Thank you, Councilmember, for that question. You know, at the core of our thesis for 2026 is really, as you point out, driving the celebrations of the neighborhoods and learning from past experiences. You know, one of the greatest learnings from the people's experience was that folks didn't even know really how to journey out appropriately to spread that economic impact. So as we were talking with folks in the neighborhoods, the key thing that we kept hearing over and over when we asked, what do you want to see? We kept being told, we want to earn money. So the commercial corridors are central to that plan. Obviously through the commercial corridor program, we're going to be making some physical enhancements working with each Council district office in partnership with each Council district office to select corridors where we can really drive targeted enhancements. But it's not just about making physical enhancements to the space, right? There's so much more that goes into making sure business is ready. Think about if you have a restaurant, you need at least 40 solid images on Google just to be able to rank. So we're partnering with groups like Visit Philadelphia to provide that digital assets, the photography, the auditing of your Google space, because the first thing you do when you go off a plane, or train, or automobile is say, Google, where am I going to have dinner? So we're working with our commercial quarters to make sure that the education is there, that the physical enhancements are there. And we're not just working with commercial corridor managers, but we're also working with CDCs and other groups in each district that has capacity. We're also going to be creating some grant programs through commerce to make sure that even if you might not be an official CDC or business operator, that you can co-create the experience of 2026 for your community by offering those opportunities as well.
Thank you for that. I think, you know, we need to do that now, right? We -- I walk the corridors, I walk the community, and, you know, you hear the buzz, 2026 is coming, it's like right around the corner, and I haven't heard anything, how do I get involved? You know, how does my business become a part of that economic opportunity that you all in government are talking so much about? And so how do we -- how do we -- how do we, kind of, speed up the process as it relates to that direct community engagement need that we are seeing and hearing from community businesses and residents.
So now with the FY '25 transfer and hopeful eventual passage of the Fiscal Year '26 budget, we're ready to kick off those events in a big way. So stay tuned for some of that news that we'll be announcing soon. But we can start some of those initial conversations and identification with you all. So we're happy to meet with your offices directly on a one-on-one basis.
Thank you. And then just two more. As we prepare for 2026, and we know the large amount of people that are going to come here, community residents are concerned about public safety, right? Will the officers that are now in neighborhoods, will they be pulled to the downtown neighborhoods to be able to cover these spaces? Are we prepared with, you know -- are we prepared to ensure that folks are safe when they're coming into neighborhoods? Are we going to respond less to the public safety need because we have a lack of officers in the district because they've been moved to the priority areas like downtown?
I'll let Commissioner Bethel talk to the specifics about deployment of officers, but the short answer is we will always meet our -- meet our obligations and duties to the residents of Philadelphia when it comes to public safety. And that's why the budget is so heavily focused on, yes, making sure the events are great, but also almost 50/50 in terms of our investment in public safety. And again, police, fire, OEM, making sure they have what they need. And Commissioner Bethel, if you want to go into any more detail there. COMMISSIONER BETHEL: Yeah, I won't get into all of the specific councilwoman, but I mean, we were working in partnership. I know my partners from OEM are here who've been leading that effort along with a multitude of folks in preparation for next year. It's going to be probably one of the most significant challenges we've ever had in our department to be able to deploy. And so we are going to be looking for other assets to support us. I won't get into the specifics of those, but obviously, we leaning on our collar counties and others to support us as similar as we did for the, you know, the Super Bowl and the parade. I mean, we had to bring in a number of officers, state police and provide us with a significant allocation. So we're confident that we'll be able to maintain the deployment in our communities, at the same time deal with the events that we're going to be dealing with both Downtown and throughout the -- throughout the city. So we're confident that we're doing that. We're doing a lot of planning. We'll be planning -- we've been planning for quite some time, we'll continue through that process, but I would make sure the community is aware. Our duty is to serve the city and then to serve, you know, the other events that we have. We've been able to do this before, and we'll accomplish that again in 2026, and at the end of this year as well.
Thank you. And then my last -- my last question, Tiffany mentioned that affordable doesn't mean cheap, but affordable also doesn't respond to low, low income. And so how do some of our low, low income families take advantage of the opportunity from the Home program?
Absolutely. So I'd like to call up our Chief of Staff for Planning and Development, John Mondlak, to talk about that. Chief of Staff for Planning and Development.
Thank you. Thank you, Councilwoman. John Mondlak from the Department of Planning and Development. I think a -- couple of things. I think that it can relate to that income bracket and does relate to that income bracket. So right now, PHA is a leader in this space. They're doing quality projects, they're doing projects that I have visited that I would happily live in, that are of great quality and there are also non-profit developers out there that are also doing the same quality work in their developments. And as part of what we do when we fund these projects, we fund projects that serve that community. A lot of that space is PHA, but not all of it. And the programs that we fund, we also put in these requirements that they also need to include affordable luxury as well. So I do think that that is happening at all levels of income, not just above 30 percent, not just above 125 -- 120 percent, I think it's happening everywhere. And I think we have to be diligent to make sure and keep an eye on it and make sure that we're diligent in our contracting process because it really is important that we put all of our effort into making sure that that continues.
I appreciate that. I think that, you know, when I came in 2022, I was very clear and honest about not understanding the entire everything that went into development, right? But what I do know for sure is what my community needs are as it relates to housing. My priority is to make sure that we protect the identity, the culture, and the history of neighborhoods. And that if we're talking about economic opportunities, that all of us are able to take advantage of that. And so I'm looking forward to making sure that these 30,000 units, that are going to be created across the city of Philadelphia, that some of our residents who are on fixed incomes who choose to take advantage of these programs, that they have the opportunity to do that. And I recognize that not all poor people have to live in the same neighborhood, I recognize that not all neighborhoods have to be a specific race, but if I choose to live in the neighborhood that I've generationally been in for a long time, I want to be able to do that. I want to be able to afford it, right? And I don't want -- I don't want my residents to feel like some of them do now on the southern end of the district, that as a result of development, they are the ones that don't belong. And so I'm looking forward to ensuring that all of us across the city of Philadelphia can participate in these program. Thank you.
And, Councilwoman, you make a wonderful point about the rich cultural identity of all the neighborhoods across Philadelphia, and that's exactly what we want to highlight and showcase with 2026. And to speak about some of the work that is already going on to your earlier question, I just want to call up Carlton Williams, our Director of Clean and Green, to talk about some of that beautification and greening that is already happening.
Thank you. Appreciate it. Thank you. Good afternoon. Good afternoon, Councilmembers. Carlton Williams, director of Clean and Green Initiatives for Mayor Cherelle Parker. Thank you, Chief Deputy Mayor Sincere and team. Yes, we are already working with commerce and our partners across the government in reference to identifying corridors, where we will be actually clean cleaning and greening our neighborhood corridors to make them more attractive for people to come in and do business visit. And ultimately, improve the environment. So far, we did an example on Lancaster Avenue, and I invite you all to look at 40th and 41st in Lancaster, which we install planters along the walkways. This, again, makes it more attractive for people to come in and do business here in the city of Philadelphia. It also makes sure that the businesses understand the importance of a clean environment, and so it makes them feel comfortable in actually doing business there. So we're working with commerce to identify locations 7 around the city of Philadelphia that 8 will actually benefit this 9 throughout the entire areas, mainly 10 in neighborhoods outside of Center 11 City. I want to emphasize that 12 because also we want residents, as 13 stated earlier, with Philly 250, we 14 want people to come into the 15 neighborhoods to benefit from this 16 as well. So this is how we're 17 working together over the next year 18 to get prepared in reference to 2026 19 and beyond. These are legacy 20 leaving projects that ultimately when the crowds go away, the business is still thriving and can be successful and benefit from it.
