 090266 economy and jobs?
We actually pulled a number of studies, Councilmember, on a range of taxes. And it should be stated that -- and I think we said this earlier in the testimony, or the Chief of Staff said this -- we're not necessarily keen on using this as our last resort. We do believe there will be impacts of property-tax increase. But we're also of the opinion given, you know, the canvassing of academic studies that we did, that the temporary nature of this is a better choice than decimating services, which is what we believe would have to happen.
Well, it's not a choice between raising taxes and cutting services 'cause there are other taxes we can raise. It's a choice -- let's assume the revenue you get is the same. This is a choice between different methods of revenue. You were very specific in the 161 3/25/09 - WHOLE - RES. 090266 testimony that continually lowering the wage tax saved 2500 jobs a year. My question is: How many jobs will we lose if we increase property taxes? Is there any study?
Yeah, there's -- we do have -- and we can get you the detailed answer, but we do have analysis -- Professor Inman did some analysis, the Tax Reform Commission did some, eConsult did some. So -- and in each one of those, they said yes, there's an impact from each tax. The impact from the wage tax or the business tax is greater in terms of raise it, losing jobs; or if you decrease it, producing jobs. And we can get that you information.
But Professor Inman's study and all of the materials you have talk about a long-term impact as a result of cutting taxes. In any tax that we're talking 162 3/25/09 - WHOLE - RES. 090266 about raising or other revenue measures, we're talking about temporary increases. So --
I personally had a conversation with Professor Inman about this.
And while he does prefer a property-tax increase to other taxes, any temporary tax should not have the negative impacts as long as there is certainty that the tax will end in the eyes of business or whoever it is we're taxing.
Right. And what he said to us is that -- and, you know, as we've all said, while we don't want to increase any tax, if you had to do a tax, he said the best choice was a temporary property-tax increase.
Okay. So you're telling me you have specific 163 3/25/09 - WHOLE - RES. 090266 studies that will tell us how many jobs we'll lose as a consequence of a -- of property-tax increases on some basis.
Of property-tax increases, but if you're asking about a temporary property-tax increase, no. 8
-- of what a property-tax increase would mean, and we also have the further statement from Professor Inman that if you have to do something, that's the preferable thing to do.
Right. So do you have any studies that show what the impact is of a temporary wage tax slowing in reduction? 164 3/25/09 - WHOLE - RES. 090266
Well, I don't think that we'd be talking about slowing in reduction; is that your --
No. I'm saying, are there any studies that show what the impact is, the long-term impact, on jobs -- 'cause his study was the long-term impact on jobs where there was a clearly defined decrease in the wage tax over time.
Okay. My question is: Are there any studies that demonstrate that we will lose jobs as a result of a short-term wage-tax increase?
I don't think that we've seen that type of study. So I can again tell you just -- I mean, based on the conversations we've had with him, that he thinks that would be more 165 3/25/09 - WHOLE - RES. 090266 harmful.
Right. But there's no study on that's academic or peer-reviewed. And so, really, when you're citing a study that's about long-term impacts on jobs, you're comparing apples and oranges, because in any case, we're talking about short-term impacts.
Right. But, again, in terms of his look at the economy, he thought that the thing that had the least impact was the short-term property tax, because in general, wage taxes have a more negative impact than property taxes.
Sure, that compares wage tax to property tax? Yeah, there are. 166 3/25/09 - WHOLE - RES. 090266
-- that compares short-term increases in wage taxes or property taxes.
Councilman Green, if I could refer you to my testimony earlier today in which I quoted Professor Inman where he -- although it wasn't the subject of a study, but he did say, and this is his quote: "The last years of modest 12 cuts in the wage and gross-receipts tax 13 has saved the City more than 35,000 jobs 14 or 2500 a year."
He said: "The 167 3/25/09 - WHOLE - RES. 090266 decision to temporarily" -- and he used the word "temporarily" -- "stop the tax cuts will, therefore, cost the City's private economy 2500 jobs. This is on top of job loss from the recession. "This -- and, again this is a quote." This is a significant contribution from the private sector and a particularly painful burden for Philadelphians looking for jobs." So I don't know if it was the subject of a study.
He made the statement that it would cost at least 2500 jobs from temporary tax --
I just happen to think that the Administration has been, and this Mayor has been, a wage-tax cutter for a long time, and I think that that's very important. 168 3/25/09 - WHOLE - RES. 090266 But I don't think we should hold up one professor or one study and say that prevents us from looking at other options. Everything, as Councilman Jones said, has to be on the table. And I will be providing the Administration with studies that show the impact of property-tax increases on this kind of magnitude and the effects on jobs, which can be quite serious.
