Thank you, Madam Chair. I'm going to go on the record to say that those numbers don't sound accurate to me. I will be very curious to hear how 29 is the sweet spot that we found. My last set of questions --
That would be amazing. Thank you. I did ask for that earlier in the budget --
And we did provide -- we may have provided it and we will provide it again.
We hear you. Thank you. And so, to close out my series of questions the Chair of the committee talked about three programs that were already panned out in bonding. I'm wondering thinking about NTI and NPI. There's some duplication there. I'm wondering why are we not funding those programs at a larger amount?
So there is not really duplication with NTI, but with NPI a lot of the programs that were in NPI will be continued in this bond -- through this program. And that is part of we're proposing to continue the programs and to expand them. That's exactly what this program does.
So I don't think you answered my question. So what I'm asking is -let me ask it this way: When you set up a new program like you're proposing today, how much revenue do you have to spend in staff to set up this new program?
Yep. So most of the programs in here are not new. Most of the programs here are continuation of programs that were funded through NPI. We are adding staff to try to improve the operations --
Madam Chair -- it's okay. Madam Chair, thank you. I don't want to waste members time anymore. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you. We appreciate it.
Thank you very much, Councilmember Thomas. Are there any additional questions for these witnesses from the committee? So I'd like to recognize Councilmember Gauthier and recognize Councilmember Young.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I appreciate the opportunity to take a part in the discussion. I've followed all of the questioning and the discussion so far and I just wanted to put out another perspective for the committee members. I think we absolutely need this level of investment in housing in the city in order to make a dent in the housing crisis and in order to keep what makes Philadelphia so unique and special in place. We have seen dramatic gentrification in neighborhoods across the city and we've also seen a lot of displacement. We've seen housing prices go up without income going up. I can speak as it relates to my district. About 54% of people who rent homes in my district are what's known as cost-burdened. That means they spend more than 30%, sometimes a lot more than 30% of their income, on their housing expenses. About a third of homeowners are also in that category of being cost-burdened. We've lost tens of thousands of affordable apartment units over the past decade, almost 40,000 units that were renting at $800 a month while we've gained tens of thousands of apartment units that rent for 2000 a month in the poorest big city in the country. We've also seen real displacement of Black and Brown populations from neighborhoods across the city, North Philadelphia, West Philadelphia and other areas. We have the distinction of being a city where we still have high levels of homeownership all across the socioeconomic spectrum, where we have people who have lived in neighborhoods for generations and generations that is at risk if they cannot afford housing in the city of Philadelphia. I don't always agree with the Mayor on philosophical issues or ideological issues. I am squarely behind her on this issue, that we will not get to where we want to be from a housing perspective if we don't make a bold investment. In fact, it's estimated that it would take us 200 years to generate the amount of affordable housing that we need if we keep going at our current pace and do the same thing that we're doing. And I also wanted to make a point that housing is an investment. It's not just spending for spending sake. People cannot get a job if they do not have a reliable place to lay their heads. Children cannot learn if they're couch surfing or in precarious living situations. Not to mention um the jobs that will come from the initiative. I also don't doubt that we can put this money to use. We have a number of existing programs that are critically underfunded. Basic Systems Repair that allows folks to use grant money to make critical home repairs has thousands of people on the waitlist. We get about $1 million a week in requests for that program alone. Adaptive modification, that helps to outfit homes for seniors and disabled people. We have thousands of people on the waitlist. We started a vital acquisition program that is allowing us to purchase units on the private market and turn them into affordable housing. These things cost millions and millions of dollars in order to do effectively and in order to do in a way that will provide the impact that we need to see. And so, I for my part have been pushing on us to use $800 million to support mostly affordable housing and the most vulnerable people in the city, but I have no doubt in my mind that we need at least 800 million in order to keep our city as special as it is and to make sure that people have a reliable place to call home every single day. Thank you. (Applause.)
Thank you very much, Councilmember Gauthier. The Chair now recognizes Councilmember Thomas with a question and then recog --
Okay. The Chair will now recognize Councilmember Young.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you for allowing me time and this committee. And I do want to commend the Mayor's vision for our city. This is a bold step. Everyone reiterates it's very commendable to take this step because housing is, you know, it's one of the crises that we go through in the city right now. But can you tell us how many borrowings in the city's history have been $800 million or more?
So, no, the pension obligation borrowing was over $1 billion. I think there have been some water borrowings that have been 500 million. So I think the pension obligation bond was bigger and there was an airport borrowing that was at 700 --
Well, as the Councilmember said this also would be an investment.
And how much money is projected to be spent on the -- how much of the 800 million is projected to be spent on the development or preservation of affordable housing?
So the plan has 16,500 units of preservation, 13,500 of production.
How much money of the 800 million is projected to be spent on the preservation of affordable housing or the development of affordable housing?
I'm going to ask Mark Dodds from Housing Development to come up to answer that. (Witness approached witness table.)
Good afternoon. I'm probably going to have to dig for just a little bit. If you have an additional question, please feel free to ask it but I'm going to go through my --
Thank you. Okay. We can wait on that question. Has the City ever borrowed money for research purposes?
