COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA PUBLIC HEARING COMMITTEE ON FINANCE - - - Room 696, City Hall Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Thursday, June 13, 2002 9:35 a.m. - - - RESOLUTION 020285 - Approving the annual program statement and budget for the expenditure of the NTI bond proceeds for Fiscal Year 2003. - - - PRESENT: COUNCILWOMAN JANNIE BLACKWELL, Chair COUNCILWOMAN MARIAN B. TASCO, Vice Chair COUNCILMAN DAVID COHEN COUNCILMAN FRANK DICICCO COUNCILMAN JAMES F. KENNEY COUNCILMAN MICHAEL A. NUTTER COUNCILMAN BRIAN O'NEILL - - - VINCENT VARALLO ASSOCIATES, INC. Registered Professional Reporters Eleven Penn Center 1835 Market Street, Suite 600 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103 (215) 561-2220 I N D E X RESOLUTION 020285 PAGE PATRICIA SMITH, Director of Neighborhood Transformation ......................... 3 6/13/02 - FINANCE - RESOLUTION 020285
Good morning. Thank you for your patience. This is a continuation of the Finance hearing regarding the NTI resolution, Resolution 020285. Let me say as an opening statement that we have been working tirelessly to try to come up with something. And I say this particularly to the Members of the Committee as well as to the Administration, to try to come up with some way to satisfy all sides concerned to pass the NTI resolution. It is our goal and our concern to pass this resolution, not only because it is tied to CDBG, but certainly in the spirit of trying to get this program started, we really, really are interested to pass this resolution. Having said that, we have heard the concerns of my colleagues and certainly are prepared to pass out two suggested amendments. I'm sorry I couldn't get them to you sooner, but we really just got them together. I'm going to ask the Clerk to pass out two resolutions, one deals with Basic Systems Repair Program and the other deals with retaining walls, alleys, driveways, curbs and sidewalks and calls, 4 6/13/02 - FINANCE - RESOLUTION 020285 certainly, for a study of all of these various areas that concern so many of my colleagues. I talked to Councilwoman Krajewski who's not on this committee, who is committed to driveways, and many of the other of us are committed to curbs and sidewalks and get complaints at every community meeting. What we want to do is get a cost analyst on what it would cost to do these and, certainly, to have a detailed study City-wide of what this entails. And so these are the two resolutions that I'm asking my colleagues on the Committee if they would read, if they would consider in order for us to try to pass this program statement, part of the NTI resolution. And I would also like to say, having said that, and I'm going to ask the Administration as well to consider -- and we're passing out copies now -- to consider these. These are issues that are very, very important to each Councilperson in his or her district. Certainly, I'm willing to make myself available all summer long for discussion on this. I say to my colleagues, I'm willing to be a conduit for our concerns between the Administration and City 5 6/13/02 - FINANCE - RESOLUTION 020285 Council. I'm now open for any questions or discussion. Oh, let me say before that, that we do have a quorum. To my right is the Vice Chair Councilwoman Tasco; to her right, Councilman Nutter; to his right, Councilman Cohen; and to my left, Councilman DiCicco. Thank you all for coming. Councilwoman Tasco.
Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I say this as a point of information and also a point of concern. In late '98 when the Mayor was still President of City Council, because we have constantly raised this issue, raised it when he was President of City Council, we put in resolution, had hearings around the issue of retaining walls, curbs, sidewalks, driveways. The same issue has been ongoing for years. He pulled together in late '98 maybe early 1999 -- well, I guess it was '98 because he left in '99, so it must have been '98. A committee of all of the City departments, to the Law Department, Streets Department, every department that would have some jurisdiction over trying to 6 6/13/02 - FINANCE - RESOLUTION 020285 address this issue and promised that they would come up with a resolution of this issue as we are getting here today in this memo. And it seems to me that we are no further along because that was an issue then and has been as long as I've been on Council, 7 years. And then when we attempted to pull together 8 all these parties, there's been no follow through on 9 this, and I'm just concerned about what we're going 10 to get because that's what I thought was in the 11 works to begin with. That was in 1998. 12
Let me say, 13 from my point of view -- I know, I've been around 14 here since January 1976; obviously, not elected 15 until 1992. But I've been around here a very long time and have file drawers full of requests from members of the community who are interested in curbs and sidewalks and who have legitimate concerns. The trees break the sidewalk, they're old. It's really terrible and it really begs attention, the whole issue. However, I would like to say that certainly this Committee with our membership has not considered it nor have I personally been in the forefront as Chair of the Committee to make sure 7 6/13/02 - FINANCE - RESOLUTION 020285 that something is done. And I'm asking the Committee the opportunity. The worse we could lose is a couple months. I would say if we can't get it done, then let's come back in September and amend it so that we can do whatever it is that we need to do. I'm asking this Committee if they would consider giving us an opportunity or giving me an opportunity to try to prevail upon the Administration -- and we're asking the Administration, we're going to ask you to respond to try to come up with -- Certainly, I remember when former Mayor Goode was the leader of our City and he promised to come up with a program dealing with curbs and sidewalks. And in spite of all else he did, he did not do that after a public promise to do that. I remember because I waited and waited and waited for it and said at community meetings that a plan would be forthcoming. But having said that, it just didn't happen. But I'm asking the Committee to give us an opportunity as a Committee to work through another plan. Certainly, I had no formal input, was not leading Finance Committee at that time. And, 8 6/13/02 - FINANCE - RESOLUTION 020285 again, I say if it does not work to my colleagues, then we have the opportunity to come back in September and amend the resolution and do whatever it is we think we need to do. Comments? Councilman Cohen.
Madam Chair, I've been on the question of retaining walls and driveways because in the 17th Ward our need for curbs and sidewalks is not nearly as great as the need for repavement of driveways and preventing retaining walls from collapsing. For many years I was stunned after being told by the Administration that studies were under way to find that -- with David L. Cohen at the time. He was Mayor Rendell's Chief of Staff. I raised the issue with him. I said, "David, what's happening all these years?" You know what? He had never heard of the problem. He didn't know what I was talking about. It's the only issue in which I found David L. Cohen knew absolutely nothing about because nobody in the Administration, despite continuous reports to us that they were working on the problem, that there were difficulties in getting contractors 9 6/13/02 - FINANCE - RESOLUTION 020285 to do the paving because the old system of getting homeowners to sign contracts. Apparently a lot of homeowners found the cost so onerous that they didn't meet the contractual obligation. The contractors felt they weren't getting paid. You know, this thing has been studied to death. But I would be willing to put everything together. I think your arguments, if they're valid for retaining walls, driveways, curbs, and sidewalks, they're certainly valid for the subjects we're talking about in NIT (sic). I don't recollect that before NIT came that there was this kind of detailed study that you're talking about. But if there is, I would like to see it. Because I haven't yet seen any kind of detailed study that came before we talk about $300 million. And I think your proposal might be a meaningful one if everything were thrown in the hopper together. Let's study it all together. The weakness is in having a NIT program with no 21 planning. I still haven't had an answer to anything I've asked about continuously in the 17th Ward where I'm the democratic ward leader and meet on a daily basis with homeowners that are worried 10 6/13/02 - FINANCE - RESOLUTION 020285 about their property values going down, worried about the deteriorating quality of life because the retaining walls and driveways are so bad. Why don't we just leave everything go over the summertime. And I would be delighted then to participate in a study of everything, come out in the fall vigorously with a program for NIT that we could use to answer questions and at the same time solve this issue, too. Incidentally, I don't know that it would harm NIT at all. My understanding is that there's about $20 million available for demolition. I don't know how anybody would spend that money over July, August, and part of September anyway. So if there is any immediate program needed for demolition, seems to me everything is there for it. So I would say why don't we do this: Why don't we take the agenda before us this morning and hold it and come back refreshed, make all the studies we want to make. As a Member of the Committee, I pledge to work with you, Madam Chair, on the Committee to move ahead on this. I'm willing to dedicate the summertime to this and to any necessary action on 11 6/13/02 - FINANCE - RESOLUTION 020285 that wage tax exemption for the working people of Philadelphia. I'm willing to devote the whole summer to those kind of problems so we can move Philadelphia forward. Thanks, Madam Chair.