Thank you. And then also, I just want to state for the record, also following up on the line of questioning from Councilwoman Quetcy Lozada. Just also, when we talk about housing below, typically we talk about affordable housing and workforce housing, but also there's a low income community besides PHA that still need assistance, such as The Women Revitalization --
WCRP. It's run by Nora Lichtash, we just have a new project in South Philadelphia that provides housing, particularly for women with children, right? And that's at an income level, right? That is not -- that is below, particularly, those who go for like our "Turn the Key" programs, right? But still helping people go from being running to actually being homeowner. And also CATCH -- work with CATCH in my district, particularly on veterans housing, right? And that's another area that doesn't really qualify in the affordable workforce, but at the same time, high quality housing, particularly for veterans at a whole different price point. So I think we're all rolling in the same direction. One thing I do take pride in is that PHA houses today, like they are super high quality houses, right? I've been at plenty of their ribbon cuttings since I've been a Council President that's not inside my district, that shows the quality of the houses being offered. We're talking about three stories with a roof deck, right? With all the finishes. So I have witnessed that. And obviously, if you -- if anybody in here participating in "Turning the Key" ribbon cutting, you see that we're going in the right direction in terms of providing high quality housing for individuals that we service. But with that being said, I'm going to go back to Councilwoman Quetcy Lozada real brief.
I just want to say just thank you also, Council President. And I also as the daughter of a military veteran, I appreciate also the shout out to veterans because --
-- whether it's that constituency, or that group, or that the single mothers, or single fathers, or guardians, we want to make sure that there is something in this substantive mind you, in our housing plan for everyone, so absolutely.
Yeah. To me, it's important that we are able to respond to that to 60 percent 6 MAI, right, because those are the 7 folks that oftentimes don't have the 8 opportunities that we talk about in 9 some of the programs, right? Those 10 are the folks that we don't 11 prioritize. 12 And so for me, it's 13 important that as we're creating 14 this new stack of housing, that that 15 community is also remembered -- you 16 know, you're remembering them in the 17 process. And understanding that not 18 all residents want to be homeowners, 19 some of them want to be renters, 20 right? They don't want the responsibility of the overhead of maintaining a home.
Absolutely. Absolutely. One of the things, and so we -- one of the things that Mayor Parker always says that has resonated throughout this process, and one that I also stand by, is that in this process, whether it's the One Philly Mortgage, or the litany of other programs that we either discussed yesterday, or are part of this program that we will roll out more comprehensively over the coming weeks, ahead of our April 21st hearing, we are not going to put the haves against the have-nots, or the haves against the have just a little bit. We're thinking about all of it. So absolutely, we concur.
Okay. Thank you very much. It is Rue Landau, Thomas, Jay, and then we'll be officially in our second round. Rue.
Thank you so much, Council President. I promise to be brief -- as brief as possible. And thank you all so much for being here. I want to -- I'll start with housing too. As somebody who used to sue PHA a long time ago, long before this executive director, I could not be happier with the quality and the style and the way in which Kelvin Jeremiah is doing business here in Philadelphia. It's just a complete change from what it was back then. So that is very exciting to me. I wanted to also -- I might just follow-up a little bit on -- I -- I guess I also want to underscore what my colleague, Quetcy Lozada, just said about making sure we don't leave behind people in deep poverty while we are going through this home process. I am excited for digging in deeper to what all of you are laying out here through this, to have the city investing its resources to transform the way we are dealing with housing, providing housing, and the city of Philadelphia. It's so exciting for me, but we need to make sure that we're not leaving behind folks in deep poverty.
And Councilmember Landau, let me just be very clear, that's not lost on us. None of us up here at this table and those who are in leadership, many of us, we are first generation, first to graduate college, first to be in leadership roles, first to sit at this table, right? And so in that, to leave behind people in deep poverty would be leaving behind my grandmother, my uncles, my cousins, right? And so, no, that will not happen. That will not happen. This is not a tone-deaf plan, and this is also not a plan that's just going to sit on the shelf. So absolutely, we concur, we're with you. But to leave behind people that have just a little bit, will be leaving behind the people in our families, and we're not going to do that.
That's wonderful to hear. Thank you so much. And I've appreciated talking to Directors Brooks and Hill recently getting to know them and thank them so much for their initial meetings with me. It's clear that we need to focus on homelessness -- the holistic approach of homelessness to home ownership. And that we're, again, excited to partner with you on that. But I remember, I believe that we've already heard the stat that two thirds of people in who are coming into our shelters are coming in for the first time.
That struck me as something that's really significant and that we could -- it's an opportunity to triage and to problem solve immediately while they're coming in the shelters, and certainly, a place where we can use an extra $5 million to come up with a program to make sure that we are figuring out exactly what the needs are and hopefully keeping them out of the shelters. You were -- we discussed -- I think it was Director Hill who talked about that stat. I think it predated her, but also the fact that they've been doing a deep dive into what all the touch points are in the homelessness system that we have. What happens when you come to a shelter? What happens next? And I'm curious if you've talked to the people in need of shelter housing, whether or not they have -there's been any kind of, you know, discussions with them to make sure, why were you coming here? What do you need? What can we do next? What can we do better so that we can have, you know, as we all discussed, the shelter units that feel more like a real first step, where we can put in a lot of supportive structures and then get them moved into housing.
Yes. And it is through that engagement where we discovered that that's where that 66 percent figure came from. But I will call up now, Cheryl Hill, the Director of the Office of Homeless Services, to talk more about that in greater detail.
Thank you for the question. So to answer your question, one, we try to engage individuals with lived experience. And as we're going through this process over the next few months to a year, that's exactly what we intend to continue to do. But also what we're doing is we're engaging the service providers. We are also looking at our monitoring a lot better, and just addressing something Council President said earlier, that is what we want to make sure that whatever our shelters look like is something that any of our family members can go to, and we are accepting of our family members going to that. Because similarly, I have family members who have actually used the shelters here in Philadelphia, and I recognize that I do not want them to have to do that again. So with that, we are evaluating our shelters, we are talking to the service providers to make sure that we're getting their information, but also we plan to bring in individuals with more live experience to talk about what are the barriers. We have a survey that we use now in some of the shelters or in our shelter system to get some of that information, but we do want to do a deeper dive because we want to make sure that the path that you take to get out of homelessness is one that can keep you out of homelessness.
That's wonderful. Thank you. Welcome to Philly, we need you. Welcome here into this role, is what I meant. And then the next questions I had, I wanted to -- I'm going to save most of my tax questions for later. But I wanted to talk a little bit more about federal -- potential federal funding cuts, which I'm also concerned with. We talked about there's a, you know, we get $2.8 billion in federal contracts. My first question is: When you calculated that number of 2.8 billion, did -- what does that number entail? Does it also include contracts that come to the city of Philadelphia through -- as pass-throughs to nonprofits?
Yep. So when we talk about the city, the funds directly to the city, that's what we're talking about that will not include partner entities who are not the city, like the district, or PHA, or other entities.
Do you have that number as well? So that's more than 2.8 billion.
Do you have that million? Not million, I'm sorry, it's been a long day already.
I do not, we'd have to collect that information from some other agencies.
And also, just while we were -- I was following up, I believe on Councilmember O'Rourke's questions about federal workforce as well. It's my understanding that 80 percent of federal workers live outside of Washington, D.C. including as many as 137,000 that live in Pennsylvania, somewhere between 20 to 30 -- to 35,000 that are -- live in Philadelphia. And that doesn't even include the -- our counties where they come to work in Philadelphia. What is -- have you done calculations on what happens with the loss of these -- potential loss of these federal jobs?
So we work with our outside economists to understand, sort of, what the -- what we expect in the job market. And so our job projections reflect some of what we anticipate, understand that it is a fluid situation and we'll continue to work with them if things -- if things evolve.
Okay. Knowing that these rise, it'll be increased unemployment rates, increased vacancies in buildings, and a lot of stress on families, which will disproportionately affect black and brown families as we know, especially black families here in Philadelphia, which, you know, have a larger number of jobs and we have a significant number of veterans here in Philadelphia who will also be affected as well. I guess, I had one last question for now that I'll just put on the table for the future for trying to get down into the -- into the -- into the departments. But I wanted to dig down deeper in staffing to talk about which departments those 5,700 vacancies are. And are we looking at each avenue to aid in the hiring process in different ways. I'm so excited for you, Director Jones, to be here, and would definitely want to drill down, dig deeper into that. I don't know that we need to talk about it today, but I would love to get a breakdown of those 5,700, where they are, where we can help, and what are there different barriers for different jobs.
We definitely have that breakdown and we will make sure that we submit that to the Council president's -- Council President's Office for your review.
Thank you. Oh, CP, can I ask one last question? When it comes to -- I'm all, I really want to focus also on our business growth here in Philadelphia and wanted to know if you could touch more on the plan for Market East. Very invested in making sure that our east market is thriving as soon as possible.