So when it's part of a larger project that has happened in the past. I do want to add that one of the things that we have said is that we are open and eager to have conversation about appropriate funding sources within the overall H.O.M.E. program for things like research and to talk about whether it might make sense to, for example, pay for that out of a different funding source rather than borrowing.
Yes, as part of larger projects, but also wanted to put on the record that we're open to talking about moving that to a different funding source.
Okay. Thank you. And you were talking about the debt service on NTI, NPI and Rebuild, and you want this current budget or five year plan rather to start including some debt service calls for this borrowing; is that correct?
All right. And so, with the difference between an $800 million borrow or $400 million borrow you would say that could be about a $250 million saving to the taxpayers if we cut that in half, right, because you're saying 500 million will go --
Yeah, that's right. If you borrow less over the 20 years, interest would be less. Obviously, you wouldn't have the same level of investment and you wouldn't have the benefit, the same benefit from the program. But, right, the cost would be lower too.
Right. And with that in mind, we wouldn't have the same level of investors but the City has already identified who the investors would be in this program; is that correct?
I meant investment in programs. So for example, the program has a certain level of investment in Basic Systems Repair, and that level investment will be lower if we only borrowed 400 as opposed to borrowing 800 in two different tranches.
But looking at the legislation, I don't see a number again that will -- how do I know that we are going to be investing lower if we only do 400 million? I don't see those numbers that would tell me that.
I believe we sent over a budget that has the numbers by program.
But the legislation, right -- I go by what the legislation says, right, what we're going to authorize you to do. And none of the programs essentially have numbers attached to them. They rarely have AMIs attached to them.
They have descriptions, right. So I'm just curious to know how as a member of the public, right -- because we see the legislation. The public only sees the legislation. They don't have the spreadsheet that was sent around to us, right. So how will the public know how much of their tax dollars is going to be spent for these programs, right? And that's why I asked how much money is going to be used specifically for the development or preservation of affordable housing, how much is going to be used to develop market rate housing, how much is going to be used, you know, to do demolitions, and how much is going to be used for facade improvements. I think the taxpayers deserve to know what those numbers are if we are asking them to pay $1.3 billion.
Hold on one second. Okay. I apologize for the interruption. I ask that you please respond succinctly to Councilmember Young. Now, I'm going to recognize Councilmember Thomas for 30 seconds. And then we must move on.
Okay. And let me tell you why. I'm facilitating time. We have another committee hearing that was supposed to start in seven minutes. We also must give a stenographer a break and we also have 16 witnesses signed up to testify for public comment. Okay. So please give Councilmember Young a response and I'll recognize Councilmember Thomas 30 seconds and then we have to move on.
Yeah. In the development of the plan, I'll give you the latest figures I have available in front of me. 39% of the budget is dedicated to preservation, 26% production. And then we've also categorized programs by stabilization and incentive mechanisms. So 9% incentive and 26% stabilization. We'd be happy to provide those to you or even more updated numbers if we have them. And then as far as the AMI breakdown you requested, again the latest figures I have 36% goes towards households at or below 30% AMI, 41% between 30 and 50% AMI, 19% greater than 120, and 4% between the 80 and 120 range.
And in those percentages that you gave us, you said 39% of the previous one. 39% goes to development, another percent goes to preservation. But that doesn't break down again whether it's market rate or affordable housing. So that's the number that I was specifically looking for. If you can provide that to us, that'll be helpful.
Okay. Thank you. Thank you so much, Councilmember Young. The Chair recognizes Councilmember Landau very quickly and then very quickly Councilmember Thomas and then we'll have to move on because I also want to be respectful of the 16 individuals who have signed up to give public comment for the hearing and our wonderful stenographer who has been here with us all morning for two hearings thus far and we have a very long day today. Councilmember Landau.
Thank you so much. And just 30 seconds. I wanted to just publicly state my support for $800 million. I think this is a moment in history that we can have a transformative investment in housing and affordable housing in the city of Philadelphia. And I also want to say that the oversight that is baked into this bill for Council to have will make sure that we know that the money is spent in the ways in which we want it to be spent, so thank you so much.
Thank you very much, Councilmember Landau. Councilmember Thomas.
Yes. So I just want to put on the record that I'm adamantly against $800 million. I think that is not the direction that we should be going in right now, especially when we can borrow 400 now and if we get it right, we could do the second 400 after that. I also want to put on the record that it was said that we're not starting any new programs. So since we're not starting any new programs, I don't know why we need to hire new staff for this. And I don't know why we can't just put the money into NPI. And instead of doing 800 million through H.O.M.E., if there aren't any new programs, put the money in NPI and do it that way. Unfortunately, we know that that's not the case. There are new staff that come with this. This is a new program as it relates to H.O.M.E. And it's unfortunate that the information that's communicated to us today isn't reflective of the question that we're asking or accurate as it relates to the direction that we're trying to go in. Thank you, Madam Chair.