Thank you, Councilman. What we are requesting is that we pass this resolution with the ability to amend it in the fall if we're not satisfied with the study. Therein, we will have what we can spend and the circumstances surrounding that, including issues that are listed here today. And we're asking that we pass the NTI resolution with these amendments in place that call for the study so we can get a legitimate study done, have the study funded through NTI so we can come back in the fall with a formal detailed extensive study City-wide on what is required. That's what we're asking today. We're asking you to pass out the NTI resolution with these amendments that call for this formal detailed study City-wide in all these areas.
Seems to me, it's an unbalanced request. Maybe I'm missing something. Seems to me, you're saying, "Let's pass the NTI 12 6/13/02 - FINANCE - RESOLUTION 020285 completely and then in return we'll agree to study a problem with no indication of any support for whatever comes from the study." Seems to me we ought to have a balanced approach. Let's use the same approach on both. Because actually, Madam Chair, the issue of sidewalks, curbs, retaining walls and driveways is much older as a Council subject than the issue of total demolition and prayers for developers to come along in areas of the City that they never come along on. And I'd like some proof of that fact. We can use the summer so that the Administration can show us who's going to develop the areas in the 17th Ward that need development and in any other area except the Center City area. Who's going to go to Mantua, for example, and develop the open space there? I'd like to hear of a developer and what his plans are for that. Who's going to go to the other areas in the northern part of the City, north of Market Street. Because I don't find any developers eager anywhere. I'd like to learn if they exist. We'd like to support that development.
Certainly, when 13 6/13/02 - FINANCE - RESOLUTION 020285 it comes to the 3rd District, I could talk for the next two hours our plans and private developers who want to come in, et cetera. We have ours planned out. We've been working on that a very long time. However, because in 1999, remember, I announced a 10-year plan for my own district. So that's another discussion. I could talk to you in detail about that. But our goal is for NTI to fund this study in these specific areas. That is why I'm asking the Committee to pass this out, to do a detailed study for curbs and sidewalks, driveways, as well as retaining walls. Certainly, the City may have more information about retaining walls than the other areas. It's going to take time and money and we want the NTI and we're asking Ms. Smith to absorb the expense of whatever it costs to have a detailed City-wide study in all three areas so that we can come back ready to deal with these issues and also funding, what it would require to do the work. And this is why we're asking Council to consider passing the resolution. Certainly, it is always our right, it's our resolution, we can amend it, we can do whatever it is we choose to do. But that is why I'm 14 6/13/02 - FINANCE - RESOLUTION 020285 asking this morning because I wanted us to have a charge of the summer. I wanted us to be ready to move forward with something. And it seemed to me after hearing -- we tried to come up with a resolution that would incorporate everyone's concerns. And it seems to me that with retaining walls, as Councilman Nutter has been leading that battle; driveways, Councilwoman Krajewski; and curbs and sidewalks, everybody else; it seems to me that we tried to incorporate -- we're dealing with trees, thanks to some of you as well. And if we deal with these issues and have a detailed study, we finally have at least a handle, a formal handle on these big issues that plague our communities. I've also pledged, certainly, myself to be involved. I will put my reputation on the line in terms of commitment to making sure that we have something real that we can bring to you. I will make sure that I pester the Administration, if it takes that, all summer long so that we can come back to this Committee with a detailed, specific plan and cost analysis so that we can move forward. So that is my -- my goal is not only to try to appeal to not only this Committee, but to all 15 6/13/02 - FINANCE - RESOLUTION 020285 Members of Council in a way that can have us move forward and so that we have our directions as this Council ends today.
Is it a fact the City has available to it now without action on this resolution the sum of approximately $20 million available for demolitions?
I don't know. The Administration will have to respond to that.
