On the one hand I am very pleased with what these charts show. Nearly 50,000 units of housing production and conservation; a substantial portfolio of different activities, some of which lead the nation in terms of performance and value; and a reasonable, in my opinion, a reasonable distribution among geographic areas of this city. There is no question that the production and the performance and the value could be increased further. And there is also no question that the geographic distribution of the resources could be made more effective. The area --
-- that I think -- I'm getting to that -- requires most attention is the one that we have discussed for many years, and that is neighborhood conservation and preservation. And although it could be argued that a number of these programs do support that goal, the home repair programs, for example, I think we would all agree that that is not sufficient. For the immediate future, I propose that we look at a very successful model that has been effective around the city, the Model Blocks Program, and attempt to fashion a program of that type that would draw on some outside resources and bring them in as part of the program, although they are not community development resources, so that we could build up that activity.
Well, I mean, I believe in accessing as many outside resources as possible. The question is, what are we going to put in that resource pile to help support that?
In this budget, there is no proposal for funding a new program.
I am not talking about a new program. We are talking about an 82 BILL NO. 000344 expansion of an existing program. Isn't that your suggestion? Aren't you suggesting that we expand the Model Blocks Program in response to the issues that I have been raising?
What I am proposing, really, is new in the sense of curb and sidewalk reconstruction, rather than sidewalk patching and repair would be included. It is, in my mind, substantially different. Also, the citywide emphasis that I am proposing is substantially different, in my opinion. But in terms of what's represented on this chart, the proposed consolidated plan for the coming fiscal year does not propose any substantial variation from the portfolio programs that is represented here.
Let me just mention -- and then I know a couple of my colleagues have questions, and they have been very generous -- as I indicated earlier, 10.2 percent of the low- and moderate-income people in the city live in the district that I represent. 83 BILL NO. 000344 And over the last four years, based on the figures that you provided, the funding level across all the programs was 7.5 percent of the dollars. That represents $13,342,894. If the district was just funded at the comparable rate of the low- and moderate-income population, the figure would be $18,110,494, which is a shortfall of $4,767,600, just based on this is who you have, funding should be proportionate to what you have, everybody is treated fairly across the board. And, in some instances -- and that's actually one of the smaller shortfalls, if you will, as compared to some of my colleagues. So, I mean, I think that this is a very serious issue, and some action needs to be taken for Year in order to get some resolution to 19 these particular issues. 20
However, if we applied 21 the other criteria that HUD uses in determining how 22 much funding goes to Philadelphia, that is, the 23 vacancy criteria and the housing conditions 24 criteria, we might find that the 4th District in 25 fact receives more than its proportion of the block 84 BILL NO. 000344 grant funding. We would be glad to pursue that analysis. I don't know what the results would be. But I just don't know whether they would show that the 4th District is receiving less or more or about the right amount of the apportioning of the block grant funding.
Well, then lastly, what would you suggest is the response to a low- and moderate-income persons in the district who meets the income eligibility criteria, just like anyone else across the city, but they see no 14 activity in their particular neighborhood or their access to programs? What would your response be to that person?
Well, I think there are two responses. One is that most of these programs are accessible to any income-eligible person in the city. And then, secondly, I think this year in particular, the first year of an Administration, is a good time to get organized and plan for some new activities, rather than simply defending a 85 BILL NO. 000344 repetition of program activities which had been satisfactory, but do not address all of the citywide needs. So I would propose that, as in the Model Blocks variation that I have described, we talk about what those new approaches should be, consider this budget a transition budget, but not wait to get involved in discussion of Capital Program, which, again, will come up late this summer and early this fall, so that we begin mobilizing for some of the new program activities that these residents would have in mind.
Thank you very much. Councilman Kenney, unless yours, Councilman Clarke, is a followup question.
This is kind a followup to what Michael was talking about. I just, as an At-Large Member, we don't always pay attention to the specific allocations given district by district because we have citywide interests. But within recent months, Michael, 86 BILL NO. 000344 Councilman Nutter, has kind of given us this information. And it really is -- there seems to be a glaring inequity. I don't understand the reason why the concept of allocating available dollars across the board, where the low- and moderate-income percentages across the city seem to be relatively equal, distributing those dollars in an equal and fair fashion. It seems that through your testimony and through your pleasant insistence on your philosophy, that your office is simply the Office of Housing. And if your office was simply the Office of Housing, I could buy your argument a little better. But since it is the Office of Housing and Community Development, I would suspect that we're talking about the continuing development and stabilization of every neighborhood across the city. And then if you would argue to me, well, you know most of the poor people live in District A or District B or District C, then I could say, you know, well, maybe it is fair because the 87 BILL NO. 000344 level of poverty is so much greater in those particular districts that it makes sense to kind of allocate more of the money for those districts. But I look at these percentages and see that it is basically evenly distributed throughout the city where poor people live. To me, it is not only nonsensical, it is kind of unfair, for the rest of the city to get a lot less than some other areas of the city are getting. And I think a poor person living in District A is as poor as a person living in District E, not wanting to designate districts by number, because I know people may get offended. But just talking about the basic fairness of how this money is allocated. And in some ways the discussions we have had about, you know, investment in middle-income and upper-income housing kind of folds into this, too. Because, again, as Councilman Nutter says, if we are stabilizing neighborhoods that are now doing well, and making sure they don't fall into disrepair through the use of this money, what's so 88 BILL NO. 000344 wrong about that?
To respond in reverse order, the proposed consolidated plan for the coming fiscal year does not include any provision for supporting middle- and upper-income housing. Because the only funding source that's represented here is the Community Development Block Grant, HOME, and the other programs that are income restricted. I believe that discussion would need to be part of the Operating Budget discussion, because other funding sources would have to be brought in to play.
I mentioned the middle- and upper-middle income housing just as an aside. My basic concern is the line of questioning that Councilman Nutter began. And that is, percentages of low- and moderate-income people is clearly evening spread across the city. What is the problem with the philosophy or the practicality of distributing those available dollars evenly across the city, as the poor people are distributed equally across the city? 89 BILL NO. 000344
Housing Director and Community -- you are the head of the Office of Housing and Community Development.
Okay. So that's why I said it is simply not the Office of Housing.