Absolutely. And I shared that along with you. Earlier in the year under the leadership of Donovan West, who heads our Mayor's office of Business Roundtables, we convened at the Sears Center and with all of our business roundtable leaders and talked about all of the recommendations that have come forth by way of that office. As part of that, the Mayor shared then, and also in her budget address earlier this month her commitment to Market East from City Hall to the river. And in that she announced that Jerry Sweeney, a local business owner, would be heading an advisory group. Also, part of that advisory group will be all sorts of stakeholders, including business owners that in Chinatown, residents of Chinatown, and Wash West. We are working, of course, in close coordination with Councilmember Squilla to ensure that through our Office of Planning and Development, we do a robust, you know, master planning process. But in that process, we'll be doing ongoing engagement around that. Also, of course, working in coordination with larger organizations like Jefferson, who is really important to this administration, Mesa Ridge, and on and on and on, so.
Sorry, we have also -- just in our transfer ordinance, we have 250,000 to start the marketing study. And then in 2026 -- FY '26, we're proposing the remaining 500,000, so 750 total to get the ball rolling this year so we can get that started.
And I'm sure this will be in partnership with Neil form 76ers/Comcast on partnership and commitment to revitalize East Market Street, correct?
Absolutely, for the record. That is absolutely correct. We will do that in partnership with Comcast and the 6ers.
Thank you very much. The Chair recognizes my majority with Councilmember Isaiah Thomas.
Good afternoon, Council President. And it's been great dialogue so far. I appreciate my colleagues asking such informed questions. I want to first start by thanking the admin for your partnership around issues related to education as well as 2026. And I also want to commend the admin for what you've done around public safety. Clearly, it's not just the Mayor and the administration alone, but when you look at where we were when we all sat together this time compared to where we are right now, its a victory lap that you all deserve. So I just wanted to commend you on that. A couple things. And I'll go, you know, straight down the list and whatever you can answer now, great, and whatever you can't we can save for a later time. But where we are right now, looking at new spending this year, we're looking to spend a lot of money, a lot of spending this year. I'm wondering, looking at the amount of spending that's been proposed by the admin compared to where we are, not just locally, not just on the state level, but also federally. I want to -- I want to -- I want to understand, are we meeting the moment looking at tariffs, looking at the cost of goods, thinking about what you want to do around housing, are we -- does it fit the moment that we're in? That's the first thing. Second question is around 2026, while we've made significant progress as it relates to what we've spent, we still have a lot more work to do, so at some point we would like to discuss what we're missing, what we still need to do, and if that conversation happens at a later time, I know we're going to do a 2026 hearing, we're a 100 percent fine with that. Third area of focus, you propose 800 million in housing, which will be paid for beyond the five-year plan, as well as tax cuts that will be paid for beyond the five-year plan. Despite anyone's opinion on both initiatives, when you think about the idea of us spending money now to pay for it later, when we're currently not in a fiscal crisis help us understand your thought process behind that. And then last but not least, taxes. We were able to lower taxes by 40 points over two years from 6.2 on birds, specifically, down to 5.8. Based on your proposal right now, the admin would only be lowering taxes 30 points over five years, which is less than what we were able to do over a two-year time period. So I'm wondering, what message do you think that sends to the business community when the majority of the tax cuts over 70 percent of the tax cuts that's being proposed by this Mayor would not be implemented until after this Mayor, and a lot of us on City Council will no longer be here. I'm specifically thinking about jobs that pay between 90 and $200,000 a year. We do a phenomenal job of a job of growing jobs that keep people poor. What are we doing to grow the job market that helps move people into the middle class? Because it's phenomenal to build all of the housing that is being proposed by the admin, but who's going to buy these houses? Who's going to live in these houses when the majority of people who make between 90 and $250,000 a year are choosing to leave Philly because we don't have those type of opportunities. So I know that was a lot of different items, but I just wanted to see if I can get as much on the record as possible in my first round of questions.
Okay. Let me start and see what I can handle. So the first question was, are we meeting the moment of uncertainty? And, you know, we've all talked about how much uncertainty there is. We tried to position ourselves to be ready for that uncertainty. I don't think you could be ready for all that could happen with the federal government, but we are coming into FY '26 with -- for us, a very high fund balance. We are making contributions to a rainy day fund. The budget stabilization reserve fund, and we are putting money into the Federal Reserve. So we're trying to do those things to kind of steal ourselves against what may come while also not abandoning needed investments. And we want to, at the same time, make crucial investments in the course of this five-year plan to keep the moving -- the city moving forward.
So I just -- we just going to continue to, we have this conversation tomorrow, because tomorrow we're going to do a deep and dive. But when we're talking about investing in the ideas of economic growth in the city of Philadelphia, we are hearing everything that the admin is saying, and we know that former, the Mayor, former councilwoman had that priority. So we know that the track record is there and the appetite is there, we're just not sure if the numbers meet the appetite. And so in tomorrow's dialogue, we're really going to push around this economic side and around the fiscal side, because I'm concerned with issues related to reverse commuting, I'm concerned with issues related to center city buildings. And looking at the dynamics that we're dealing with here, listening to dialogue around East Market Street, I just don't know if the numbers match the passion, if that makes sense. So I'm looking forward to doing a deeper dive into that dialogue, because again, when we look at where we are fiscally, and I think we all agree with our intentionality around pension payments and the pension fund, we all want to make sure that that stays intact. I don't know if we all agree with what we do once those payments begin to change. And I don't know if we all agree that this legislative body in collaboration with this Mayor should be spending or earmarking dollars for the future. From my opinion, when I think about earmarking dollars for the future, those are decisions that we make when we're dealing with some type of fiscal crisis. And according to you all, the fiscal health of the city is pretty good. So I just think that it could become a little risky to Aramark future spending with the climate of what we're dealing with right now. And as a person who's extremely supportive of investing in growth in the city of Philadelphia, even the recommendations that will promote that type of growth, I would be hesitant to support for those dollars to be already earmarked. So I hope that made sense and I'm looking forward to the continued dialogue tomorrow.
Please, yeah. I would love to hear your opinion, especially on the payments that would be made based on the recommendations in the Mayor's budget proposal.
Yeah, and I -- first of all, on the economic growth, the tax investments are part of that, and there's, you know, a lot more that the commerce director spoke to some of that. We've been talking about, I mean, everything we've been talking about today has been related to that. And I understand everything we do is a trade off, right? So what we're trying to do with the tax investments by having legislation that goes through, you know, to when the gross receipts portion goes away is to make -- to show the business community that there's a commitment -- there's predictability, that they know what's coming so that they can make their investment choices based on that, based on the sign that we're giving with that legislation.
And I think that intentionality is really important, and so I do appreciate the admin looking to give Philadelphia's, right, not just the business community, but Philadelphia is in general a vision as to where we're going with the future of the economics of the city. I think that the concern that we have is will we make it that far? The pandemic showed us that people can work from anywhere, and what we're seeing is we're seeing people to choose to locate their business outside of Philadelphia and in their surrounding areas so that they can elude a lot of our taxes, but simultaneously are able to take advantage of our phenomenal culture, because people love Philadelphia, whether they live in the city or around the city, they still love our area, they still love what it is that we do. So we can't just ignore the fact that these businesses are choosing to locate themselves outside of the city of Philadelphia, and we can't ignore the fact that we have one of the highest reverse commuter ratings with over 50 percent of Philadelphians leave our city to go to work to come back to the city. So that tells us right there that we have issues with our tax structure, not even considering the fact that we lost more revenue during the pandemic than any other major city in the country besides Detroit. I think my time is up Council President, so I'll save my questions for the second round. What I do want say, before we close out this first -- before I close out right now, I'm looking forward to the conversation around 2026. We're going to have plenty of dialogue around there. I want to continue to advocate for Councilmember Quetcy Lozada's specific ask around a plan specifically around Kensington. I think that that's extremely important. She asked for that months ago. I want to continue to advocate for that. And I also want to say that in the midst of you reading your statement this morning, you did not talk much about public education, but I know that public education was mentioned in your statement because I read it. So I just want to make sure that the general public understands that public education is a huge priority both to the admin as well as to City Council, and I look forward to specifically our conversation, not just around our traditional academic settings, our facilities, getting an update on where we are with our facilities plans, but also around our universities. We've had significant issues as it relates to our universities for a number of different reasons, not just thinking about institutions that close, but also our own institution and the community College of Philadelphia, and I'm hoping that we can all work together with the labor issues that we're facing right now at CCP to assure that we can put ourself in a position where those young people's academic journey is not disturbed. I know for us this is March and we have a long way to go before our "Season is over", but for young people who are in college, a lot of them are looking to graduate pretty soon. And I would hate for the mess that we have it as adults to put those young people in a position where they're at the ending of their academic journey is messed up because we can't get some fiscal problems situated. So I just wanted to put that on the record, both for you and for us so that everybody in the public knows that education is a top priority for the city of Philadelphia, and we'll all work locked in step to be able to address the education crisis that we're dealing with here in Philadelphia. Thank you, Council President. And I'll cue myself up for the second round. Thank you, sir.