What I said is that these are mostly existing programs. I did not say all. You can go back through the transcript. That's what I said, that they are mostly existing. There are new programs too.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I just want to again you -- we can have an off-therecord conversation, however you want to do it. But you're blatantly not answering my questions and you're moving the goalposts as it relates to our time together throughout the course of this hearing. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Okay. Thank you. Thank you very much and thank you very much to this panel for all of your hard work over the past several months and for the opportunity to work together to elaborate. The journey continues. Okay. Are there any further questions or comments for this panel? (No response.)
Seeing none, we thank you very much for your testimony. There being no further testimony, we will begin the public comment portion of this hearing. I need to be very clear that we are so grateful and we are so appreciative of each and every one of you who have signed up to provide public comment today. We have a 1:30 Rules Committee hearing and it's 1:28 and we have to give our stenographer an opportunity to have a break. And so, I'm going to respectfully request that each of the public commenters please limit your testimony to one minute. I know that seems very unfair in light of the fact that many of you have been here all morning with us since 10 o'clock and I appreciate you so much. But I just ask that you give us a little bit of latitude today, recognizing that we have an additional committee hearing and we have additional work with the Council. A Committee of the Whole hearing that was rescheduled -- not rescheduled, but was scheduled this morning that we need to reconvene later this afternoon. Okay. So I'll ask the Clerk please call the names of the witnesses.
Joseph Ulrick, Kimberly Washington, Rachel McDaniel and Jordan Teicher.
Okay. Please approach the witness table in that order. You can provide your name for the record and then proceed with your testimony. (Witnesses approached witness table.) Please state your name for the record and you can proceed with your testimony. And if you have any written comments for submission, you can feel free to submit your written testimony for inclusion on the record. Okay. Thank you.
One moment, sir. May you please pull the mic up so that the stenographer can hear you.
Good afternoon. Thank you very much. My name is Ulrick Joseph and I represent Mark Engineers and two way mechanical, and I have here myself and Michael. Michael represents 360 mechanical and we here concerning Bill 250103. And we respectfully ask that this bill does not get moved through this committee for this reason: We are -- three of them and one other person's not here. We are three of the biggest mechanical contractors in the city of Philadelphia, happen to be MBE. And JCI contacted us out of the blue, contacted my firm out of the blue for some reason after they went through their process of getting the minority participation on the quadplex project. And sometimes they have a saying that says, when you see something, you have to speak up. We had numerous conversations with JCI regarding minority participation. And what we did was we put together a team of three mechanical contractors. And the Quadplex project is mostly mechanical. We put together a team of three minority contractors who could perform almost 100% of the contract. We could provide the bonding, we could provide the payroll and we would not need any support. So what we said was we could do this project and not need any support from any majority company. We've performed -- we've done this before in the past. We did 3.0 as a contractor, $10 million contract by ourselves. One of the things he spoke about was the percentages, 30 to 50%, but he never spoke the dollar amount. So the City of Philadelphia, we're trying to promote more minority contractors that can become self-sufficient, that can use minority participation through a true sense of the word. All my foremen on the job site are minority foremen from (inaudible). We probably are one of the only contractors that have foremen, not journeymen, foremen that represent on the site that are minorities. So we just ask you for an opportunity, an opportunity to get a large percentage of the contract and perform. Take the risk. We'll take the same risk as everybody else, but we just don't want to be ignored. They came to me and then they decided that they did not want to talk to us anymore. We put together a team of 360 Mechanical, DeWitt Mechanical. We put three minority contractors together to perform this project, but they seemed like they want to continue to do the same thing that they've always done in the past, is use small contractors that are minority. They cannot financially perform those projects. They didn't do with the typical vetting process that should have been done. They should have checked my K1s, check my taxes. They didn't ask for that. They didn't check bonding capability, none of that. They just said they went to the OEO registry and I'm registered in the OEO registry. That doesn't mean anything. What it means is we have minority contractors out here in the city of Philadelphia that can perform, that can do the work and perform the work and take the risk, and that's all we ask is for that opportunity. Thank you very much.
Thank you. Thank you very much for your testimony. Please state your name for the record and proceed with your testimony.
So I'm Mike Brown with 360 Group. And just to add, I'm also one of the larger minority mechanical firms here in Philadelphia. To give you an idea, Rico and myself have performed on GESA 3.0, GESA 2.0. We have designed and built but have been a part the majority of the team on over $150 million worth of work that we've done about $100 million. We create jobs, we have labor and multiple trades. We got -- my companies put kids through the trades where they got through the apprenticeship to become journeymen. It's important that real self-performing minority firms be used that create opportunity. We're based in Philadelphia. I've been paying Philadelphia taxes. I mean, it was not a need to be in Philadelphia. It's a choice to be in Philadelphia. Never moved to New Jersey, grew here, made it to the Navy Yard, sat on boards, participated in Community College, Board of PIDC, Foundation Board of Community College, and we're telling you that this cannot continue this way if you want to end poverty and create generational wealth. Thank you.
Thank you. Thank you very much for your testimony, for your public comment today. We appreciate you all being here. Thank you. Please state your name for the record and proceed with your testimony.