I have had two concerns as head of the Office of Housing and Community Development. One is a concern about open access to the program, so that any individual or household that meets the eligibility requirements can get access to the program and can get served through them. As I have indicated, most of these programs are open access programs, available to any eligible person. The second concern that I have had is that the funds that we use are used strategically, 90 BILL NO. 000344 that we pay for performance. So the groups that are delivering get access to the funding, get their proposals ranked highest, and we see some real production. The part of the inequity that results, that relates to the 5th District, involves, as I have said to Councilman Clarke, the special needs housing because of certain circumstances. Another reason for the imbalance is that, in the 5th District, we have had two big leveraging opportunities, the Nehemiah Program, which supported the development of West Poplar, and the Home Ownership Zone Program in the Cecil B. Moore area. So a substantial commitment of block grant funding was made to address those opportunities. Just to repeat quickly what I had said to Councilman Nutter, low- and moderate-income residency is not the only criteria that HUD uses in giving us the award. And I will provide Council Members with an analysis that shows how the other HUD criteria, vacancy and housing conditions, for 91 BILL NO. 000344 example, would apply and what distribution would be shown. I am concerned that a strict application of the percentages, whatever this analysis shows, might not be in our best interest. For example, if we decided to apply these percentages across the board, would we say that every Council district had to establish a fair share proportion of homeless and special needs housing? I don't really believe that that kind of requirement should be imposed.
But part of the premise of your answer is that all of this money needs to go to some form of housing.
But according to the HUD guidelines, there are other uses that are eligible for this money, besides housing. And if -- I guess the argument could be made that if a relatively stable neighborhood received a greater share of these funds to improve the community that they are living in, those people are living in, would it not inure to the benefit of 92 BILL NO. 000344 the city as a whole, because perhaps those people would be staying in that neighborhood, as opposed to moving out of that neighborhood, and potentially precipitating a decline in what is now a stable neighborhood?
And those people are paying taxes and contributing to programs for homeless and people with special needs and other types of programs. But I don't think we are seeing the forest through the trees here. And I believe that we can't wait another year to do this. I think that we ought to start talking about this now. And I think that's the purpose of having this hearing and this deliberation. Because you have created, and admirably so, almost 50,000 houses throughout the city. Maybe it is time that we started focusing on other areas of neighborhood improvement, in addition to housing rehabilitation and construction. But now looking at other areas to 93 BILL NO. 000344 stabilize the community, like curbs and sidewalks, like shopping district improvements. I mean, maybe there is creation of employment in additional housing amongst -- within shopping districts that have been falling into decline, which creates not only the benefit of additional housing, but additional jobs and taxes. I mean, I think the focus has been solely on housing. I mean, people need more than just a house. They need a viable, stable, producing community in order to prosper. And I think that it has been a big mistake over the past probably eight years.
I agree, we have got to demote more attention to those issues. Two comments on what you said. One, after housing, and really moreso than housing, I think the issue for neighborhoods is jobs and job readiness. And that's why in this budget, as in prior years, we are proposing to fund job-readiness programs and jobs programs that work, that address a niche that the existing work force programs are not developing. 94 BILL NO. 000344 We have, I believe, the most successful YouthBuild program in the country. And I believe representatives of YouthBuild are here to testify. But we are funding activities that help people in the neighborhoods connect with good-paying jobs -- not community service, but good-paying jobs -- in the metropolitan economy. And, to me, that's a critical activity. We are proposing that again. Secondly, the other major division of the program has been the economic development division. And there are representatives of those agencies that could describe how the funding for economic development is being used.
I just want to lend my voice to the chorus of people that I think you are going to hear from today from Council that want to do something in Year and not wait until 21 we do this proposed blight initiative and Year 27. 22
Thank you very much. 25 Councilman DiCicco. 95 BILL NO. 000344 COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Thank you very much. Mr. Kromer, good morning. On the same line of questioning as Councilman Nutter and Councilman Kenney, one of the biggest complaints that my office receives, and I suspect that the other District Councilpersons receive also, is when the city, the Water Department, the Gas Works, whatever, decide that it is time to do some infrastructure reconstruction of city streets. Sometimes decisions are made that, you know, after the reconstruction, a new curb may go in, or maybe the replacement of one of the blocks or two of the blocks that were disturbed, or sometimes you do the first block in and then leave the second or third block to the homeowner as to whether or not they want to make a complete reconstruction of the pavement. While that may not seem as serious in the scheme of things we are talking about today, I was just wondering, what role does your office play, if any, in coordinating the efforts between the street reconstruction and that portion of the curb and sidewalk that is budgeted for repair or 96 BILL NO. 000344 reconstruction? Do you partner with the other agencies, the Water Department, the Gas Works? Could you enlighten me a little bit on that? Because I think on some of the materials I have read, they may have even been on your book, but in some of the books I have read, when we talk about neighborhood revitalization and stabilization, it is amazing how important new sidewalks and curbs are. It really sends a message of hope in a community that something is changing and something is changing for the better. And I was just wondering if that's a question of policy. How do we get to that? Are you doing anything in coordination and cooperation with the other agencies?
We currently aren't doing anything in coordination with other agencies that are responsible for curbs and sidewalks and water and sewer improvements, in part because our work, housing rehabilitation and settlement grants and home repair, doesn't get in the way of the work of those agencies. 97 BILL NO. 000344 However, I think it is fair to say that this situation will not continue, and that going forward we will see a lot more coordination between infrastructure replacement that is part of the Capital Program and associated housing improvements. That's the message I am getting from the Mayor's staff, and I believe that is much more so the orientation of the City Planning Commission than it had been in the past. So I think in the coming months of this coming Fiscal Year, we will see a lot more of that kind of work. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: I certainly think so. Not only because it would reduce the number of complaints that our office gets, but I also think that it will lend itself to neighborhood stabilization. And you know what happens when the 1000 block of Cantrell gets a complete sidewalk, but the 900 block only gets the first block of the sidewalk, people feel left out of the process. And aesthetically it just doesn't make sense, either. You don't see that new 98 BILL NO. 000344 construction and that sense of there is something changing for the better. And I would think that it would be a lot less expensive, while the contractors are out there doing the excavation and tearing up the sidewalks, and that portion of the sidewalk, just to go in another block. I mean, there are a couple of cases where in South Philadelphia, I know on the 2400 block I think or 2900 block of South 9th Street, as an example, the neighbors wanted a complete sidewalk. And we were able to make an arrangement to get some additional city money in. But the residents, the homeowners, had to contribute a certain amount of money towards the second block, which would have completed their sidewalk. And they were happy with it, but they weren't totally happy because the residents a block away got a complete sidewalk at no cost. And, again, I think it really does change the whole environment. The aesthetics of it just really make it. For the enhancements that come with it, I think you couldn't put a value on that. 99 BILL NO. 000344 I think it does really work for stabilization.