Council President, we do have six -- we have six items that we will follow-up with you on the record through the Council President's Office that we were tracking. I did want to just reflect for the record that the Kensington plan, we did deliver that in a -- both a press conference, but also ahead of the hearing that we had a few weeks ago. So I know that through the Office of Public Safety that was provided and --
Yes. And we can -- we can follow-up on that. And then -- but then regarding education, sir, if we may respond to that. I know that with our -- with Chief Deputy Mayor, Vanessa Garrett Harley up here, I can -- I can feel her. I know that she's going to want to respond to that, if that's okay. Okay.
Yes. Thank you, Tiffany. I just want to put on the record, councilman and thank you for calling out education. It is a primary concern and primary importance to both Mayor Parker, as well as myself and to our Chief Education Officer, Debora Carrera, and all of the others of us who have young people in this city, whether it be our children or other children. It is a top priority, though, for the marriage. You know, she was a teacher, this means an awful lot to her. The extended year program is one of her primary and will be a legacy program, which we have devoted a lot of time, money, and attention to, and is going well. That is currently school district 12 schools, five charter schools, and 13 we have asked for budget allocations 14 to expand that program to 10 more 15 school district schools and five 16 more charter schools so that it will 17 be a total of 40 schools altogether, 18 30 school district, and 10 charter. 19 And it is enhancing the 20 academic environment, it's enhancing learning social emotional intelligence, and many other things for our young people who are part of those schools that that program is available and the parents who wish to take advantage of it. We are working very closely with our school district and our school board, but we believe in the educational importance for all kids across the board in this city, because we care about all children and all children's education, and not just those in the public-school district, so we also continue to foster additional partnerships, even in the charter school realm. So we are very, very focused on education, but thank you for calling that out.
Well, since you said that, let me just add another shameless plug. You know, I'm never going to throw away a moment to be able to do that. The admin proposed to increase the real estate tax from 56 percent to 56.5 percent, specifically for schools, which I support. But I believe in your proposal, that wouldn't go into effect until 2030. I'm going to fight for us to do that now. Looking at the fiscal issues that our schools could possibly face in collaboration with your vision around extended day, I think that year should be moved up. So I want to go ahead and put that on the record to you, Council President, as well as to my colleagues, we need to look at that 56.5 percent now. We did a phenomenal job going from 55 percent to 56 percent last year, and last year's budget. And I think we need to move on that. And I'll close out by also saying thank you to the admin for putting money back on the table for Vision Zero. That's something that's been a huge priority to my office, my team, and the work that we're doing. And I want to give a shout out to my guy, Mike Carroll, for the great work that he does as it relates to Vision Zero based initiatives, and continuing to do that work. Thank you.
I want to second that. I had that down there. I just want to give Mike a good shout out for his hard work and his dedication, but most important administration for stepping up and being supportive for Vision Zero. The gentleman I want to acknowledge before we go into our next round is Councilmember Jeffrey J. Young.
Thank you, Mr. President. Good afternoon. I'm sorry for my tardiness. I was at a Janazah of a 15-year-old, who was shot on a SEPTA bus and unfortunately passed away. You know, Barry, at the same cemetery that my nephew shot, killed by gun violence is buried. So seeing a 15-year-old get buried next to my nephew who died from the same thing, this epidemic that we face in our city called gun violence. Gun violence. The Mayor acknowledged in her speech that public safety is number one. What are we doing about that in the city? And when you look at these documents, you go through it, you see that there are so many priorities, so many priorities that are put in front of things that affect a community that goes through death and violence on a very regular basis. I've been going to funerals from people killed since I was 14 years old. 14. That is traumatizing to a community. Traumatizing. There were 13-yearolds there burying a 15-year-old. He was Muslim, so they would help him put the dirt on his body. 4 years old. That's what communities 5 have to face in this city. What are 6 we doing about that? That's the 7 number one priority in this city. 8 Look to these documents and 9 listen, everything is great. We are 10 a city, so we have to provide 11 different levels of services, and 12 that is all understood. But we have 13 to prioritize what really -- what the number one issue is. We have to prioritize that. We have to. Because people are literally dying. Babies are killing babies. We are the only community in the world that goes through this type of trauma.
We're not a sleeping administration. Every shooting we're there.
One moment. May I -- may I please respond, sir. Because I feel your passion and I'm there with you. Just last year, less than a year ago, my best friend's brother was murdered. And so I'm right there with you. This is not lost on me.
And Tiffany, please, let finish all due respect. I was -- let me finish, please. And I -- and I --
And I empathize -- and we empathize, right? Because we are -- we have a shared experience. A lot of us in the city have that shared experience. So let's prioritize that shared experience. Housing is number one, which is very important. Taking care of our municipal workers is very important. Tax reform is very important. We have to grow jobs in the city. Very important. Our wellness ecosystem, a $100 million that we invested last year as seed money. 216 million operating funds, right, proposed over five years. 2026, very important to the city. We get to all of that, then we get to public safety. And you look through the public safety, the what -- what's in this document regarding public safety, talks about the forensic center, which is important. Body cameras keeps us safe. But you look at the -- what really -- the crux of it, what can help these communities is $25 million grant in anti- violence grants. From this document, that's all we see, right? That's all we see, is a $25 million grant for the number one issue that is facing this city. Then we get the Clean and Green, which is something very, very important to our city to keep our city clean and green. Economic opportunities, great education, core support. There is nothing in this document that talks about our opportunities in our parks, our libraries, our rec centers, nothing in this document. Those are the things that are important to this city. Everyone acknowledges that public safety, that gun violence is the number one issue in this city. Let's do something about it. That's why we're here. Let's do something about that. I'm tired of going to Janazah's of 14 or 15-year-olds, and I'm saying like, it's not -- like, where's that normal at? Why is that normal? That should not be normal. It's not normal for folks on the mainline, but it's normal for us. And it's been normalized. That's a tragedy. That should not be normalized. A teen -- it should not be normalized to want to get a gun to take somebody's life. As a teenager, what opportunities are we providing for those kids to not want to do -- because I never wanted to do that. I had the world given to me by a great educational system, and my environment was so different. And I know that if we change these environments, every kid can have these same outcomes. But we're not investing in changing these environments. Like, we're not $25 million, but the eco, the wellness center, you know, you do five, you know, add demand for five years, 20 million, 125 million, they still 21 getting 216 million. 22 I mean, you know, it's 23 really nothing in here for our 24 youth. You know, it's similar to a line of questions that, you know, Councilman Phillips had. Right, with the engagement. Where's that at? So, and I understand, you know, that our passion, like you said, our passion. But Councilman Thomas just said, the numbers don't match the passion. They don't. So I look forward to continuing the conversation throughout this budget cycle that addresses that number one issue, right? And so I've talked to, like, I talked to these folks that we emphasize with them, we live their life. So if folks want to keep talking about these unnamed constituents, like these are the people I'm talking to at these places, places you're not there, right? And we have to be that voice, that voice to their government because they deserve services too.
Now, I agree with you, but to suggest we're not there, that's where we can agree to disagree, because we are there. We really are. And not just when a shooting happens, we're there long before the shooting happens. But when the shooting happens, we're there as well. And I echo your passion. I feel that as well.
And that's great to be there when the shooting has happened.
And I feel that as well. Now, if there's an opportunity to respond to you, I will, but I will not out of respect for you, go back and forth.
If there's an opportunity to respond, I will do that. But if you don't want me to respond, I'm also very happy to listen. And I mean that. I mean that.