My name is Jordan Teicher. I'm a resident of West Philadelphia and I'm a PGW ratepayer. I'm here because like many of the other people you're going to hear from shortly, I spent the last few years trying to raise the alarm about PGW, a public utility which has been given free rein to operate without concern for transparency, affordability, sustainability or the future of its own workforce. I'm here today to ask that instead of rubber-stamping PGW's business-as-usual budget, the Council step up, show leadership and force PGW to serve the public interest. Right now Philadelphians who can afford to do it are getting off gas, which is shrinking PGW's rate base. To deal with this, PGW should be comprehensively planning a managed energy transition. But instead, it's planning to make up for lost revenue by increasing residential gas bills 13% on average and it's retaliating against organizations that are challenging this dangerous status quo. At the same time, PGW is planning to invest $8 billion on new gas lines that would lock us into burning fossil fuels for decades. After years of advocacy, PGW finally conceded to maybe do a geothermal pilot, but this is nothing compared to the kind of coordinated long-term effort we need to power Philadelphia with renewables. So I had three asks for Council today: The first, protect your constituents from the steep rate increases by contacting the PUC and urge them to carefully scrutinize PGW's current rate case proposal. Second, tell PGW to withdraw its bad faith discovery requests against organizations who challenged their proposed rate increases. And third, make PGW develop long-term plans for a managed shift to affordable renewable energy that doesn't leave behind low-income households. PUC can develop these requirements or you can pass your own mandates. Finally, I want to say that PGW leadership has made it crystal clear over the years that they are not thinking seriously about a future beyond gas, and they don't care about the city sustainability goals so we must make them. And I urge Council to seize this moment to take the lead. Thank you. (Applause.)
Thank you. Thank you very much for your testimony today. The Clerk will call the next set of witnesses. And as a reminder, please, please keep your testimony to one minute. Thank you.
Once again, Kimberly Washington and Rachel McDaniel, Elaine Fultz, Karen Melton and Peter Firch. (Witnesses approached witness table.)
Please approach the witness table. State your name for the record and proceed with your public comment.
Steve Greenspan and Emily Abendroth can also approach. (Witnesses approached witness table.)
Please state your name for the record and proceed with your public comment. Please proceed.
Yes. Good afternoon. My name is Elaine Fultz. I live in West Philadelphia. I'm a PGW ratepayer and I appreciate the opportunity to testify. I'll try to be brief. The immediate issue that I'm concerned about is the magnitude of PGW's requested budget increase, which is on average 13%. Quite a large increase, especially in light of the federal cuts that are being contemplated in support for low- and middle-income people in Philadelphia. I work with refugee families in West Philadelphia and the family that I am most familiar with has four children. The dad works as a parking lot attendant, and they would be very hard-pressed to pay a 13% increase. I am sure that you have many constituents in similar circumstances. To protect them, I ask that you contact the PUC and urge it to carefully consider this proposal. I ask you please to let them know that the Council is concerned and that you are watching. Very briefly we all know that PGW's rate base is declining due to a combination of global warming and demographic changes in the city. But rather than planning for an orderly change in its business model, PGW has been digging in. It has been resistant to those of us who are trying to make the case for change and it is trying to make up the lost revenues through a very perverse and counterproductive way that the previous witness just described, the weather normalization adjustment and the revenue normalization adjustment. If these just adjustments are implemented, your constituents will pay more for gas that they aren't even using. I urge the Council to take a greater interest in the budget of PGW and to ensure that in this budget and future ones it makes proposals that are in line with your climate goals, if necessary, through a legislative mandate that PGW match the goals that you have set out for the city. Thank you. (Applause.)
Thank you. Thank you for your great work. Please state your name for the record and proceed with your testimony. And as a reminder, please, please try to keep it to a minute. Thank you.
All right. My name is Peter Firch. I'm a PGW ratepayer. PGW, wherever you are, City Councilmembers, Gas Commission, what do you hear as you listen to today's PGW testimonies? Do you hear the voices of radical left activists who know nothing about running a gas company who are helping and shutting down PGW or do you hear the voices of concerned Philadelphians who are trying to help prevent the rising price spiral PGW is beginning to experience as their customers electrify or make their homes more energy efficient? Do you hear concerned Philadelphians who want PGW to continue to function vibrantly so they continue to provide affordable energy to Philadelphians and to continue to provide good jobs for thousands of Philadelphians? I hope you hear people trying to help PGW move to the future despite PGW's strong opposition to that concept. We do not know what PGW's future will be. That will depend significantly upon you PGW, you Gas Council, and you City Council and your creativity and courage. But like it or not, the future is not going to be built on gas. PGW's budgets and this one is no exception to continue to miss that planning for the future mark. In fact, this budget is totally devoid of any funds for that. Yet PGW is aware of their future, their current rate increases or attempts to isolate them from shrinking customer base in a warming climate and need to transition and their need to transition to some other energy form. I'll stop there. (Applause.)
Thank you very, very much. Thank you. Appreciate you so much for being here. Please state your name for the record and proceed with your public comment.