And the cost to the city is not significant. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Much less. Much less. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you, Councilman. Councilman Clarke and then Councilman Goode.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I will be brief. I just wanted to respond to some earlier statements that were made by a couple of my colleagues with regard to my questioning. I just wanted to say, I agree that this is the forum for all questioning related to the $79 million. It is fair game. But I would also like to say that I did not ask those questions in a defensive posture. So I didn't want anybody to feel that that was the case. The only one that I feel like I need to defend are some of the people who live in some of the parts of my district that are extremely 100 BILL NO. 000344 blighted. That's where the defense needs to happen. So I wanted to clear that. The purposes of my questions had more to do with points of information. I asked the specific questions about the disparity of dollars associated with the 5th District and the disparity associated with the special needs solely. That was the basis for that. With respect to these Council district allocations, I don't think that it is accurate as it relates to neighborhoods as an example. Both Councilman DiCicco and myself both represent neighborhoods that have probably the highest incomes in the City of Philadelphia and some of the lowest. Because we both represent Center City and North Philadelphia. So I don't think that's an accurate depiction in terms of neighborhoods versus Council districts. So I just wanted to make that point of clarification. And I also wanted to say that I am going to be as aggressive as possible to make sure that I can get more money into the 5th 101 BILL NO. 000344 Councilmanic District. Thank you very much.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I didn't know we were actually going to get into this discussion today this deeply. But I think there needs to be a new community development strategy within Year 26, actually as it relates to the Mayor's blight removal initiative, but I don't believe it should be one that pits low-income people against middle-income people. I do believe it has to go beyond political arguments. And I believe that the argument regarding equitable access, we need to make the record clear, as I think you said you will make it in terms of documents that you will eventually send to Council. But this city does not receive the Community Development Block Grant just based on low-income population. It receives it based on a number of different things that need to be clear; that people deserve that money, deserve access to opportunity, deserve access to developing their 102 BILL NO. 000344 neighborhoods for more than the population of low-income people that are there. There are other neighborhood conditions that are taken into account, including the conditions for investment. And the condition for an investment is not just a condition for public investment in terms of equitable access, but a condition for private investment. And there are places within this city that require more investment to improve their investment condition, to attract more private capital. The reason we put more money into low-income neighborhoods over the last 16, 20, actually years of Community Development Block 18 Grant Program, is because of private disinvestment. 19 And we have tried to change that. We have tried to 20 reverse that. 21 I don't think we have necessarily 22 done a good job of it; that's why we need a new 23 strategy. 24 But it should not be one that says 25 because private sector is not investing in 103 BILL NO. 000344 low-income communities in the way that they should, then we are going to give up on those communities and we are going to then move in just to secure middle-income communities. I want the record to reflect that, also.
Councilman DiCicco. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Thank you, Madam Chair. I would be remiss if I didn't thank you, Mr. Kromer, in your support of Jefferson Square, and there are a number of other projects that are going on in my district, and your office has been very helpful. And I again want to thank you for your cooperation. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you. I think, Mr. Kromer and my colleagues, that we have really gotten into the crux of, I guess, the philosophy of housing and community development. And certainly I have a housing consultant who is here and whose company has invested more than $40 million in my district. And housing is different than a lot of other things. You know, you have to really work 104 BILL NO. 000344 with the private industry, the institutions, try to deal with need, as well as stabilization. And certainly it falls into a different category than a lot of other fields. But certainly it is a tough job, and I think the 3rd should get everything. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Do you want a stadium? I can give you a stadium.
I wanted a stadium at 30th Street, the institutions didn't. Are there any other questions from members of the committee or my colleagues? Councilman Nutter.
Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. Mr. Kromer, can you share with us any information as it relates to either Year from a 19 funding standpoint or programmatic standpoint on 20 actions that are to be taken by OHCD with regard to 21 the acquisition/disposition process? 22
As with other 23 activities, there are no new acquisition/disposition 24 programs proposed in Year 26. 25 As I have indicated previously, the 105 BILL NO. 000344 proposed Year 26 plan does include a request for proposals that would be issued by the Redevelopment Authority on behalf of the city, inviting developers to request acquisition funding for --
I'm talking more about the actual systems involved in acquisition/disposition, and the speeding up of those systems. And, primarily, again, most of our discussion in this area is more about individuals trying to acquire properties through the city in this ongoing problem, is probably the nicest term I could use in the Public Hearing. When a person tries to get a property, we then oftentimes look at Act 94. Then you get a budget back for a property that is not worth that much, and we expect someone to give us at the end of the day or thousand dollars to 20 acquire a property that might be worth $5,000. And 21 no one in their right mind is going to do that. 22 Has anything been done to speed up 23 that process and cut down on some of the costs, as 24 well as the paperwork? 25
I can mention two 106 BILL NO. 000344 activities which, although not comprehensively documented in the plan, will, I believe, make a substantial improvement across the board throughout the city. One is the implementation of the new provisions of what has been known as the 1202-A program. This is a program that was initially enacted by Council during the 1980s, but recently was amended to include vacant lots, as well as vacant houses. And under 1202-A, as you may be aware, the Commissioner of Licenses & Inspections can authorize an individual or an organization to act as the city's agent in addressing code enforcement problems on a particular vacant lot.
I understand that. I am talking about the person who actually either wants to acquire the property or get the house next door either for themselves or to do rehab work or something like that, and it takes forever to get those properties. And because of the various administrative costs and other cost requirements, Board review, and staff costs at the RDA and a 107 BILL NO. 000344 number of other places, it is not viable for a person to pursue that. What I'm asking is, has anything been done from an administrative standpoint or a program standpoint to cut down on the dollars that are needed to acquire or the amount of time it takes to get that particular property?
Just one comment on 1202-A approach. I believe that would bring in a higher volume of vacant lots, and that those vacant lots would be conveyed through the sheriff's sale system in a pretty reliable way. In terms of the broader --
Just for the record, how long does sheriff's sale take?
I haven't studied the system in detail, but I believe that the system now delivers in approximately one year, which I think is reasonable for a vacant lot, side yard request.
The other initiative that's been tested by city housing agencies, that's 108 BILL NO. 000344 being considered for expansion, is an approach in which community organizations with the Office of Housing, the Redevelopment Authority, Department of Licenses & Inspections, would go through a particular targeted area and on the spot make the basic decisions about demolition, encapsulation, moderate rehab. And that those decisions would include funding the acquisition of vacant lots and vacant buildings for which interest has been expressed. This whole targeting and the planning that preceded the work in the field would involve the District Council office, as well as the community organizations in the area. And I would expect that that advance planning would include some decisionmaking about getting vacant properties to individuals and businesses that wanted them. How that would be funded is another issue. In the past, the Community Development Block Grant program has been the only funding source for acquisition and disposition. I can't tell you that there's a new funding source. 109 BILL NO. 000344 But I believe that if this program is adopted, and I think it is likely to be expanded during the summer months, then we would have to add to the resources.
What is an assisted acquisition and a nonassisted acquisition?
A nonassisted acquisition is an eminent domain acquisition, undertaken by the Redevelopment Authority, in which the cost of acquiring the property, the fair market value and the associated costs, are paid for by the developer of the property. And some groups such as Allegheny West Foundation have taken from their own budgets to pay for assisted takings of properties that they have wanted to develop. A nonassisted -- I'm sorry. An assisted -- what I described is a nonassisted taking, in which the developer pays the costs. An assisted taking is one in which a public funding source, primarily the Community Development Block Grant, is used to pay for the redevelopment costs of acquiring a particular property through eminent domain. 110 BILL NO. 000344 Those have been known in past situations in situations in which there is funding or an expectation of funding to actually produce the housing or improve the housing on the property to be acquired.