Tiffany, and I'm not -- and I'm not saying you cannot respond. I just -- I want the record to just be clear that I'm not saying that you aren't doing these things. You are. The Mayor has been there, the Mayor's office has been there, the administration has been there. I'm not saying that the numbers don't lie, things are coming down, right, the numbers don't lie for themselves, but when you look at the budgetary priorities, right, that's the thing. That's what I'm talking about, that's it.
And that's where I would like the opportunity to respond. I'm going to first kick it over to Chief Deputy Mayor Vanessa Garrett Harley, then Commissioner Bethel, followed by Adam Geer to talk about that million. But I want you to know before I kick it over to my colleague, I hear you. I hear you. I'm right there with you. I'm not in a Ivy Tower. I'm not just in City Hall. I'm in those same neighborhoods that you're talking about. I got -- I got friends that live there. I got people who are now family to me that live there. That's where I dine. That's where I spend my time when I'm not working here. I'm in the neighborhoods. So, but I hear you. I want you to know that. It's not lost on me, and it absolutely is not fallen on deaf ears. I hear you. And it impacted me. It impacted my best friend and her brother, who is no longer here. So I want you to know, I hear you.
So, Councilmember, first and foremost, sorry for your loss. Please accept my condolences and that of the administration. I more than understand your frustration. I think my career work for the last about 22, years since I've been 5 at the city has been very focused on 6 children and youth issues, and not 7 the least of which is violence 8 prevention around that work. I 9 formally had the role of doing the 10 -- what is now under our Office of 11 Public Safety, but have been in all 12 of these communities where there 13 have been shootings. I have talked 14 to many of these folks, still talk 15 to many of the mothers who have lost 16 their children to gun violence, 17 unfortunately, have worked with many 18 organizations, including those of 19 Council president's and many of our 20 boots on the ground folks who are 21 actually doing that work. That will 22 never be a non-priority. It is 23 definitely the primary priority for 24 the merits, a primary priority for me, even though technically, that is not my portfolio anymore, I continue to do that work because it means that much, right, to me. There's a significant amount of money that you may not see reflected in a line item that you can just point to, though, in this budget. In the juvenile justice arena that we have under our Department of Human Services. So we not only run the PJJSC, and obviously we want to catch these young people before they ever come there and change the trajectory of their life before they get there. But certainly, there is a significant number of prevention programs that we have, programs that catch kids that are on the cusp of delinquency, or some that have already been in the system that we are trying to change what they do. We do a lot of work directly with community organizers. And even for our young people that are in the PJJSC, we have programs that we bring inside. We have even credible messenger programs, because while they may not listen to me or to you, they may listen to somebody who has that level of credibility and influence out of the streets. And we have a significant number of people with lived experience who come in and work with our young people on a very regular basis. I know that commissioner Bethel is very committed to young people, he can speak for himself in a minute, but there's my radar programs that we're doing with them as well around diversion and other diversion efforts, and there's money that is being poured toward that. We certainly continue to work very significantly with our school district and with all of the partnerships where you would see young people, our Parks & Rec, there are numbers that would be embedded within their budgets, even the programs embedded within the Free library's budget, which is to try to offer those safe places and spaces for young people to go. You will soon hear us in about another week or two, do a presser about summer activities, summer job activities, because we all know that if we can keep young people busy and we want to keep them safe in every way we can. I'm working with Councilwoman Gilmore- Gilmore-Richardson, the CERC, as we call them, or the Community Evening Resource Centers, is another place where we've opened these young people are going. We have almost 1,400 visits already this year. There are places and spaces, but it is foremost in our minds as to how we do everything we can to try to keep these young people safe, even trying to build into conflict resolution, into curriculums, and everything else to try to show them a different way. But I will turn it over to our Commissioner Bethel. But I want to assure you, it is first and foremost in the minds of many of us, and I'm born and bred in this city.
I come out of North Philly, and I have probably been to as many funerals as you have, unfortunately.
And I agree with all of that, and I know that these programs exist. I'm not saying that the work is not being done, but what I'm saying is in this document, right, where's that's a priority. When we're talking to the residents of the city of Philadelphia, the constituents of the city of Philadelphia, for the first time, they're represented with this. There's nothing in here that talks about that. That's, you know, I'm not saying the work isn't being done. I see it. With my office works with Blue's Office, the Office of Victim Advocate.
You know, we do. We know it exists, but I want the communities to know that they exist too.
And that's the reason why we do the Budget Town halls. We're go -- we don't expect the community to tune in and watch this hours and hours and long hearing, we're going to the community, both through the neighborhood action centers ongoing, but in our budget town halls.
This don't -- this won't take hours. This don't take hours.
So what I'm -- what I'm saying is that whether it's in that document or not, this is a government that you can see, touch, and feel. That's our administration. We're coming to your neighborhood. We've been there before, we're there now, and we'll be there in a couple of weeks again, talking about this budget. We've taken a three-pronged approach: Prevention, intervention, and enforcement. That's the holistic approach. So I hear what you're saying, and I agree with you. I absolutely agree with you. No 6 doubt, no doubt. No defense at all here. I agree with you. Commissioner Bethel is going to talk about the work that we're doing around intervention and enforcement, and then we'll also talk about prevention with the time allowed through Director Geer.
Thank you. COMMISSIONER BETHEL: Ready to say something?
Please proceed. COMMISSIONER BETHEL: Okay. Yeah. So I -- I listen, then I hear you. I think all of us understand that, I've been at it almost 40 years. The amount of death I've seen as a child growing up in West Philadelphia and coming in this department, and the reason I came back to the department for that same purpose of whether we can -- how we can change, and how we work to make sure we reduce the level of violence in the city. The Mayor said her from the time I walked in the door, from the time I met her before I took this job, Kev, we have to get this violence under control. And for the first time, we are heading in that direction. I know you're frustrated, but in that era of juveniles, we're down significantly in a number of young people who've gotten killed under the age of 18. And we're down significantly in the kids from 18 to 34. And that's not because Kevin Bethel's sitting here, it's because of all the people -- some people in this room, a lot of people in this room, the work that you are doing, Councilman is doing, and the folks out there in the field who are touching these young people each and every day. And so, as we weave our work, I think it was said appropriately, a lot of this stuff you don't see councilman because it's already woven into a lot of the work that we're already doing. For example, you know, we work around our prevention work. I have the Powell Centers, I have 15 Powell Centers, those are publicly funded, millions of dollars that pour into our communities, but not sewn on the sheet because it's outside of the work that we do. When I talk about our diversion program, where we're working upfront, our school diversion started almost 10 years ago. Commissioner Ali is in here, and I think others where we have all of the COAs have been supporting us since day one. And we've diverted almost 3,500 young people into programming to be able to turn them in a different direction, and it's going phenomenally well. The recidivate rate for those young people are so down. And now we've expanded that citywide to work -- now we're doing diversion in the community. A young person that we engaged for the first time was done a low level offense, and we're now looking to use CERC, but we're using the COAs and we're using the Juvenile Assessment Center. All that stuff it's cost. I have 11 men and women dedicated to the Juvenile Assessment Center. I just trained them into be youth specialists to go out in the community and work with young people. And so, as we do all of this layer of perk, I worked with the, you know, public safety, Adam Geer, we are locked in step, but that was a new position that was created. And Brilly is bringing in. So their GVI program is really working with us. Now they're doing GVI group violence initiative with teenagers. We're also launching a program -- a group -- a gang youth reduction program in your zip code 19121, where we're -- but guess what? That's coming from other dollars, and we have a grant that we got from the state. It's almost a 800, $900,000 of money that you won't see on the books, but that we're using. So we're also using other dollars. And so I know you hear it, but I can tell you for the first time, and I've been at a long time, that for the first time we're seeing a lot of synergy around our young people, our work with my school district, you know, with the corridor program that I started before I left the school district, and we continue to this day. I'm working on a program -- a project with a doctor from -- a doctor from Stoneleigh Foundation. She's actually looking at data before I left the school safety. So going back in time to see where could we intersect young people and see where we can touch them earlier in the process, and she does that well. For the first time, we'll have some variables. Council, we have -- I have 1,600 people that have been shot more than twice. I've got almost 300 -- almost 300 people have been shot three times.