Well, I'd like to hear that because I'm looking for a way to move both programs ahead. It seems to me the curb and sidewalk, retaining walls, is not going to be anywhere near as expensive as the blight program. Why can't we do something and provide money for both at the same time so both programs can begin while they get further study? I'd be interested in that kind of proposal. It doesn't seem to me to be balanced to ask for approval of a total program in one area and only a study in the other. Why don't we provide some funds to get both programs under 16 6/13/02 - FINANCE - RESOLUTION 020285 way? And I understand that's already been done for NIT. Let's balance it with a similar funds for the other side and then make the studies. Incidentally, we don't have to solve the problem of the whole City on retaining walls. I mean, it's easy to study anything to death and say it's such a big program that, of course, we can't afford it. I can figure all of things it will cost billions of dollars and I'd defeat the proposal merely by studying how expensive it is. But there's some emergency problems where areas are being destabilized today adding to the blight of the City because the City's lack of attention to it. Why can't we put up some money at the same time we're putting up money for NIT? And then have a balanced approach to both and make whatever studies are needed in both areas. Because I'm not satisfied with the studies on NIT. I still haven't got, despite month after month of asking, any kind of program that enabled me -- for example, at the ward meeting Monday night, a question came up as to what does the blight program mean for the 17th Ward. I was in no 25 position to be able to say that apartment building 17 6/13/02 - FINANCE - RESOLUTION 020285 at 16th and Grange is going to be taken care of, Wister Street's going to be taken care of, Belfield Avenue, because nobody's come up with any plan. So that certainly needs a lot of study, too. So Madam Chair, how about a balanced plan on both, equal action on both? And it would be good for the neighborhoods because both programs are very important for the neighborhood. Thank you, Madam Chair.
You're welcome. We will ask the Administration to respond to the issue of demolition and monies.
Thank you. My name is Patricia Smith, Director of Neighborhood Transformation. In the legislation authorizing issuance of the financing for NTI, Council did authorize an initial expenditure for start-up costs up to $20 million, and it did lay out a process and procedure where action can be taken with respect to dangerous and eminently dangerous buildings under that in order to protect the health and safety of the City. In response to your question with 18 6/13/02 - FINANCE - RESOLUTION 020285 respect to the Administration, we're very much willing to work closely with Council, with you, on looking at very seriously -- and I can't speak for past Administrations, but looking very seriously at this issue of private infrastructure. I think we can't lose sight of the scale that we're looking at. And we do believe that a cost analysis is critical, but not only the cost, how do we finance that? The Administration agrees wholeheartedly with the statement in the resolution or in the amendment that the cost of repair and demand for financial assistance, since there are some homeowners that are not in a position to do these type of things, substantially outstrips our current resources, including the NTI bond proceeds. We're committed to working with you closely over the summer. We've already begun to pull people together to look at these issues.
Thank you very much. Certainly, we realize there are legitimate problems in all areas. And certainly, and I would say this to my colleague Councilman Nutter, that someone called our office who lives in Roxborough area. Does Magdalena Street ring -- I have no idea. 19 6/13/02 - FINANCE - RESOLUTION 020285 It's just a name to me. But one of my staff members came to me today about someone with whom we are associated who lives there and those severe problems dealing with retaining walls. We accept the fact that we have emergency issues and that dealing with retaining walls and these other areas, curbs and sidewalks and driveways, and we want to get about the business of having a legitimate way, an expeditious way that we approach resolving these issues. And that is why that I am asking the Committee to consider passing this resolution so that we can move forward. We can move forward in a positive direction. And, again, as I say, I'm making my commitment to be personally involved in this area and certainly to report back to you every step of the way with a legitimate study that deals with your areas and about which way we should go. Councilman Nutter.
Madam Chair, first, let me ask, who prepared this proposed amendment? 20 6/13/02 - FINANCE - RESOLUTION 020285
Well, I've had my staff working on it last night. When I left here at 10:00, my staff member Darwin Bouvier was still dealing with it.