I don't have that figure here, but I can provide it to you by the end of the day.
Okay. If you could provide how many and the locations and the costs involved, I would appreciate that. What is the policy of OHCD, or what is not only your policy, but the philosophy and planned action, to deal with the anticipated or ongoing circumstance? We have an aging population here in Philadelphia in many of the neighborhoods throughout the city. And people are either, unfortunately, passing away or they end up moving into a retirement community, or maybe some senior housing, some of which produce or are assisted by the city. What is the game plan to deal with 111 BILL NO. 000344 this continued aging population and our ability or inability to attract new younger families to that housing in those neighborhoods throughout the city?
The two traditional programs that have been in effect for some time, that are intended to address that issue, are programs that improve the housing that older people are living in, or help sell those houses to new home buyers. And those programs are the Basic Systems Repair Program, many of the clients for which are elderly homeowner occupants, and the Settlement Grant Program, through which properties, a significant number of which are owned by older people or they are area inherited properties, are made available for home ownership. An additional newer activity is a vacancy prevention activity that has been planned in coordination with the University of Pennsylvania that relates to title problems. And I would just like Deborah McCullock to summarize that approach. MS. McCULLOCK: The vacancy prevention activities that we funded in the current year included a special training for housing 112 BILL NO. 000344 counselors and senior service providers, to help them assist seniors with specific housing problems. It also included a fund for what we call tangled title, to help people who can't transfer their properties to another buyer or who don't have clear title to their properties, making them eligible for loans and grants for repairs. Because of some encumbrance in the title, they live in the house, but it belonged to their parents and it was never transferred to them, so forth. So there is a specific fund set up to assist paying off whatever would need to be paid off and help people get clear title.
And what is this, a pilot project? MS. McCULLOCK: It is a pilot project. Last year it was funded, or Year 21 currently we committed $50,000 to it. And that's 22 again what is proposed for Year 26 to continue the 23 training counselors and continue providing 24 assistance to counselors and their clients on a 25 case-by-case basis to provide specific assistance. 113 BILL NO. 000344
And where is this offered? Is this a citywide program? MS. McCULLOCK: Yes. It is for the housing counselors that are under contract to OHCD, it is available to them, and to other senior providers. We have carried out the program in conjunction with the University of Pennsylvania and the Philadelphia Corporation for Aging. And so that both senior -- it's been a really good way for senior service providers, through the PCA network, to meet with housing counselors, through our Housing Counseling Network, and really share information and ideas about how each set of people can help the clients.
In addition, we are proposing funding for the Sharp Home Repair Program administered by the Philadelphia Corporation for the Aging.
If you could provide me guidelines from our earlier discussion, we talked about housing conditions, and see as it relates to final determination on funding levels for CDBG dollars, I would appreciate it. 114 BILL NO. 000344 Mr. Kromer, you came to a community meeting some time ago in a portion of my district, it was actually in North Philadelphia. And at the time you said to the people who were at the meeting that one of the reasons they didn't get funding in their particular section was that they were not organized, and that's why they don't get any money in that neighborhood. What exactly does that mean, and how does someone overcome that situation, and what do people have to do, in your estimation, to benefit from the programs of OHCD?
I think that it is essential, the residents who are interested in seeing improvements in their community get together and work together with city agencies such as the Office of Housing and Community Development and with some of the organizations that provide services to community groups. And when I make reference to people in the community, I'm talking about a unit as small as a block group or a volunteer civic association. There is really no need for every community to have a real estate development 115 BILL NO. 000344 organization or a Community Development Corporation. But I do believe there has to be some community initiative, a block group or the religious congregation or from a business group or some other entity that's going to devote some time to --
So let's say you have an organized block. What would they do?
The first thing that they would do, in terms of the Office of Housing and Community Development, would be to work with the neighborhood program coordination staff, individuals who do nothing but work with local groups to expand service delivery and plan for new programs. That would really be the first step.
And out of that process they can expect that if they have reasonable ideas or reasonable requests, that they will be funded?
Some of those groups have then received predevelopment funding from organizations that the Office of Housing and Community Development has funded, such as the Local Initiative Support Corporation or the Reinvestment 116 BILL NO. 000344 Fund. Other groups have received assistance in planning design work through the Community Design Collaborative, which is also funded through the block grant. So, yes, there is a progression in activity that follows that engagement.
Similar to the information you provided last year, could you get me a listing of Years through for all of the tax 12 credit projects; name of the project, location, 13 dollar amount, number of units, and what year that 14 tax credit deal was done? 15
Tell me a little 18 bit about the capacity-building capacities of OHCD 19 as it relates to either existing or possibly new or 20 start-up community-based organizations. 21
I would ask Belinda Mayo 22 to say a few words about that. 23
My name is Belinda 24 Mayo, and I am the Director of Neighborhood Program Coordination and Community Development at the Office 117 BILL NO. 000344 of Housing and Community Development.
Yes, it is. It is on 148, Community Organization Capacity Building, at the bottom of the page under Community Organization Capacity Building.
What we have done is, we have provided a number of training and technical assistance programs over the year that were specifically focused on physical development projects. And we have continued -- we continue to do that in the Year 25, and propose it in Year 20 in a slightly different manner. 21
In the past we have had long-term training programs that actually work with nonprofits that were newly emerging or already established to get hands-on training and extend the training periods like one year to six months through the Community Development Institute, which is a project of the Reinvestment Fund. We seem to have come to a point where most of the groups that have development capacity or can be trained to create capacity have sort of gotten as much training as they can use. And now what we have done is, we have set up a series of specialized training programs through the reinvestment fund, again, that focuses on planning, on specific types of programs. Since there is a broad array of housing development and community development programs, we sort of focused on those. And we have identified those programs through a series of surveys to the groups that say, what kind of training do you think you need to pursue your development agenda for the next year. And we have continued to do that through the reinvestment fund, but we have also 119 BILL NO. 000344 established a program with the Local Initiative Support Corporation that funds the same kinds of programs, again based on a survey of the needs of the groups. So there is a series of workshops that focus on physical development, different types of community development and housing-related services, but also economic development. And those workshops are held on a regular basis through lists and through the Reinvestment Fund. In addition to that, we provide funding support to the Philadelphia Neighborhood Collaborative to provide technical assistance, grants as well as services, to the nonprofits and the CDCs that are members of PIDC. Those workshops are open to any group in Philadelphia. And what they do is, they, again, focus on the needs of the groups, but also have some specialized areas. One of the things that we are pursuing now is helping groups to develop web pages and to also increase their information technology capacity so that they can communicate on a different 120 BILL NO. 000344 level. We have also focused very squarely based on the investment in rental housing by this program and by the CDCs in making sure that the nonprofits have property management experience and capacity. There are no nonprofit property management entities in the city, but there are many, many for-profit. And what we have done is tried to encourage CDCs that own more than 100 units to become more involved in property management.