I have a guy been shot six times, right? I mean, and so, yeah. It's something that's been entrenched for a long time. But I can tell you, we've been fully supported. Everything that you, the Council, has given me, even when we talk about our victim advocates, the money that came from this Council. I have now victim advocates working with homicide to work with families to support them when they have a death, a tragic loss. And because all of that untangling of the conflict, all of that stuff that GVI is doing, going to the homes, and I know I'm -- I'm still talking about Adam's stuff. I hear your frustration, but I've been at it a long time. It's different now. I feel a difference, I feel a level of collaboration I have not seen in a long time. I think we're headed in the right direction. It's not about the money. See, I could put money down here all day. I seen money get spent. I seen millions and millions and we ain't getting nothing done. And really, it's not about the money, it's about the work. And I think if everybody focus on the work, we can get these things that you want get done and do it effectively. But about the dollars, I've seen a lot of money get wasted. I'm looking at Sue Slawson across of me running the recs. Man, we're -- we're lockstep. What she needs, I got for her, protect her rec centers, get around their pools, make sure that's a safe place for us. And so just, I would just -- I hear you, but I would just tell you, in my experience, things are different now. And it's not about the money, it's people care about our kids. They want the what you want and we want it in a different way, and that's got to cost money. It's going cost money because we can't get it done ourselves. And so I just -- I'll just stay there. Oh, you can pull up. No, okay.
Okay. Thank you very much, colleague. And I just, I want to say this for the record, if it's okay, colleague. We're all very sorry for your loss collectively as a Council body and as colleagues. And we feel your pain, we want you to know that we are with you and we're supporting you, your family and community during this time. And I'll just ask that if we could follow-up -- we're not going to do any more on that particular question for this round. And I ask that if the administration would follow-up with Councilmember Young. Okay. Thank you very much.
Okay. Thank you. We're going to move on to Round 2. Okay. For round 2, we'll have two minutes for this round. The Chair now recognizes Councilmember Gauthier.
Thank you. Although Philadelphia's Parks & Recreation system offers great access across the system to people from neighborhoods all over the city, it is well documented that as a city, we spend less on Parks & Recreation per person and per capita than many other big cities. It is also well documented that the quality of Parks & Recreation space varies greatly depending on your race and your income. And so in whiter, wealthier areas, there tend to be more high quality public spaces than in neighborhoods that are black and brown and poorer. Given that context, I noticed that parks and recreations budget seems to have decreased by 8 percent or about 7.3 million due to cuts in class 200, in classes 300, and 400. Can you explain those reductions? And then also, I see that Parks & Recs staffing budget has remained flat. As Commissioner Slawson knows because I've bugged her about it a lot. I've been trying to get PPR staff person to help manage two very vibrant parks and parks with a lot of needs in my district, Malcolm X Park and Clark Park. We've been working on this for two years now, spanning two mayoral administrations. And, you know, these are well used parks, these are parks, you know, that people love to frequent, but it's -- they are also parks where we have issues with dumping, where we're trying to form some order among vendors, where we have issues helping unhoused people and people with drug use disorders. So can you first speak to the proposed budget cuts of 7.3 million, and then can you next speak to why we're keeping the staffing budget for Parks & Recreation flat when we have a lot of needs for staffing and programming across our Parks & Recreation system.
Thank you. So there were some one-time things in FY '25 that we added in the transfer ordinance. And so that includes Lemon Hill Prep, that was several million dollars. And then there's also -- there was funding for the Youth Sports Initiative. I think they're still spending a lot of that down, so we had set that up as one time, but there's some more money in '26, so we're kind of working through that. We didn't want to add money until that was spent. And then there were a couple of other kind of supply related items that were one-time in the proposed transfer ordinance. In terms of these staffing, I think perhaps Parks & Rec can talk about some of what they're doing to filler vacancies.
Break down the 7.3 million and what that cut entails with a little more detail.
Sure. So the FY '25 number, the current estimate includes some things that are non-recurring. And so in our first transfer ordinance, we included about 5 million for Lemon Hill Related Prep for 2026, so that's a piece of it. There was also some one-time sports fund funding in FY '25 that doesn't recur because Parks & Rec is still spending it down. And then there were a couple of supply related items, and then some tree pruning funding that was -- or sorry, some -- a couple things that were one-time. We can get you a list of what the items were. But the big one is the Lemon Hill site prep in FY '25.
Can you -- do you know, if you take out these one-time items, do you know how sort of the normal Parks & Rec budget compares to this year?
I'd like to call up a Commissioner Sue Slawson to talk about the quality of our -- of our programs, of our system, and to also to speak to some of the points that you made about the budget for Parks & Recreation in comparison to other cities. We know that the amenities, the infrastructure is much bigger than even larger cities like the City of New York, so I'll kick it over now to Commissioner Slawson.
Good afternoon, Sue Slawson, Commissioner for Parks & Recreation. Thank you, Councilmember for bringing up those questions. One of the things that when you look at the differences Philadelphia Parks & Recreation in other cities, some, there's really no comparison. There's no other city that has 70 pools. We have more pools per capita than any city in the country. When you look at facilities, most facilities, most cities don't have 159 rec facilities, they don't have 10,000 plus acres. And so there are a number of things that just don't balance out when we are compared against other parks and recreations.
And I do acknowledge that we have a massive system. It provides good geographic access to people all over the city. I think I'm talking more about spending that would get us to where we need to be with respect to equitable quality and staffing and programming.
I think that Sabrina addressed the budget and the fact that we really aren't cut. There were some one-time opportunities that we're trying to prepare for 2026. And that's really all it is. Our budget is -- hasn't been cut.
And are you all going to speak to the staffing piece or?
How are we thinking about increased staffing, giving the needs of some of our parks? I talked about two parks in my district specifically that are highly used and highly trafficked that we really do need more of a staff presence. I imagine that other council districts experience this as well. How do we meet those needs with a flat staffing budget?
So it's not that the budget's flat, it's the opportunity for us to actually get the staff in. So we are working with HR, we are constantly doing -- going out, even next month, we're having a opportunity for hiring at the Dell Music Center. It is not funding, it is getting people in to actually take the jobs. So I think a lot of people are struggling with identifying people that want to come in and work for different positions. So we're advertising, we are on the radio, we have, even in our facilities, we're letting people know, we're trying to get people in to get jobs. It's not that we don't have the funding, we're looking for staff. And so we actually would be happy to give you information to assist us. Because you and I have talked about this, so we are working very hard to bring people into our system. The funding's there, we need the people.
Thank you. Councilmember Gauthier, The Chair now recognizes Councilmember Brooks.
Thank you so much. So HIPAA permits general analysis of population. So I want to ask some broad questions about the Wellness Court system. There has not been much public discussion about how effective these plans are. I would like to get some specific numbers on participation. So I have like five questions. The first is: What is the percentage of people who have accepted the offer of Wellness Court in lieu of jail? The second question is: What percentage of people who agree to attend rehab in Wellness Court are actually showing up for court? And how many people have received services pursuant to the Wellness Court outcome? How many people ended up in supportive housing? And how much has the Wellness Court costs since January?
So we can tell you approximately 35 people, right, and this is operating once a week have entered into the Wellness Court system. Beyond that, we will get you more answers in terms of numbers that we can share. Keep in mind though that this is operating at one day a week, and we're not going to put a strain on any of our systems. The idea is, right, it's a pilot, is to move slowly. And now with the Mayor's proposal, where we're able to increase five days a week, we will plan for that and make sure that is in an intentional and well thought out scaling up because we're dealing with people's lives. And to the extent that we can share information across the board, we will continue to share that information.
So for the record Councilmember, it's been six weeks and we -- but values based, data driven, it's something that we preach ongoing about all of our programs. So those are metrics that we can provide in the future. We don't have it now, not because we're not prepared, it's only been six weeks.
Okay. So we could just wait on some more data maybe.
By the end of the summer or mid-summer, will we have more data on? I mean, because part of it is the increased expense of this whole system that we created, and if we don't have numbers, how do we know that it's worth us spending, I don't remember what the --
-- hundreds of millions of dollars that was asked for?
That's fair. And I think six months is a really good interval, so absolutely.
Okay. I think that was that. I have a few more. Should I wait to the next round?
Okay. Thank you, Councilmember Brooks. The Chair now recognizes Councilmember O'Rourke.