Yeah. My name is Emily Abendroth. I live in Cobbs Creek in West Philadelphia and I'm a PGW repair I'm testifying today in regards to the PGW capital budget. I realize City Council members have a lot on their plate today so I just want to appreciate you hearing our part, and I also just want to name how much I appreciated the rigorous questioning that you were asking of many other things. And I would hope that in future years there would be a distinctly rigorous questioning of the PGW capital budget from here forward. And I really just want to acknowledge how much is on deck. I know, Councilmember Thomas at one point, you had spoken last year about having an additional session around the climate goals of this city and that PGW would be one of the witnesses for that to try to speak to what ways they were trying to meet the 2050 goals. And so, I think we're just trying to name how much we would love to see that progressed forward, and we know it is very unlikely that something is going to happen today that changes the 2026 capital budget, but we just want to name you could contact the PUC right now to urge them to scrutinize the rate hike. People are going to be nailed with increasing utility budgets of every kind, water, electric, gas, groceries and we would love to see you stand up for that population and also to help us, back us. This will be my very last sentence. As we as community organizations are trying to intervene over and over, PGW has aggressively tried to prevent that. If you could support us as we try to enter these spaces so that it can be a democratic and transparent institution as a municipally-owned utility. Thank you very much. Apologies for the time. (Applause.)
Thank you. Thank you very much for your public comment. The Chair now recognizes Councilman Thomas for a quick response.
I just want to say thank you for your testimony today. I know you've been waiting hours to get that comment on the record and I want you to know you did not waste your time. As you were communicating your testimony, I'm sitting here with my colleague who's actually a Board member of the utility company and we actually agreed as you were testifying that we will do a hearing in the fall. We did one last year. We'll do it again this year. We'll examine where we are as it relates to carbon neutrality and other issues that we committed to. And we'll look at some of the things that you just raised. So please be on the look-out for that notice that'll come in the fall. And I want to thank you and all of the advocates who came with you for keeping that on our radar. It's very important. We have a lot of things on our plate. And without you reminding us that this is important, you know, it helps us do our job. So thank you so much. Appreciate it.
Thank you. Thank you very much, Councilmember Thomas. The Clerk will call the next set of folks to give public comment.
Karen Melton, Steve Greenspan, Emily Davis, Linnea Bond, Patrick Houston and Pamela Darville. (Witnesses approached witness table.)
All right. Please approach the witness table, state your name for the record and proceed with your public comment. Thank you.
My name is Emily Davis. I live in Philadelphia for 40 years. I agree with all of the speakers before me. But I wanted to remind people that in 2017 the City Council committed to making its own operations carbon neutral by 2050. In 2019 City Council extended that commitment to 100% renewable energy for municipal operations by 2030, electricity citywide by 2035 and everything, including heat and transportation, by 2050. We own PGW. Should PGW not follow the goals set by City Council? Right now PGW is fighting change. They attempted to enact a regulation that would bar public organizations from intervening in their budget process and they're now retaliating against public organizations who are challenging the rate change. This budget demonstrates that PGW leadership does not care about the city or its own workers. We and they know there are better options. After all, PGW was a partner with the Office of Sustainability in the diversification study that was published four years ago. PGW can also see the process being made by other communities and utility companies. I ask that City Council please make sure that PGW budget supports the City's commitment to green energy future.
Thank you. Thank you very much for your public comment. Please state your name for the record and proceed with your public comment.
Good afternoon. My name is Patrick Houston. I'm here testifying in regard to Bill 250528, PGW's capital budget. I'm with the Here for Climate Justice Coalition, Housing Equity Repair and Electrification for Climate Justice. We work for safe, affordable housing and energy and home repair across the city of Philadelphia. I'll just say -- I'm going to abbreviate my testimony. On my way home yesterday I was reminded of why we do this work. I looked up at the sky. I saw the haziness from forest fires as far away as Canada. And then this morning I think many of us may have received that notification on our phones about that dangerous air quality, the air quality alerts. So we know fossil fuels are cooking our planet. They're worsening our air quality and they're raising our cost of living. And in fact, right now as folks have already mentioned So very briefly the public utility of Pennsylvania, Public Utility Commission, is considering a rate hike proposed by PGW. So everyone in this room, everyone in this city who pays a bill to PGW can expect an increase of about 140 million -- $140 per household on average from this rate hike. Just to summarize this all up, this is all to say on the one hand the budget opens this opportunity for Council to engage in this process and to push PGW towards thinking about how are we securing affordable and sustainable energy for our city and align with the rest of our social equity goals, our economic opportunity goals and our racial justice goals. And so, would urge -- we know this is the 11th hour for this budget but to recognize that opportunity. And I will say one last thing. Things that make me hopeful is that willingness to engage as we just saw demonstrated by Councilmember Thomas and Driscoll. What makes me more concerned is PGW reticence to respond to public concern. (Applause.)
Thank you. Thank you very much for your public comment. Please state your name for the record and proceed with your public comment.