Let me ask you a question on that. I mean, of all the CDCs that are doing work out there, you are saying that they are not managing their properties?
They are. In fact, some of them are managing their properties. It is not cost effective for ACDC to manage properties if they have less than 100 units.
There are different entities. Penrose Properties has a management 121 BILL NO. 000344 company. Interstate is a management company that's based in New Jersey, but provides a lot of management to CDCs in Philadelphia. But both organizations provide management services that are transitioned eventually to the CDC staff. There is a mentoring relationship that is established that helps the CDC understand how property management works, how to protect their assets, and so forth. So there is a transitioning process that takes place in most instances.
Let me go back to something you mentioned earlier. How many groups are participating in these training programs?
Well, right now, if you look at the universe of CDCs -- and there is no 20 process for certifying a group as ACDC -- basically if they have bylaws and articles of incorporation that commit them to community development, then they are ACDC. OHCD doesn't certify a group. But what we do is, we do certify that they have the 122 BILL NO. 000344 organizational structure to manage a program, to manage a project, and to manage federal funds. Right now I would say there are about 35 groups at different levels of capacity that would work with this program.
We have a directory of CDCs and nonprofits that we have had a funding relationship with. However, the Philadelphia Association of Community Development Corporations has a more extensive list and a web page that provides ongoing information that we support.
The PA CDC list, are those the same people who are participating in the training programs you are talking about?
Well, PA CDC don't participate in the training program. They do provide some technical assistance to CDCs in developing web pages and other information technologies.
Now, does the 123 BILL NO. 000344 office make a distinction between ACDC and a community-based organization which may not necessarily be in the development business, but they are more involved in social or civic activities in a particular area.
Well, there is a natural distinction. Some are capable and have the capacity to carry out real estate activities, and others don't. However, we don't discourage groups that don't have that capacity. What we say to them is that, as a community-based organization or as ACDC, as long as you are involved in community development, then you are in fact a development corporation. We try to encourage people to develop partnerships with more experienced nonprofit and for-profit developers, so that they can get community development and housing activities underway in their neighborhood. We also try to encourage them to understand that whatever services they have been providing at the neighborhood level are as valuable 124 BILL NO. 000344 as the physical development. Because without those services, the physical development would be just that, it would be developing buildings, but not providing those services to individuals.
Last question. What, in your estimation, does the nonprofit CDC at whatever, however you evaluate what their capacity is, what do they get out of their partnership with the for-profit developer when all is said and done?
Well, those relationships are usually worked out in partnership agreements. In the past there have been for-profit developers that have worked with neighborhood organizations and provided a small portion of the developer's fee to help the organization with its operating costs. More recently, groups like Universal Community Homes have been successful in developing partnership agreements that give them more, more responsibility and more participation in the decision-making process around the projects and also a bigger share of the developer's fee.
What about on the 125 BILL NO. 000344 experience and the learning curve and ultimately being able to do development on their own, without the for-profit developer?
Well, again, Universal Community Homes is probably the best example. They started out in a partnership agreement with a large for-profit developer in the city. And they slowly and gradually have built their capacity. So that while they may still have those partnership relationships with the for-profit, they have taken on more responsibility for the projects and they have taken on larger projects. We spent a lot of time recently working with church congregations that have spun off CDCs. We have helped them understand the difference between the nonprofit church status and the nonprofit status as a Community Development Corporation. But in doing that, we have also helped them understand what are the responsibilities and risks that they take on in doing a project that involves multiple funding sources and legal commitments to getting the project done. 126 BILL NO. 000344 And more and more those groups are looking to establish CDCs, but also looking for partners that can work with them and help them learn the process.
Thank you. Mr. Kromer, last few questions for you. Can you give me an update on the status of -- I made a request, I believe, during budget hearings about an analysis of the housing that has been produced that primarily is listed in the back of the plan on the HUD 100 loan page. I believe I had asked you and the Budget Director at the time, who is unfortunately no 16 longer with us, to give an analysis of the taxes generated to the city as a result of houses coming back on line as a result of either rehabilitation or new construction. Do you know where that project is?
Yes. The Finance Department had requested some information from the Office of Housing and Community Development to begin analysis. That information was provided. And 127 BILL NO. 000344 my understanding is that a methodology has been worked out and that the analysis is being done. I believe it is fair to say that the results of that will be available this month, and that Finance could provide some comments on what the analysis is producing prior to the time when this bill is considered for final passage. So although the analysis is not complete, I believe all the materials are in place, the methodology is in place, and the work is being done.
I don't know. I would have to ask Finance. But I can get an estimate for you before the end of the day.
All right. Have you, through the budget process, the city budget process, sought any city funding for administrative or program delivery costs that are now being covered by CDBG funds?
So I assume since you never asked, you have no idea what the city response would be?
My experience has been that the city has followed the pattern established in other cities, in which the Community Development Block Grant itself pays for the associated operating costs. And I believe that is the approach that continues to be supported here in Philadelphia.
Not withstanding the fact that if we made a shift, you would be able to put more CDBG funds out on the street?
You and I had a conversation not too long ago, and I shared some backup information with you about a particular project out in West Philadelphia that involves one house. It is for a lady by the name of Ms. Drake. And I think you were going to get back to me on what we might be able to do with that. 129 BILL NO. 000344
I'm sorry. I believe that property is being acquired through eminent domain, but I will check with the Redevelopment Authority and again confirm that with you today.
Lastly, about two years ago, in Mayor Rendell's cabinet room, you participated in a meeting with a group of clergy members from West Philadelphia, a project called the Phoenix Project. I believe they were trying to acquire and renovate upwards of 300 houses in various parts of West Philadelphia. Can you tell us or tell me what's going on with that?
The Redevelopment Authority staff can provide more detailed information, if that would be helpful. But my understanding is that the major stumbling block to moving forward with that plan had been the lack of information from the sponsoring organization about how the rehabilitation would be financed. And that really is essential, if the city is going to commit funding through 130 BILL NO. 000344 Redevelopment Authority to acquire property. And I don't believe any information whatsoever about a development financing plan had been received. And I would really be reluctant to support moving ahead on acquisition without something more substantial.
Well, have you had any conversation with Reverend Staley in recent times about that?
I know that Redevelopment Authority staff have attempted to get that information repeatedly. But if another meeting would be appropriate, I would be glad to participate. But I know that the effort has been made repeatedly to obtain that information.
I would appreciate the followup on that. Lastly, on the Francis Drake matter, it is my understanding that the property is actually in the city's inventory. I don't think acquisition is necessary.