I appreciate the effort. Obviously, this is something that I've been talking about and many other members have been working on and I absolutely appreciate the concern of the Chair. I would say, though, it is helpful in these kinds of matters if the person who is directly involved could have some opportunity to review these items. Now, let me just make sure I'm understanding the proposed amendment. The amendment has quite articulately laid out what the objective is, but the amendment also does not have, similar to the other amendment for Targeted Basic System Repair Program which we did see the other day, that amendment has a FY '03 Budget amount which we're being asked to approve in addition to an additional $2 million; is that correct?
But there is no 21 6/13/02 - FINANCE - RESOLUTION 020285 money allocated for the other proposed amendment relating to the retaining wall, alley, driveway, curb and sidewalk repair and reconstruction analysis; is that also true?
That is true. We don't know how much in each area it would cost. However, we are prepared -- and I have not had this discussion and I don't know. Not knowing how much it would cost, it's very difficult to talk about monies because we just have know idea the length and breadth and width of the problem. But I'm prepared to ask the Administration, Councilman, if we could do a pilot here for at least $500,000, which is nothing, but to put in to further amend this to at least include $500,000, not for the study but to go to something, to the direct funding of a plan and however it comes out.
I believe at a earlier public hearing the Administration did state that we could envision a demonstration pilot type of project and allocate approximately $500,000.
I thought you all said 250 and we were trying to push it a little further. 22 6/13/02 - FINANCE - RESOLUTION 020285
I don't quite remember. I'm sorry. Anyway, but with respect to the study itself, if there needs to be outside resources to conduct the study part, we would use bond proceeds for that, but we would make the appropriate resources available to support any type of expert to help us with the study and the analysis.
Again, we always felt very strongly that we really wanted to just look -- be able to have some resources to test out a couple of strategies with respect to retaining walls, particularly if there was the possibility of using new technologies that can significantly reduce the cost. But there's also other issues like how do we structure a program where there's shared responsibility between the private homeowner? Or if there's a situation where a homeowner does not have the resources, can we use some of our existing programs like PHIL Loan to help support some of this type of repair work? So basically we saw it as a seed grant, a way to get things started.
And you and I have 23 6/13/02 - FINANCE - RESOLUTION 020285 had discussions about a different dollar amount.
Well, we specifically talked about $2 million. If we're just doing a seed program or a pilot program, you're going to control how much is actually spent, and I assume, knowing you, that you're going to be diligent about the dollars. I mean, the reality is that $500,000 for this kind of problem is not a great amount of money. $2 million is a more legitimate amount that gets to actually what was recommended by the Streets Department sometime ago to legitimately start a program and have a funding amount that would actually allow you to do something. But at the end of day, even if you had $2 million in there, it doesn't mean that you're going to spend all $2 million. And if you don't spend it all in a pilot program, you're going to roll it over into the FY '04 Budget. So why would you decline to just do the $2 million in the budget to demonstrate that this is a legitimate commitment to this, which $500,000, as you and I both know, does not represent? 24 6/13/02 - FINANCE - RESOLUTION 020285
As we stated in previous conversations, the Administration does have concern about whether or not this is the appropriate use for NTI bonds. If we get a sense of cost --
Not from a legal perspective but more from a policy perspective.
You said in your document that it was appropriate use for the dollars, in your own document.
I'm not talking about legally. You said in your document use of proceeds, that this was an eligible item; not from my document, not from anything that I wrote. It was your document.
It's an eligible activity from a technical standpoint of using tax exempt financing. But even when something is eligible, we can still make policy decisions.
So I was trying to correct 25 6/13/02 - FINANCE - RESOLUTION 020285 myself, Councilman. I was speaking more from not from the legal or the eligibility uses, but as a matter of policy. We did talk about that issue with respect to --
But I have to believe that as matter of policy, if you put in your document that this is an eligible activity that you must have made -- somebody made a decision to list that item as an eligible activity and the kind of thing you could use these dollars for.
That appeared under the part of this program statement which talked about tax exempt financing.
It talked about the NTI bonds and what they can be used for.
The rest of the program is broken out into the four categories, and we didn't talk about it.
I understand that. I'm not talking about what category anything was in. There is a page that talks about the NTI bonds. It goes from one page to the next page. And it lists probably 15 items that you can use the dollars for.