Thank you. My name is Linnea Bond. I'm a Spring Garden resident and the Director of Education for Physicians for Social Responsibility Pennsylvania. PSRPA is one of the groups intervening in the PGW rate case at the PUC right now, where as you heard PGW is asking for multiple forms of rate increases because gas demand is declining, which is both a climate necessity and a marketplace reality. More and more people are confronting PGW saying we need planning and solutions that aren't supplied by the fossil fuel industry, whose financial interests run contrary to declining demand and climate change. But PGW is responding to the more and more people who want to solve this, who are concerned for health, affordability, job security, for labor and climate change. They're responding to those who are legally intervening with discovery requests demanding internal documents and information on our members, violating First Amendment rights, similar to attacks we see at the national level, supported by a constitution defying federal government. In addition to needing budgets that match now six-year-old Resolution 190728 to end Philadelphia's methane use by 2050, I ask you to stand up for the people who are trying to participate in and enable others to participate in this conversation that affects their pocketbooks and the planet we live on. Thank you. (Applause.)
Thank you very much for your public comment and for being here today, each of you. Thank you very much. The Clerk will please call the next set of witnesses to provide public comment.
Pamela Darville, Devneet Kainth, Melissa Austroff and Mitch Chanin. (Witnesses approached witness table.)
Thank you very much for your patience and thank you for being here. Please state your name for the record and proceed with your public comment.
Good afternoon. My name is Devneet Kainth. I'm concerned about Bill 9 250528, the budget proposed by PGW. I've been a resident of Philly for eight years. I'm a PGW ratepayer and I'm also a student doctor at Drexel. I have a Master's in public health and I'm on the Board of Physicians for Social Responsibility Pennsylvania. I plan to be an OB/GYN and to work every day to keep mothers healthy and to bring babies into this world safely. PGW's plans to continue investment into fossil fuel infrastructure does not align with those goals. Numerous studies have already linked air pollution and climate change to severe diseases such as asthma, high blood pressure and cancer and also increased health care costs, especially in a city where in children are suffering from asthma. This is undeniably a poor investment into our health and futures. Additionally, it must be recognized that low-income residents will be the most burdened by this approach, including me, a no-income student. The proposal increases utility rates as people have said, and I'm concerned about the poor health outcomes that this will exacerbate in my patients. Today I ask Council to protect their constituents from the rate increases, the retaliatory discovery from PGW and compel PGW to require transparent plans to an affordable and renewable future. (Applause.)
Thank you. Thank you very much for your public comment. Please state your name for the record and proceed with your testimony. Mitch is one of the members of our Committee on the Environment's Advisory Committee, so we appreciate the work that you've done. Please proceed with your public comment.
Thanks so much. Mitch Chanin and I am a nearly lifelong Northeast Philly resident and a member of the union family, and I'm here to testify primarily about 250528, the PGW capital budget. If it's okay. I just want to mention very briefly on the H.O.M.E. plan. I remain really confused how we're handling Basic System Repair when the plan is to not increase funding substantially, yet raise the income cap for people who are eligible when there are already thousands of people waiting. And I would just ask that City Council please provide robust oversight for the rollout of the H.O.M.E. plan, particularly the home repair elements. I don't understand how it's supposed to work to increase the eligibility to people with higher incomes while there are thousands of people at the current income level who are waiting when we're not increasing funding. How is that going to work? How are we going to make sure people get their homes fixed on the PGW capital budget? I don't want to repeat too much of what has been said. I share the values and goals and concerns that people have already raised and I want to say a couple additional things. So I appreciate the work that the Gas Commission does to review PGW budgets. The Gas Commission is not resourced to or mandated to review PGW business plans or budgets for compliance with the city's climate goals or even its long-term business viability. A number of us -- I'm part of POWER Interfaith. Seven of our organizations are currently challenging PGW's proposed rate increase at the Public Utility Commission. We're opposing rate increases that will be unaffordable for people who are already struggling. And in addition, we're asking the Public Utility Commission to mandate a new kind of long-term planning to bring PGW budgets, investments and business plans into line with the city's climate goals and the changing energy marketplace. As people mentioned, demand for gas is declining while PGW is increasing its infrastructure expenditures on gas. That is not a viable long- term plan. So we're asking the PUC to take responsibility for creating a new long-term planning process. We would love for City Council to add their voices to tell the PUC that they think that's a good idea. We have just submitted voluminous expert testimony that's very good. We can share it with you if you'd like to review it. Finally, on that point, as people have mentioned, PGW's lawyers are being extremely hostile and aggressive towards organizations representing the public who are trying to take part in this process by demanding that we provide private information, meeting notes, strategy, internal emails, information about our members. None of that is necessary. I regard that as a hostile attack on public participation. They and their lawyers need to decide by tomorrow if they're going to force us to litigate on this. And that's just a big waste of everyone's time. Our funds should not be used for this kind of litigation. It's a waste of their time and our time. I'd hope that you will just ask them to stop. There's no need for that. Finally -- I know I need to wrap up. One more thing I want to share. We're very pleased that PGW is proposing its first geothermal pilot project in East Mount Airy, serving the McCloskey School and Dorothy Emanuel Rec Center. That's great, but it's not nearly enough. I'd like to see the City, the school district and PGW, integrate our capital planning so that we can look at how that kind of infrastructure can be built across the city to provide affordable cooling for city and school district facilities that don't have it and to reduce our carbon footprint and our utility bills. So thank you. (Applause.)