Good afternoon. On , in your Resource Comparison, under Resources from the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Housing, in Year was 3,215,000. 11 Year 26 you have 2,300,00, 915,000 decrease. 12 Could you explain that? 13
Yes. Funding from the 14 Commonwealth of Pennsylvania has decreased steadily 15 during the past few years, from a point where five 16 years ago the city could count on $4 million, and 17 now, as you see, our expectation is to receive 18 roughly half of that amount. 19 I believe that one explanation for 20 that drop in funding has been a decision in 21 Harrisburg that applies to the entire state to 22 divert more funding to main street programs and 23 other economic development activities that can be 24 supported across the Commonwealth. 25 Regardless of the motivation, 132 BILL NO. 000344 however, the drop is substantial. And it means basically that the very effective repair programs administered by the Philadelphia Housing Development Corporation are cut in half. And half of the people that we were able to serve, half the number of people we were able to serve, are not being served during this coming fiscal year. That's really a very serious problem, particularly given the housing preservation, housing conservation needs that we face. And I'd like to say that, you know, if we lobbied harder with the state for more funding, we would get more. But, in fact, the Mayor's Office has lobbied extensively for more state funding. An approach, which as I have indicated previously, I would like to try to propose, and I have proposed this to the Mayor, is one in which perhaps we could leverage more state funding by putting on the table some of our funding and linking it to some of the state's interest. For example, we discussed the very effective home repair program that the FOB community development corporation has undertaken. And I 133 BILL NO. 000344 appreciate the detailed information that was provided to me about that program. I'd like to propose to the Commonwealth that perhaps we leverage our resources so that we can extract more funding from BCED for programs that we're committing dollars to repair. And if in the coming year we only succeeded in leveraging on a one-for-one basis with Philadelphia plan groups, we would still have a very substantial amount of new funding. I believe the FOB program, for example, is currently funding $80,000 worth of repairs. And if we would leverage an equivalent amount, that would be quite an accomplishment. So with the support of the Mayor's Office, I would like to take that initiative to Harrisburg this summer and see if we can't free up some more state funding for that kind of activity.
Are you saying in past years -- because we have a new Administration now -- that there was not a real strong lobbying effort to capture or increase or maintain the number of housing dollars for the city? 134 BILL NO. 000344
Well, rather than commenting on past years, I can say that this year a very strong lobbying effort was mobilized by the Pennsylvania Low Income Housing Coalition, with dozens of community-based organizations in Philadelphia and around the state. And a very effective outreach effort was made, some very effective contacts with suburban and rural legislatures which appeared to be promising, but unfortunately did not yield the results expected. That, I think, was the best possible advocacy effort that you could have seen for housing in Pennsylvania this year. And, unfortunately, it didn't succeed. So we will need to try another approach.
I want to go to, we have an ongoing discussion about Logan. And I won't go into the details, because we do have hopefully a working task force to resolve some of the issues around Logan. But I noticed in the budget we only have, and I lost it, I think $412,000, of four-hundred-and-some-thousand dollars, for Year 135 BILL NO. 000344 26. Is that just to cover the remaining families there?
The amount that's budgeted for Logan acquisition and relocation is on , and that is level with previous year's funding, $3 million, the third line down, Item A3. The other references to Logan on that page refer to repayment of prior years' Section 108 financing. But the amount being proposed for this coming fiscal year for Logan is equal to that in the current year.
So that's proposed to be level. And my expectation is that amount would be needed to cover the remaining eligible cases. And that, in addition, we would have some substantial activity related to the property 136 BILL NO. 000344 acquisition, and the planning for the future of Logan, and the disposition of the properties that are held by the Logan Assistance Corporation.
Last year there was an effort, there was a commitment of money given to the city, supposedly $1.5 million, from the state for residents of Wissinoming, and part of the money to go to Logan for those people who are classified as ineligible. Would that money have come through your department, if it were requested by the city?
No. And I was not familiar with the funding for Wissinoming. I heard about it, but the city's housing agencies were not involved.
So you got none of the money that was appropriated by the state, the $1.5 million --
So all of the money probably went to Wissinoming? 137 BILL NO. 000344
Thank you. Are there any other questions from members of the committee or members of Council? It took us a little while.
Well, I guess I want to go back. And maybe you did answer the question. On the acquisition and disposition of vacant properties, did you give us a good answer on that, in terms of trying to speed up the process? Because it is so lengthy. Because we are going to be talking about blight removal, and spending $250,000,000 on blight removal. But unless we change some systemic problems that cause us to have these vacant properties, and allowing them to sit forever and not being able to acquire them, I am afraid we will throw good money after bad. So are we really working on changing the way we are able to acquire a vacant property, 138 BILL NO. 000344 and move it on to the next owner?
The Year consolidated 4 plan does not contain the solution to the problem 5 that you are looking for and that we are all looking 6 for. It basically calls for a continuation of 7 existing programs. 8 And rather than say, well, that will 9 all be taken care of in the future, let me say that 10 I think two issues have got to be addressed. 11 One is organization. We have got to 12 be better organized to deal with the problem on a 13 citywide basis. And the other is money; there has 14 to be some funding to support property acquisition 15 on a larger scale. 16 What I can say about the immediate 17 future, that is, the summer months ahead, is that 18 there are two approaches that will be underway in 19 neighborhoods to use our existing resources in the 20 plan more effectively through better organization. 21 One is applying the expanded 1202-A 22 program, so that L & I can authorize many adjacent 23 owners to take control of side lots next to them, 24 and we can begin moving those lots at a higher 25 volume through the sheriff's sale process. 139 BILL NO. 000344 And the other approach is the neighborhood sweep approach, in which we go through a targeted area and on the spot make the decisions about demolition, encapsulation, but also vacant property conveyance, some of which could be funded through the Community Development Block Grant program. That's not the comprehensive approach that we all need, but it is a first step towards getting better organized and using these available resources more effectively.
But sometimes I don't know if you need a program to look at the process. I think the process needs to be reviewed, as to what new policies may need to be implemented, what rule changes need to be made to make it easier. And that's an internal piece to the departments that handle all of these transactions, coming together to sit down to talk about, what do we do now, and why doesn't it work, and what can we do to make it work. I think that that is the discussion that needs to take place. 140 BILL NO. 000344 I had someone try to acquire a building, and it was taking forever. It took a hands-on to get the process through. I mean, even to the interaction with the Law Department, getting the Law Department to move with the settlement papers, or whatever the contracts or whatever you have to do with this stuff. But I don't think you need to -- well, maybe you do. But I don't believe right now that there has to be any dollars appropriated for thinking about what the solution should be to resolving the issue, and that's what I want. Because if we don't do that, I have properties that are sitting in my district, they're vacant, the taxes are paid, but they are a neighborhood nuisance. The grass doesn't get cut, we have to constantly call about getting the place boarded up. And it shouldn't be allowed to sit like that. And we don't need a program for that; we just need some action by the city in terms of a policy on how we are going to handle that. And that's what we're looking for. 141 BILL NO. 000344 Because if you don't, my district and other areas where there is no blight, you are going to have blight, because you are going to end up with a lot of vacancies, or the house will have to be demolished in the middle of a block that's solid. So a quick resolution to it has to come about, it has to come about. Otherwise, we are not going to be successful in dealing with blight.