Thank you, Madam Leader. I have raised concerns all of us have about federal uncertainty and the risks to small businesses. All while large corporations stand to benefit from the Mayor's tax plan. Meanwhile, this budget proposes significant service cuts for Philadelphia's working families. I'd like to clarify these cuts for the record explicitly not to obscure them in record. So if the answer is yes, say yes. If the answer is no, say no. Again, just trying to get it clearly on the record. Is it true that the Mayor's proposed budget cuts million from 7 the fire department? 8
Does this budget cut nearly 5.6 million from the Office of Homeless Services?
Is it true that the Mayor's proposed budget cuts 1.1 million from the Office of Community Empowerment and Opportunity, an agency that also heavily relies on federal grants?
Does this budget eliminate the city's Zero Fare Transit program, which provides free transit to 35,000 of our poorest residents by zeroing out its funding?
Thank you for those answers. I do appreciate that, particularly around the Zero Fare, and we talked about this in our meeting. The cuts are alarming for me. While large corporations get tax breaks, Philadelphia's workings families are seeing some of their essential services, I believe, slashed. These proposed cuts are not just numbers, they represent real harm to the people who need our support the most. And eliminating the Zero Fare Transit Program in particular betrays a serious anti-poverty strategy that actually helps boost our struggling septic system in a time where they keep talking about a death spiral. I wanted to shift a bit. I've seen some very concerning reporting about the use of our opioid settlement grants. From my understanding, the city has previously contributed opioid settlement dollars towards two grant programs: The Overdose Prevention and Community Healing Fund, and the Kensington Community Resilience Fund. These funds have used participatory decision making to allow the most impact to community members to make decisions about the types of programs and services that they need to address the opioid crisis and its impacts. In 2024 alone, the Prevention Fund distributed 3.1 million, I'm going to wrap up Madam Leader, 3.1 million to 43 organizations. I'm concerned about changes that the Parker Administration has made to these programs. Could you confirm, has the Parker administration officially ended these two grant programs, which we have -- which have been managed by the Scattergood Foundation?
We have not ended it, but we're not working with the Scattergood Foundation for that fund -- for those funds. So we are -- we are still doing that grant program, we're working with another entity to ensure that more dollars are going directly to the community. We're also working in close coordination with Councilmember Lozada and the Kensington Caucus around that decision making. So that's really important to me. You know, you talk about participatory decision making, but not everyone was involved in that participatory decision making. With this new process, we're going to ensure that all community members as well as working with Councilmember Lozada's office are involved in that process. Going back to SEPTA just for, because that yes or no 6 question, I actually like the round of yes or no questions, but I do want to say that you mentioned the death spiral with SEPTA. We've worked very closely with SEPTA, with the current GM, the Scott Sauer and his team. And even before then when Leslie Richards was there and their chief of Staff, Elizabeth Smith, who's both have gone on to other roles now, we will continue to work with them. We will continue to support them through our budget, and along with Y'all, advocate for, you know, the Commonwealth to adopt the governor's proposed budget. That has not changed. As with regards to the program that you mentioned, that program was a two-year pilot funded by ARPA Funds. Those funds have dried out, and we have chosen not to continue that pilot, but that is not to suggest in any way that we do not support SEPTA and that we're not concerned about their fiscal health. So I just want to note that for the record.
Thank you, Chief. Madam Leader, can I squeeze my other questions in real quick and get off your mic? Yes. On that point heard and also recognizing the programs that actually directly attack poverty in the city, I believe this is one of those things, and that's, I think more the point I wanted to make as it relates to those in terms of how much of a -- how much bang you get for your buck. I know it was ARPA funded, but 35,000 people in the city being able to have that sort of transit is something that I think would be essential in a city like ours if we're actively trying to move against that. But let me get these other questions around the wellness village. What percentage of the city's opioid settlement funds are currently going towards, or plans to go towards the Wellness Village ecosystem? And I've also been concerned about more sustainable funding sources for the wellness ecosystem. Are the providers who are offering services at the Wellness Village being reimbursed by Medicaid? Like what's the long-term revenue plan for the project on that point? And if you could get answer those questions, that'd be great. Thank you, Madam Leader for your Grace.
Thank you so much. So to answer the question, first, I, of course, our budget director is coming up, but I -- Sabrina Maynard, but I would also like to call up Managing Director Teal to talk more holistically about the wellness Philly ecosystem and provider our long-term funding as well.
Thank you. So for the opioid settlement funds, roughly a quarter is going to non-wellness items. So that includes programming at the prisons for MAT Behind the Walls, 175 Housing Continuum, OHS Beds, CEO Outreach, the Wound Care van, and so that's about $50 million over the proposed plan. And so the remainder would be for wellness. I'll turn it over to --
Madam Leader, Councilmember Adam Teal, the managing director. Councilmember, the providers that we are partnering with across our ecosystem, most of them are when they're able to seeking Medicaid reimbursement. And we are also working with the Commonwealth and a number of others to help change the way that system works so we can have more opportunities to recover those dollars. And we are also working with, as you've heard Mayor Parker say anybody who has a nickel- and-a-quarter to contribute to this core public safety function to find other ways to provide the ongoing funding, both operating and capital that is going to be required to operate this system. Still with the idea, we hope, and we said this last year still, this is the -- this is the hope. And again, with, I think now we are showing we are able to do this, we are showing the concept works while still early. We are hoping that eventually there will be a market, we're hoping to catalyze a market for providing these services where there is currently the gap, which is in recovery. We have also shown over the past year, there is some elasticity in the market for the front-end services, for the treatment services. We've seen an expansion in treatment beds, about 600 treatment beds across the ecosystem. Those are not city supplied, those are our partners who are expanding that front end. We still have that gap in recovery. We are hoping that eventually there will be other mechanisms to address that gap besides the city doing it still right now. There is nobody else to do that but us.
And so in my conclusion, I'll just say that the raise -- I raised this question around sustainability for the long-term. There needs to be a sustainable funding plan. Like what is the backup plan if Medicaid actually gets wiped at the federal level part, like if, if that's gone, that's a big deal. And so I just want to make sure that we raise that and at least that we're focusing on it. Thank Y'all for your time and answering the questions. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. President.
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Member Phillips.
Thank you, Council President. I too just want to echo that I really felt the --
Member Phillips, just for one second. I just want to clarify, there won't be a third round. We are at 4:00 o'clock, we will be wrapping up. And so I just want members to be direct, and straight to the point with your questioning, and likewise, in terms of response, let's just get right to, you know, the actual response because I know a couple times, which I think is great, three, four people responding, which is great because that shows Y'all engaged. But likewise, the whole commentary before we ask the question, if you want to get it in this realm before we leave, just want to state for the record, this needs to be real direct. Councilman Phillips.
Thank you. I'll just give right to the questions. For the Department of Labor, I just wanted to raise a couple questions. Last year, FY '25 budget cut $400,000 from the Department of Labor. What were the impacts that cut had in terms of the difference in worker violations, cases investigated, and the comparative wait time for each reported violation? What is the current number of back law cases and the time each has been waiting?
So in terms of comparing the budget from year- to-year, so in FY '25 and the transfer ordinance, we're proposing adding a million dollars for their arbitration costs. That's one-time money, so that won't recur in '26, so that'll look like a reduction. I can call up the folks from labor to talk more about the other questions you raised.
Thank you, Councilmember Phillips. And I'm going to call up Deputy Director of Labor, Cara Leheny, to get into more detail, but in terms of your question about last year, and I know Sabrina addressed the difference between FY '25 and '26, but last year's difference was solely about one-time payouts and potential bonuses that just didn't carry over as well.
Good afternoon, Councilmember. My name is Cara Leheny. I'm the first Deputy Director of the Labor Department. I apologize, because I am going ask you to repeat sort of your --
You asked about the 400,000 I think since I already answered that.
Yeah. What were the -- what were the impact of that change? That there was a, you know, what are the current number of back law cases in the time it has been taken to investigate them?
And I'm sorry, Councilmember, which backlog and -- and we have four units, three of which do investigations, which unit are you specifically referring to?
This is the -- hold on, this is the department of -- I'm not exactly sure. I didn't know that you had different those. Let me come back to that question so I get more specific to that.
Okay. Got you. I didn't know it was debt and nuance.