That's the intention, to 6/13/02 - FINANCE - RESOLUTION 020285 show eligible uses. But even when you have eligible uses, I'm just saying and I'm just clarifying -- I didn't realize it was a misunderstanding -- that just because it's an eligible use, as a matter of policy, one can still feel that this is not the way we want to spend the dollars because it's still a pot of money.
So just because it's in the document doesn't mean that it's actually going to happen; is that what you're saying?
The part that we are saying is the program part which speaks to blight elimination, which speaks to things like housing investment and neighborhood program. That's where we specify the specific program activities. The front part of the document was intentioned to set up the framework type of financing. Again, I apologize for the lack of clarity.
What was your involvement in the development of the amendment.
In this amendment, I was not involved in the development of this amendment.
You are the Director of the NTI Program. 27 6/13/02 - FINANCE - RESOLUTION 020285
Excuse me, one moment, Councilman. Let the Chair note that Councilman Kenney is also in attendance. Thank you. Councilman, resume your questions. Thank you.
With regard to the items that are mentioned in the document and whether you had involvement in it or not, you appear to be in agreement with it, the information that is going to be studied or that you feel that there is a compelling need to have a study for, it is my -- it's already been studied. The information is there, it was done by the government. No better source of information. It's been laid out on the public record. There were public hearings about this particular issue. The Streets Department did a City-wide study on this. They know where all the walls are. They came up with a cost estimate not based on new technology, but on stone and mortar, which no one is going to do and no one is ever gong to do because that kind of worker doesn't exist anymore. We already know what the new technology 28 6/13/02 - FINANCE - RESOLUTION 020285 is. The people with the technology came and testified in a public hearing a year and a half ago. There is no need for any study or more work. There were hearings back in June of 2000, October and November on 2000 on a resolution, Resolution No. 41. There was a bill passed to set up a funding structure, Bill 000660, had hearings in November of 200 and signed was in January of '01. The work that you're talking about has already been completed. There is no need for any study. There is a need for work and action to be taken. That's the only issue here. Let's go back over what Councilman Cohen asked. You have $20 million that you can spend?
As I stated, the legislation authorizes expenditure up to $20 million.
There are a number of things that we hope to accomplish over the summer. As we've indicated in the back of the NTI Program 29 6/13/02 - FINANCE - RESOLUTION 020285 statement, we envision finishing field inspections in a number of areas. I'm assuming that we can get the appropriate sign-offs in timely manner, begin to put the package together for advertising. Some of the other things that we hope to do is the Redevelopment Authority -- the Redevelopment Authority has begun to work with District Councilpeople around acquisition requests to make sure that we have a complete and comprehensive listing for acquisition activity. To support the acquisition request, we would be seeking allocation of state volume cap money to support acquisition activities. We would be funding the Homeownership Repair Program which is a moderate rehab program, beginning to market that to small contractors and developers in addition to CDCs. We will be funding the Targeted Basic System Repair Program. There are a number of organizations that have already approached us about how they can do outreach in marketing to use those resources in support of other activities. We'll be funding the PHIL Loan Program. We'll funding things like beginning to put in place resources to start the Vacant Property Management Information System. 30 6/13/02 - FINANCE - RESOLUTION 020285
And you expect to pay for those programs out of the $20 million?
The priority for the initial expenditure would be to make sure we have enough resources available to continue not only the NTI, but what we call the targeted demolition strategy.
Excuse me, one moment, Ms. Smith. Please, we are still trying to conduct our business of the finance hearing on NTI. Could we please ask everyone to adhere to keeping our voices down. It's just difficult to hear in this room. Thank you. Excuse me.
What demolition activity do you expect over the summer?
We will always and continue to do what we call the regular curb side demolitions in response to health and safety activities. In addition, we would need -- you know, the way the City system is structured you need to when you, I think, advertise or put the package together for demolition activity, before you can advertise that, you have to have resources available and encumbered for the contract. So we go back and look at the 31 6/13/02 - FINANCE - RESOLUTION 020285 master schedule will shows where we see the advertisement, that would be projection on what we need dollars in place in order to go to that advertisement.