Absolutely. And I can say in the fairly short time that Patricia Smith has been here as Head of the Blight Initiative, most of our communication has been on that subject, how can we improve the process and get things done. Not only with regard to existing blighted areas, but areas that need to be conserved, where we need to prevent blight.
Mr. Kromer, thank you. I know as always you will stick around for any special concerns that we have. Thank you very much. Mjenzi Traylor, Department of Commerce. Good morning. Would you both identify yourselves for the record and being your testimony. 142 BILL NO. 000344 Thank you for your patience.
Good morning, Councilwoman Blackwell, Members of City Council. My name is Clarisse Wynne, and I am the Acting Deputy Director of Commerce. I am here today to present testimony in support of the Fiscal Year 2001 consolidated plan. With me this morning is Mr. , President of Philadelphia Commercial Development Corporation; Mr. William Hankowsky, President, Philadelphia Industrial Development Corporation; and also Jim O'Toole from the Commerce Department staff; and other members of our respective staffs. Before I begin, I want to thank this committee and City Council for agreeing to expedite this Public Hearing and consideration of this bill. My comments this morning will summarize and to some degree expand on the economic development section of the consolidated plan. Philadelphia's neighborhoods play a pivotal role in the city's economy. Most of the city's economic activity takes place in its 143 BILL NO. 000344 neighborhoods. To ensure an improved quality of life for the majority of our citizens who reside in our neighborhoods, we targeted neighborhood economic development as our number one priority. The city's approach to neighborhood economic development encompasses three goals: Assisting small neighborhood businesses; investing in neighborhood physical infrastructure, including housing; to improve the business environment near residential areas; and fostering the growth of community economic development skills and capacity, particularly within Community Development Corporations, CDCs. These goals are reflected in the broad array of neighborhood economic development programs, initiatives, and accomplishments of the past year. To help meet these goals, we will be expanding our targeted CDC support efforts in Lower Germantown and Eastern North Philadelphia. Our basic lending and grant programs are divided between the Philadelphia Commercial Development Corporation, PCDC; the Philadelphia 144 BILL NO. 000344 Industrial Development Corporation, PIDC; and the Commerce Department. Small business lending and facade improvement programs are implemented from PCDC. In the coming years, PCDC's small business revolving loan program will be funded at $1,650,000, the Facade Security Rebate Programs will be funded at $220,000, the TNCA Acquisition Program will be funded at $100,000, and an additional $500,000 will be dedicated to the completion of the Italian Market Canopy Program. The Housing Contractor's Program will provide approximately $1 million in lending. PCDC will provide support for the Small Business Support Center and the Micro Loan Program. These efforts are funded principally through nonCDBG resources. PCDC will continue to operate Targeted Neighborhood Commercial Area, TNC, program. This program provides an array of support services to 38 commercial areas. A listing of these areas is attached. In addition, PCDC will provide direct assistance to for-profit businesses and nonprofit organizations which act as key service providers and 145 BILL NO. 000344 employers in these commercial areas. The principal goal of the TNCA program is to enable these businesses to remain and to expand, while providing needed goods, services, and employment opportunities for Philadelphia's low- and moderate-income residents. PCDC will provide acquisition grants to community-based development organizations, CBDOs, located in TNCAs. The CBDOs will acquire and improve the properties. After the improvement is completed, the CBDOs will either lease or sell the properties to businesses, which will provide retail goods or services to the low- and moderate-income residents of that neighborhood. 4. Businesses will be required to create at least one permanent full-time equivalent job for every $10,000 of grant assistance. It is anticipated that at least 10 146 BILL NO. 000344 properties will be acquired, renovated, and occupied. Our major commercial and industrial lending programs are administered by PIDC.
These include the CDBG Mortgage Loan Program, the Neighborhood Development Fund, and the Section 108 Loan Programs. 9 million will be used to support the Mortgage Loan and Neighborhood Development Programs. PIDC will bring down Section 108 funds to assist in larger scale development projects and to support our neighborhood lending programs. The primary goals of these Section 16 108 loans will be to create permanent jobs for residents of Philadelphia, to stimulate private investment, and to generate tax ratables for the city. While the creation of jobs for low- and moderate-income Philadelphians will be the key criteria of these loans, the expansion of retail goods and services in our neighborhoods and the elimination of blight will be alternative criteria. The projects approved for the Section 147 BILL NO. 000344 108 loans will be appropriate to the city's overall economic development strategy as presented in the Economic Stimulus Program and as proposed in the five-year plan. At Commerce we will offer different levels of grant support. One effort will be to support pre-development project grants. Another will be to support planning and marketing grants. A third will be to support Special Service District Programs in West Philadelphia, Germantown, and Frankford. We will continue our targeted neighborhood support services grants, we will provide support to organizations on the American Street and West Parkside Enterprise Zones, Germantown, West Philadelphia, South Philadelphia, Frankford, Central North Philadelphia, and Eastern North Philadelphia. I would like to take this opportunity to thank Council for their ongoing commitment to the Office of the City Representative and Commerce Department's economic development activities. I look forward to working closely with the members of Council to continue to 148 BILL NO. 000344 strengthen the economic base of the cities. My colleagues and I are pleased to respond to any questions Council might have.
Mr. Hankowsky, Mr. Jones, would you gentlemen like to speak? Do you want to ask your question first, Councilwoman, or do you want to hear the others?
On your testimony, you talk about your Small Business Revolving Loan Grant funded at 1,650,000. What is the average of small business loan grants you give?
Under the small business -- hello. Good afternoon. My name is Curtis Jones, I am the President and CEO of the Philadelphia Commercial Development Corporation, 149 BILL NO. 000344 PCDC. Your question was, what is the average size of a deal or loan produced by PCDC. Over the years, it has increased from $50,000 to, on average, $100,000 per deal.
Or default rate, to phrase it differently, is less than 5 percent, which is better than some banks, which disspells any myths about the creditworthiness of some people within low- and moderate-income neighborhoods. Our deals actually repay better than most banks. And that is a testimony to some of our lenders and volunteer staff from the banks that help to make those credit decisions.
Of your Facade Program at $200,000, is that economic stimulus 150 BILL NO. 000344 money?
So the economic stimulus money is a different pot that can be used for any kind of economic development programming?
When you say you work with the business strips in the community, what does that mean?