Thank you. Thank you, Mitch. Thank you for being here. And I apologize for the rush, but we certainly appreciate all of your great work and the work of each of you. Is there anyone else here to provide testimony during public comment whose name has not been called? (No response.)
Okay. Anyone else here to provide public comment whose name has not been called? Please approach the witness table. You can state your name for the record and proceed with your public comment. (Witness approached witness table.)
Good afternoon, Madam Chair. Mo Rushdy, the President of the Philadelphia Building Industry Association. I know we're running behind today so I promise this will be 90 seconds. I just wanted to share my experience that I have been part of the Board of the H.O.M.E. Initiative that included a lot of nonprofits, for-profits, stakeholders from within the community and there was questions about the existing programs versus new programs. One of the things that I personally caution anyone to do is to do new programs for the sake of doing new programs. We do know that some specific programs work very well. BSRP works very well, subsidizing and providing gap financing for affordable housing, preserving and new construction. We have about $255 million out of the $800 million going there to preserve affordable housing. We know that Turn the Key has done fabulous things in the neighborhoods. They have enabled equity in neighborhoods. People are staying in their homes. They're getting about a couple $100,000 of equity day one. It is the best program in the country and that's why over $120 million of the $800 million going towards Turn the Key. There is $44 million that's going towards small landlord repairs. I'm sure a lot of people were here during yesterday's hearings and were talking about that we have 40,000 properties that are rundown, that need money to get repaired. We have to know that a lot of these properties are running on fumes. For someone to change a roof, they don't have the $10,000 to change the roof. And at the end of the day, the tenant suffers. So the programs that are in the initiative are very well- thought through. They are through actually asking around the communities and the people to see what actually works versus what doesn't. The Accelerator Fund, $26 million, I chair the Philadelphia Accelerator Fund. $5 million has leveraged $50 million worth of projects. $50 million worth of projects leverage 200 affordable units for 100% Black- and Brown-owned businesses. So we were talking about $26 million for Accelerator Fund. That comes to about $250 million worth of projects for 100% Black- and Brown-owned developers that's going to have an economic impact of over $1.25 billion and it's going to create over 1000 homes, 51% of them at least affordable, 500% Black and Brown businesses. So again, this program has thought of everyone in every aspect, preservation and new construction. There was no special interest going into this. This was really about what is best for the communities. And so, I support the Mayor's $800 million bond program and the programs that have been outlined breaking down that $800 million. Thank you so much.
Thank you. Thank you very, very much for your public comment and thank you for being here. Is there anyone else here to provide public comment whose name has not been called? (No response.)
Okay. Seeing none, we thank you all so much for being here. We will now proceed with our public meeting on the previously mentioned bills. Clerk, will you please call the roll to take attendance. Members that are in attendance will please indicate that you are present when your name is called.
I am present. A quorum of the committee is present and I'd like to thank each and every member of the Committee on Finance for being here today for this marathon hearing. I appreciate each and every one of you and thank you for your great work on the committee. I'd also like to thank all of the witnesses who have provided testimony today and all of the witnesses who provided public comment. We certainly appreciate each and every one of you. We will now stand in recess until June 4, 2025, at 5:00 p.m. Okay. The Committee on Finance will be in recess until 5:00 p.m. today. We will now entertain a motion to that effect. Thank you.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I make a motion that the Committee on Finance stand in recess until 5:00 p.m. this afternoon. (Duly seconded.)
It has been moved and properly seconded that the Committee on Finance stand in recess until 5:00 p.m. today. All those in favor will indicate by stating aye. (Aye.)
The ayes have it. And the Committee on Finance's public meeting will stand in recess until 5:00 p.m. today. Thank you all so much for being here. And as an announcement, we have our Madam Chair Lady of Rules here. The Rules Committee hearing will start at 2:45 p.m. Thank you. (Recess.)
The Committee on Finance will now reconvene the committee. Will the Clerk please call the roll to take attendance.
A quorum of the committee having been established, we will now make a motion to recess City Council's Committee on Finance until 6:30 p.m. tonight.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I make a motion for the committee to stand in recess until 6:30 tonight. (Duly seconded.)
It has been seconded that the Committee on Finance stand in recess until 6:30 p.m. (Aye.)
The ayes have it and the motion carries. The committee will stand in recess until 6:30 p.m. The committee will be in recess until 6:30 p.m. Thank you very much. We would also like to recognize the presence of Councilmember Cindy Bass. The Committee on Finance's public meeting will stand for a brief recess until 6:30 p.m. Thank you. (Recess.)
Good evening. We are now reconvening City Council's Committee on Finance. Will the Clerk please call the roll to take attendance.
A quorum of the committee having been noted, the Chair also recognizes the presence of Councilmember Curtis Jones, Jr. A quorum having been noted, we will now make a motion to recess City Council's Committee on Finance until 8:30 p.m. tonight.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I make a motion for the committee to stand in recess until 8:30 tonight. (Duly seconded.)