What I can say Councilmember immediately is that the difference between FY '24 and FY '25 of that $400,000 didn't impact our investigative capacity at all. As was stated, those were -- those funds were associated with terminal leave payouts for some longstanding employees who were dropping and things like that. So that didn't -- that didn't impact our capacity to investigate. I'm going to have to get you data on our -- on backlogs in any particular area. So I could either try to gather that information and for everything added to you later, if you want to tell us if there's one particular office or unit in mind that you have, whichever you prefer, we'll get that information for you.
Okay. And then also, just for the sake of thought, many workers have spoken to our offices about fair retaliation in the form of lost hours being fired -- being fired, and other threats. With an increased budget, how will the Department of Labor take action to mitigate retaliation and widespread fear of retaliation among low wage workers?
Well, I'm going to speak directly about our Office of Worker Protection and our Office of Labor Standards. Those are our external facing offices.
And both of them do excellent work in this area. I'll start with the Office of Worker Protection. First of all, they have an out -- they have a community outreach program and they go out and they -- and they educate the work -the Philadelphia workforce and employers as to the worker protection laws that this Council has passed. So that's the first step that we take: trying to get people to understand what their rights are. The second step is that OWP will investigate complaints anonymously. They will do what's called a wall-to-wall investigation, they won't focus on a particular person. They'll look at the entire workforce of that site or wherever the complaint comes from. So they have ways of protecting complainants. Finally, they also -- there are also anti-retaliation provisions built into those ordinances that Council has passed, and OWP investigates and enforces those. The Office of Labor Standards, that office is charged with monitoring the projects where the city is contracted for $100,000 or more, that's something like 470 to 500 projects right now. They actively go out, they're proactive, they interview people on site, they start finding out if, you know, are people getting paid properly according to prevailing wage and the fringe benefits that are associated with that? What about the diversity requirements that are required by our code? Things like that. The apprentice ratio, they're asking all of those questions. Again, they are doing comprehensive project wide investigations. They don't reveal that someone may have picked up the phone and said, I don't think I'm being paid properly. They go out and they look at the entire project.
Thank you. Before I got it right -- before I call on the next member, we have members from the -- we have the Mayor, vice president, and their Council from Frankfurt, Germany, which is our sister of city, just celebrating years partnering with 9 the City of Philadelphia to say 10 hello. They're here watching government in action. The Chair recognizes Councilmember Dr. Nina Ahmad, and then next I have Councilmember Majority Gilmore- Gilmore-Richardson, then I have after that Councilmember Jim Harrity, then we're going to circle back to Councilmember Jeffrey J. Young, and then if we could squeeze in, if it's before 4:00 o'clock, we'll have Jamie Gauthier, Brooks, and Lozada just give their last brief statement before we wrap up. And just for the record, this is the five-year plan, but also individual departments will be coming back, and so we'll do a double follow-up regarding the issues and concerns that we want to address. This is just the beginning of the process today, so we've got a very long way to go.
Yeah, thank you, Council President. I wanted to just go back about the proposal to eliminate the 1 percent Development Impact fund. I wanted to know what impact on the NPI bond issue of the 127 million that happened in 2024 as the development impact fee was part of the bundle of revenues to back that bond issue. I remember Rob telling us -- Mr. Dubow telling us it was not a huge amount, it was million. I just wanted to know what the impact was on that revenue bond.
Right. And like the bonds we're considering. Now, those bonds were covered by all of the revenues of the general fund, but development impact tax was introduced to try to help pay for those bonds. It never generated what we thought it was go1ing to, it generates about three and a half million dollars a year. So the bonds have really been paying off, been paid off with -- are being paid off with other revenues, so that tax going away has no impact on our ability to repay the bonds.
Okay. Thank you for the clarification. My next question is about the impressive and ambitious housing plan. I just wanted to know what percentage of that plan had mixed use, mixed income, and for the mixed income space, where I think that actually addresses the issue of quality as well, I've seen this work in New York, I've seen it in different parts of New York, I've seen the first person in Brooklyn works really well, and so I wanted to know what we were going to do in our plan here. And the second part of the question is: Once we have, you know, these new developments coming up, the impact of that on the property values and thereby property taxes of longtime residents who may not be able to afford this upswing in their taxes, are we going to have a plan to mitigate that in a way that they're counseled and offered resources such as LOOP and other, you know, tax freezes and such in a very comprehensive way?
So I think your first question was what the percentages amongst everything was? Just to be clear about what I can provide as far as the unit breakdown, 30,000 units obviously are of the total. Of those 30,000 units, we are earmarking for production 44,850 for ownership opportunities, and the rest of that 8,850 for rental opportunities. Now, it doesn't necessarily break down as far as unit types and building types, but to break it further down on the affordable -- affordability levels that we're estimating at the moment, of that 4,850 for ownership and production, approximately 1,400 of those will be for the affordable band, which is 30 to 50 percent in our plan. For workforce housing, 2,100. And that band is from 50 to 80 percent, and that's for ownership, I'm still talking about. For Workforce plus, which is 80 percent to 120 percent, we are estimating at 1,100, and for market rate within that same ownership structure is for 150 units. Also in production for a rental, we are looking to have 1,800 for the deeply affordable bands, so that's everything below 30 percent of AMI.
And only that one kind of housing in that kind of -- in that 1,800?
So again, these don't specialties don't -- there are no subcategories for what types of housing yet. Right now we're just at a level of focusing on how many units we're looking to yield and to what extent we are trying to target certain affordability bands. So again, with rental, 2,500 for affordable opportunities, on production, again, 30 percent to percent, for workforce housing, 50 percent to 80 percent, we're looking at 2,900 units, and for workforce plus, it's 1,400 units in the rental side. And for market rate, which is above 120 percent of AMI, that's 150 units as well. So on the flip side for preservation opportunities, those numbers start to jump a lower AMIs because we're uphold -- we're standing up investing in expanding a lot of the preservation opportunities as they exist now, and then also investing in some new opportunities as well. As it stands right now, DHCD's funding most of it, at least 50 percent of it does target those lower incomes right now. So we're keeping that same pace, keeping that same approach, 5,600 units for preservation, 9,400 units for preservation -- I'm sorry, not -- 5,600 units for preservation at deeply affordable opportunities. For affordable opportunities, 9,400 units and preservation. For workforce housing, 1,200 units for preservation, and for workforce plus, at least 100 units to be affected.
So we didn't talk about, these are just the actual units. Are they going to be mixed in terms of mixed income in the same building for affordable -- different levels of affordability?
It's a highly likely. So, you know, we are looking at -- we don't specify what unit types, but what I can share is that it'll be a diverse approach in our -- in our building. So it will be some single families, there'll be some duplexes, triplexes, quads as well, but then we are also looking to incentivize multifamily development as well. And if we're keeping on pace with what we do now as far as those opportunities, where there's a disposition policy that does require some mixed income opportunities on the publicly owned land, we would anticipate that mix being a model here.
So highly recommend to have some of these mixed income units for density purposes as well, if we are going to try to grow our population?
Yeah, thank you. And my very last question is for the police commissioner, very short question. Last time we had heard about your cadets being poached once they were trained in -- by you, and then they were poached by other counties and other states, has that gone down or are we still -- are we still facing that problem, and should we have some way to not allow people who've been trained by us to be poached within a certain timeframe?
Councilmember Ahmad, you also asked a question around the impact on property value?
So I want to make sure I'm in keeping with the guidance from the Council President. That would mean calling up Greg Heller, our consultant.
Question. And I even want to push a little further as it relates to Greg can answer this question. So, for instance, construction costs are higher now, right? And so, even though we Turn The Key, normally we sell a house for 265,000, right? And then you get the subsidy from the city, and that'll get it down to about 180 for a brand new house, right, which is actually a pretty good deal. However, costs are up, and so you'll have developers who are participating in Turn The Key program will say, well, at 280, right, 280,000, right, you can pull out the largest subsidy from the city, which is $70,000, right. That will bring it down from 280 to 210, right, and then you'll get another 10, 15,000 from the bank. So they'll bring the house again down to the same amount, roughly 190, 195, which is a deal, right, for a brand new house. But that 265 to 285, right, increases the value of the house next door to you, that may be, let's say on the high end, 200,000, was 150,000, right? So now that next door neighbor that increase in value is going to go up in their home, which is a good thing, but as a result, their taxes are going to go up and so it's a legitimate question in terms of how we make sure we're staying in front of it and also aren't perpetuating gentrification in the process. So we're thinking about it on the front end.