We are contracted to deal with 38 commercial corridors in the City of Philadelphia that are considered low- and moderate-income areas. We range from anything as it relates to providing collective advertising. We put in curbs, sidewalks, trees, and lighting in many of those strips. If you look at the canopies on 52nd Street, some years ago we put those in. And Councilwoman Blackwell fought very hard to make sure that we maintain those. And, so, we do that. When you look at 5th Street, 5th and Lehigh, whether you are talking about medallions that were placed in the streets, we put in trees, we 151 BILL NO. 000344 took out trees, we moved and put back in trees, depending on what the business association felt was in the best collective interests of the strip. We have done things with them that have helped them to do everything from a block party, to encourage residents to shop within the corridors, to work with them along 60th Street to work with SEPTA to plan better, some of the reconstruction of the Elevated project. So it varies from corridor to corridor on what type of services we provide. Some of our older corridors, like Manayunk, that were graduated out of the program, when we first started in those days when Manayunk was not a hip spot to be in, we worked with the business association there to the point that it is now self-sufficient and doesn't need our kind of assistance, to less sophisticated corridors, which I won't name, which need help in organizing bylaws, articles of incorporation so that they can receive money beyond what the city has to do for RFPs and things of that nature. So it varies from commercial corridor to commercial corridor. 152 BILL NO. 000344 We don't just deal with business associations. In some neighborhoods, the CDC is the dominant organizing entity in that area. Like neighborhoods like NAB, Neighborhood Action Bureau, is an example of that, where the business association works in conjunction with the CDC, but the CDC is the most active, the most organized. So, therefore, we funnel resources through them.
Some time ago I know that in response to a request I made of the city to recognize the diversity of the business owners in our districts, particularly for me on 5th Street, we asked you to employ someone who could communicate better with the merchants. Is that employee still there, and what are you going to do to expand that? One of the problems we do have is still the communication around zoning issues, what should be, what should not be. And I'm not sure that the communication is as strong or as clear as it should be.
Councilwoman, I read testimony from prior years. And one thing I have gotten is that with 5th Street we want to deal with 153 BILL NO. 000344 retail, not wholesale. So before we start, I want you to know I have it, my staff has it. As a matter of fact, I had them exercise a drill where they said, "No more wholesale on 5th Street. We want to do retail." So I have gotten that. We employed a gentleman at your insistence to find an Asian --
But you did ask me for a recommendation, and I went to the community. It is not my person.
We basically recognize that on our commercial corridors, like other major 154 BILL NO. 000344 cities, the influx of Asians, the influx of Hispanic people, the influx of people from Dominican Republic was a strength and actually helped to revitalize certain areas within the City of Philadelphia. We also realized that because of that diversity, we needed to take strides to be multi-lingual, not only in our verbal presentation but in our written packages. So we employed several Hispanic representatives within our agency, but also a Korean representative, a commercial area specialist, who not only was very versed in languages and spoke several languages, but also was able to put together a piece of software that could translate our documents into not only Spanish, but in Korean. And that employee has been with us now -- how long now, Bob? I'm seeing numbers. I can't see that far. Three years. And his name is Mr. Poc. And he not only works with us in our commercial area department along our corridors; but whatever deal coming in from whatever area of the city, he helps us to translate and also to understand the different cultures. 155 BILL NO. 000344
One of the requests I make is that a stronger communication be sent to the association in the community about no 5 wholesale. I'm not sure that that message it getting out. The other issue, how do you help with the Special Service Districts, the one in West Philadelphia and Frankford and the other areas that you mentioned?
Currently, we have a good working relationship, particularly with the Frankford Ministry Group and CDC. They provide the special services. They have what is a corridor manager that goes out and works with the business associations. We too have a similar job category, where we provide a lot of the rebates and grants for facade treatments and unified signage. Recently -- I don't have the exact numbers in front of me, maybe Dave will give me those numbers, but we did a number of signs along 156 BILL NO. 000344 the commercial corridors to make sure that they were unified and make sure that they met city code. So we work with those individuals to coordinate resources both from our funding source, CDBG dollars, but also through their funding source, and we worked closely with them. I would like to introduce Mr. Dave Boyd, who is our Vice-President for Neighborhood Commercial Development. He can specifically respond what we have done for you lately.
We are currently working up in Frankford -- my name is Dave Boyd. I work for Philadelphia Commercial Development Corporation, I am the Vice-President for Neighborhood Commercial Revitalization. Currently our facade program, which is a program where we go into a neighborhood, commercial area, that's been targeted for the program, and provide facade improvements to all those businesses that want to participate. Currently we are in Frankford. We will probably use up all the funds that we have available for this program year in Frankford. It will be the only facade program area this year. 157 BILL NO. 000344 The amount of money, I believe, for the next program year is $200,000. And usually that will provide for maybe one to two commercial areas. One of the areas that is in consideration for this program for next year is 40th Street. We have had the program on a number of different areas. I have a chart I can provide for the City Council to show over the last five, six years what areas have been provided the funding, plus the numbers of facades. 5th Street, we had the program there about a year ago. Again, we have the numbers of facades and improvements and the dollar amounts in the chart I can provide. Probably it was around $150,000, is my guess.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Mrs. Wynn and Mr. O'Toole, if you want to answer the question, how much money is in the Neighborhood Development Grant Program for Year 26?
So there was three-quarters of a million dollars in that program last year, there is no new money proposed for this year for Neighborhood Development Grant Program?
Well, my understanding is that there was no new money approved in the budget. Yes, we would like to have more, but there has been none.
There obviously was a shifting of funds in the budget. If there was $750,000 last year and there is zero this year, someone made a conscious 159 BILL NO. 000344 decision to eliminate the Neighborhood Development Grant Program.
Jim O'Toole. I am with the Commerce Department. Councilman Goode, what we have done in reallocating some funds to ensure funding for the Frankford, West Philadelphia Special Service District Programs, increasing some funding for special targeted neighborhood support, also providing additional funding levels for PCDC, and that basically ate through the $753,000 when that was done. What we want to do as the year goes on is to identify funding either through the economic stimulus program or through other resources that may become available. We have John Kromer's commitment to do that, you know, as projects become available. Right now we have no money targeted, budgeted per se, but we are committed to finding funding for projects as they come onto the books.
Can you describe exactly the types of projects that have been funded in the last three years under that program? 160 BILL NO. 000344
We have done the Thriftway Supermarket up at Broad and Wingohocking. We did the supermarket at 6th and Burke Germantown, also a Thriftway. We have done the Baltimore Avenue Mercy Medical Centers.
Your new strategy is what, to shift dollars away from projects like that for what specific purpose?
The issue comes down to how do you get the resources to get them out. What we did, basically, was to request some additional funding be dedicated for the NDG program, as well as the NDF program, PIDC. But, I mean, that discussion about how to reallocate resources couldn't be resolved at that point in time during the budget, you know, process. And what we have is a commitment from John Kromer, and also in conjunction with the Mayor's Office, that as projects come on line and into us that need funding for acquisition, this structure --