It has been seconded that the Committee on Finance stand in recess until 8:30 p.m. (Aye.)
The ayes have it and the motion carries. The committee will stand in recess until 8:30 p.m. Thank you all so much. Thank you. (Recess.)
Good evening. We are now reconvening City Council's Committee on Finance. Will the Clerk please call the roll to take attendance.
A quorum of the committee having been noted, we will now make a motion to recess City Council's Committee on Finance until tomorrow June 5, 2025 at 10:00 a.m.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I make a motion for the committee to stand in recess until June 5, 2025 at 10:00 a.m. (Duly seconded.)
It has been seconded that the Committee on Finance stand in recess until tomorrow, June 5, 2025 at 10:00 a.m. (Aye.)
The ayes have it and the motion carries. The committee will stand in recess until June 5, 2025 at 10:00 a.m. Thank you all so much. Thank you. (Recess.)
Good afternoon. I note that the time has come and a quorum of the committee is present. Therefore, we will resume the public meeting of the Committee on Finance. Clerk, will you please call the roll.
Present. I would also like to note for the record the presence of Councilmember Gauthier. And I'd also like to note for the record that Bill No. 9 250324 is being held. Thank you. A quorum of the committee is present. The Chair recognizes Vice-Chair Bass for a motion on Bill No. 250569.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I move that Bill No. 18 250569 be reported from this committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended to permit first reading of this bill at the next session of Council. (Duly seconded.)
It has been moved and properly seconded that Bill No. 5 250569 be reported from this committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended as to permit first reading of this bill at the next session of Council. All those in favor will indicate by stating aye. (Aye.)
The ayes have it and the motion carries. Bill No. 21 250569 will be reported from this committee with a favorable recommendation with a request that the rules of Council be suspended to permit first reading at the next session of Council. The Chair now recognizes Vice-Chair Bass for a motion on Bill No. 250570.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I move that Bill No. 9 250570 be reported from this committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended to permit first reading of this bill at the next session of Council. (Duly seconded.)
It has been moved and properly seconded that Bill No. 20 250570 be reported from this committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended as to permit first reading of this bill at the next session of Council. All those in favor of the motion will indicate by saying aye. (Aye.)
The ayes have it and the motion carries. Bill No. 13 250570 will be reported from this committee with a favorable recommendation with a request that the rules of Council be suspended as to permit first reading at the next session of Council. The Chair now recognizes Councilmember Bass for a motion on the amendment to Bill No. 250332.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I offer an amendment to Bill No. 250332. A copy of the amendment has been circulated to all members of the committee and I move that the amendment to Bill No. 5 250332 be approved. (Duly seconded.)
The Chair notes for the record that Councilmember Jones seconds the motion. It has been moved and properly seconded that the amendment to Bill No. 250332 be approved. All those in favor of the motion will signify by stating aye. (Aye.)
The ayes have it and an amendment to Bill No. 250332 has been approved. The Chair recognizes Councilmember Bass for a motion on Bill No. 250332 as amended.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I move that Bill No. 7 250332 as amended be reported from this committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended to permit first reading of this bill at the next session of Council. (Duly seconded.)
It has been moved and properly seconded that Bill No. 18 250332 as amended be reported from this committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended as to permit first reading of this bill the next session of Council. All those in favor of the motion will signify by stating aye. (Aye.)
The ayes have it and the motion carries. Bill No. 11 250332 as amended will be reported from this committee with a favorable recommendation with a request that the rules of Council be suspended to permit first reading at the next session of Council. The Chair now recognizes Vice-Chair Bass for a motion on Bill No. 241024.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I move that Bill No. 24 241024 be reported from this committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended to permit first reading of this bill at the next session of Council. (Duly seconded.)
It has been moved and properly seconded that Bill No. 11 241024 be reported from this committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended as to permit first reading of this bill at the next session of Council. All those in favor of the motion will signify by stating aye. (Aye.)
The ayes have it and the motion carries. Bill No. 4 241024 will be reported from this committee with a favorable recommendation with a request that the rules of Council be suspended to permit first reading at the next session of Council. The Chair recognizes Vice-Chair Bass for a motion on Bill No. 250567.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I move that Bill No. 16 250567 be reported from this committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended to permit first reading of this bill at the next session of Council. (Duly seconded.)
It has been moved and properly seconded that Bill No. 3 250567 be reported from this committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended as to permit first reading of this bill at the next session of Council. All those in favor of the motion will signify by stating aye. (Aye.)
The ayes have it and the motion carries. Bill No. 20 250567 will be reported from this committee with a favorable recommendation with a request that the rules of Council be suspended to permit first reading at the next session of Council. The Chair now recognizes Vice-Chair Bass for a motion on Bill No. 250571.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I move that Bill No. 8 250571 be reported from this committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended to permit first reading of this bill at the next session of Council. (Duly seconded.)
It has been moved and properly seconded that Bill No. 19 250571 be reported from this committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended to first reading of this bill at the next session of Council. All those in favor of the motion will signify by stating aye. (Aye.)