And let me just say we're not just counting on one professor. As I said, we looked at studies from -- we looked at the Tax Reform Commission report, we looked at stuff that eConsult did, we looked at the Controller's Office report. We looked at a number of things, and each one of those came to the same conclusion. And we're not saying that there's no --
Let me finish. 169 3/25/09 - WHOLE - RES. 090266 We're not saying there's no 3 impact from the property tax. We've also said, you know, if we had our choice, we wouldn't do any of this. We're just looking at the comparisons between them.
None of those studies looked at short-term increases; they were all related to long-term changes in our tax structure. There is no study that talks about short-term increases that you're talking about. And that's what we're talking about, short-term increases.
Right. And then we can go back and forth, but I think what the Chief of Staff said is that we actually do have comments on short-term, so --
But you have comments from one professor on short-term. You have no studies, nothing peer-reviewed, there's no evidence that you have presented to this Council so far that says what the short-term -- that 170 3/25/09 - WHOLE - RES. 090266 there will be negative short-term impacts of one versus the other than that one quote.
And we don't know what the rest of the conversation is. Perhaps we ought to have Professor Inman in here and other experts, because you guys seem to be relying on --
We do too. Yeah, we can do that. I think it would make a lot of sense to bring people in and talk about the impact of various tax increases. We'd be happy to have that discussion.
If I might, Councilmember, to correct a perception. All of the tax studies that you will see address the marginal changes 171 3/25/09 - WHOLE - RES. 090266 associated with tax rates and look at the marginal changes. It's why if you go just to a standard public finance textbook, it will look at those changes over time but focus on the marginal changes in a year-to-year basis, and I'm happy to provide those textbooks to you.
I don't need a textbook; I'm asking for peer-reviewed studies on the impacts of the different taxes. And what I hear is, there are no 14 studies, there's no evidence of a short-term increase in any tax that I'm aware of that affects Philadelphians. And this is the fundamental issue that existed when we did the -- solved what the Administration "the first billion-dollar problem elsewhere." The information that we're being provided and we're looking at in textbooks don't apply to Philadelphia specifically. The information that we care about is, what is the impact on our most 172 3/25/09 - WHOLE - RES. 090266 vulnerable population. And in the first round of cuts, that was not taken into account. No studies were done, that information wasn't available, and I think we deserve it as we look at the Five-Year Plan and, you know, answers to specifically how does it affect a Philadelphian with 25,000. If you don't know how it affects Philadelphians in terms of what it means for a family of 25,000, 50,000, 75,000, et cetera, then we can't make an informed decision, and we're going to have to get our own financial experts to come to put this into what it means to our constituents, not constituents in Washington, D.C. Thank you, Madam President.
The analyses we're talking about do apply to Philadelphia. And like I said, we're happy to have professors come in and other experts come in and talk about the impact of various taxes. 173 3/25/09 - WHOLE - RES. 090266
Very well, thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman Clarke.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Is Mr. Altman here? (Witness comes forward.)
Good afternoon. And let me preface my comments by saying I actually like Mr. Altman.
Mr. Altman, this -- the structure of the government is a little different than it was in past years. And right now, you, as Deputy Mayor, have the responsibility of a number of different things. And in terms of housing policy, who is in charge of housing policy at the end of the day? I mean, who sets the direction on what we're going to do and 174 3/25/09 - WHOLE - RES. 090266 how we're going to do it?
I mean, obviously, at the end of the day, it would be the Administration, the Mayor. The way we --
I mean, the Mayor's in charge of it all, all of the administration.
Yeah. I mean, it's a collaborative effort. I mean, it's between the Redevelopment Authority and the Office of Housing and Community Development. Obviously, a lot of people have a piece of housing and the planning department -- Planning Commission. But, you know, principally I'd say it's between the Office of Housing and Community Development and the Redevelopment Authority are the principal actors that we work together on.
So does then 175 3/25/09 - WHOLE - RES. 090266 that mean that no one person's in charge? Or --
I mean, most people would say at the end of the day, Madam President is in charge of this wonderful body.
Although we're independently elected officials, but --
Yeah. Within our structure, within the department, it would be under my direction, and then from me to the Mayor.
So you're in 176 3/25/09 - WHOLE - RES. 090266 charge.
Yeah, but it's -- as I was saying, in terms of the agencies that principally we work with, those are the two.
I understand. I mean, it has to be -- so you're the person.
I got to where I was trying to go. So in terms of this production issue -- 'cause I'm really concerned about it, as I think I made it clear earlier.
If there are issues with respects to the timeliness or decisions that need to be made, who do we call, we Council people? 'Cause it's not clear to me who we deal with now. 177 3/25/09 - WHOLE - RES. 090266
I'd say certainly you can call me on any of those issues because I work with those departments on a regular basis and can try to resolve those issues. There are the commissioners and the department heads themselves who are accessible. The head of the RDA, Terry Gillen, is here; Deborah McCullough, at the Office of Housing and Community Development. Certainly those, I'd say, are two of the principal people in terms of production and land issues. Some of the issues we were talking about before many, involve land disposition, some involve financing and Community Development Block Grants, which would be through the Office of Housing and Community Development. But, of course, you can -- I mean, clearly, you can call me, and I can bring them together. But you do department heads who are the day-to-day operational people for 178 3/25/09 - WHOLE - RES. 090266 those resources.
So you're suggesting -- and I just want to be clear 'cause I've been having some real trouble with this.
I start out with the department heads, and then if there's some --
I have to deal with you, or do I deal with you and then you'll figure it out? I mean, 'cause I'm telling you -- and you know I'm really frustrated with this.
I hear your concern about it. Let me -- I can make it clear. Absolutely you can call me and I'm accessible at any time. I know you've had some concerns you expressed earlier, and I want to rectify those. Clearly you can call me on any of those issues, and I 179 3/25/09 - WHOLE - RES. 090266 can help to resolve those with departments. But I don't want you to feel, or anyone else to feel, that department heads are not accessible to the Council or to the public. But absolutely call me, and I'll take responsibility for that.
Okay. Some earlier questions with respects to -- I think Councilwoman Miller had raised to development-related issues. I think you suggested that you could get into more detail during the Community Development Block Grant hearings and the Consolidated Plan, and I agree with that to a degree. But I'm a little concerned about that 'cause that traditionally comes after the budget hearings. And I hate to use this term, I have to be careful how I characterize it. To some degree, the Consolidated Plan deals with a relatively narrow part of the population 'cause it is 180 3/25/09 - WHOLE - RES. 090266 traditionally driven by virtue of income in terms of the people that it will help. So sometimes it's not elevated to the level where we get the appropriate responses from the administrations. So if the Council holds up the budget, right, just the general budget, then it's going to get a lot more response than if the Council holds up the Consolidated Plan, 'cause the Consolidated Plan, frankly speaking, seems to be more Council-driven in terms of level of interest. So I'll be concerned about simply waiting until the Consolidated Plan is a part of the agenda before we get some of these answers relating to this issue.
We can deal -- I mean, there are -- we can deal with many of those specifics now. We don't have to today, but in terms of the course of this budget's specific issues, I'm happy to address those issues that the Council 181 3/25/09 - WHOLE - RES. 090266 has.
And we can -- I'm, frankly, happy to sit down with any of the Councilmembers on their specific issues because some of them -- for example, Councilmember Tasco, for example, raised an issue: She was concerned about the RDA, and other people raised issues about planning or Licenses and Inspections. We can work those through now, which all affect housing, getting to your point.
With different pieces of the housing puzzle, we can address those in this process. And the Consolidated Plan, as you know, will come forward in this -- it's not on the exact, same track, but it will be before the Council recess.
So that will be before for the hearing, and you'll see 182 3/25/09 - WHOLE - RES. 090266 that.
Right. The issue with respects to your earlier statements about us being dependent upon essentially external funds for development process. How much money do we have left in the NTI budget?
Well, I -- I was going to say there is -- I'll turn it to Rob because the answer is much of -- do you know the number that was put on -- I'd have to get back to you with the exact number. 'Cause there was no new money left of -- NTI was essentially depleted, but then there was money that was -- essentially in the course of the audit was put on hold, some of the land acquisition money and the qualified redevelopment bonds. So I'd have to look at that number again; I haven't looked at it.
Anybody know? 183 3/25/09 - WHOLE - RES. 090266 (No response.) Anybody know? That kind of makes -- I guess this kind of makes my point in terms of the relevancy, 'cause to some people, that's equally as important to some of the issues we're talking about. And, you know, we have the Administration here, and nobody knows how much money there is.
Well, the question was versus (indiscernible) exempt --
I mean, that was the issue. It was never a question about the amount.
I want to say it was in the 35-to-$40-million range, but I would have to confirm that. I mean, that's the ballpark. I just wanted to give you the exact number.
And I know the bell rang. So you would say -- then you want to alter your statement that we don't have any internal --
You said the only money we have for development is external.
Yeah, let me -- let me amend -- yeah, let me clarify that, 'cause what I was saying is that in terms of any significant new resources, I guess I was (indiscernible) as we've looked 185 3/25/09 - WHOLE - RES. 090266 to -- there's funds that are, for example -- you're absolutely right and the NTI funds, what are in there. There are -- and I'm happy to go through this at the Commerce hearing. There are still funds that were from the cultural and commercial bond dollars that are still -- most of them are programmed with projects that have been worked through with the City Council in terms of commercial corridors left to be expended. I was distinguishing that from new resources where, obviously, we're more constrained and are looking to some of these federal stimulus dollars to do --
Right. Although it may not be new money, but it 186 3/25/09 - WHOLE - RES. 090266 is new money --
And the ability to leverage it with stimulus dollars should be first and foremost to maximize its capacity.