That recollection is that's going to start somewhere in the September-October time period.
No. I think we're looking to advertise some bid packages prior to that. I have to go look up the information.
Now, we've also had discussion about, from my perspective at least, separating as agenda items retaining walls from curb, sidewalk, driveway issues. You and I have had that discussion. I've taken the perspective that the retaining wall that helps to hold up a driveway and the houses attached to it, if it is in a deteriorated or dangerous condition, it is as dangerous as an abandoned property which we will always take action on. Curb, sidewalk, driveway issues I have separated out for our discussion as a 32 6/13/02 - FINANCE - RESOLUTION 020285 different type of element. But could you put the policy of the Administration on the record and tell us why you're not looking to do anything in that area?
Again, I think we weren't able to really come to terms with much would fund a demonstration project at. The Administration really wanted to get a better sense of -- in our meeting with the Chief of Staff, I believe she explained how she really wanted to get a better sense of what the potential cost is before we allocated a dollar amount.
And to follow up on something mentioned by Councilman Cohen, but even the NTI Program, I think, at its best -- and I would like the program to work and I want the program to go forward and serve all the neighborhoods -- NTI will not solve all the problems throughout Philadelphia; is that correct?
And we have 26,000 vacant properties in the City; is that right?
But we only have a 33 6/13/02 - FINANCE - RESOLUTION 020285 plan to deal with 14,000 of them; is that correct?
But we've decided to move forward even though we can't solve the problem of the 26,000 vacant properties of the City, we made a conscious decision it is the right decision to at least start to do something before we have figured out in totality how to deal with the all-encompassing problem of vacant properties in the City?
Now, there was a quote in the paper the other day about the curb and sidewall issue. You may be familiar with it. The Mayor's Chief of Staff was quoted as saying, "Curbs and sidewalks don't get you to stabilizing neighborhoods. If you have abandoned houses and nice curbs and sidewalks, you will not have accomplished anything." Do you remember reading that in the paper the other day?
I've had a very hectic week and have not had a chance to read the newspapers and keep up with newspapers. 34 6/13/02 - FINANCE - RESOLUTION 020285
I'm sure the Daily News is quite disappointed to hear that.
That was the quote in the paper. Do you have any perspective on that? Would that be the perspective of the NTI Office?
Again, as I said, as the Administration has said, we want to focus our resources on the elimination of the dangerous buildings, to begin putting resources together for land assembly, and to begin to do resources for occupied properties like home improvement loans and Basic System Repair Programs.
Would you have any idea why new curb and sidewalk and concrete street base were recently installed in the 1900 block of North Darien Street.
Would you have any perspective on having new curb and sidewalk placed on a street that had 22 occupied properties and 28 vacant properties on the street? 35 6/13/02 - FINANCE - RESOLUTION 020285
No, I really don't have -- I mean, I'm not aware of the situation. I don't really want to comment. I don't know how that decision was made. It could have been made years ago.
Ms. Smith, you don't think the block deteriorated in the last couple of years do you?
You don't think the block just fell apart in the last couple of years, do you.
No, I was just saying I really don't feel comfortable commenting on that particular situation because I don't know all the circumstances around it, how the decision was made or why it was made.
I'm not denying whether or 36 6/13/02 - FINANCE - RESOLUTION 020285 not it happened or not.
Well, if you had to choose between doing new curbs and sidewalks on a block that had occupied and 28 vacant versus 6 blocks that are fully occupied or maybe have one or 7 two vacants, which block do you think should get 8 that kind of treatment? 9
I would -- my personal 10 decision would probably be a block that does not 11 have that level or degree of vacancy. 12
Thank you so 15 much. 16 Are three more questions from Members of 17 this Committee? 18 (Discussion held off the record.) 19
Thank you very 20 much. It appears we are able to come to an 21 agreement about which way we should proceed. 22 Therefore, this hearing is recessed. Thank you. (Committee recessed at 10:15 a.m.) - - - 37 C E R T I F I C A T I O N I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing proceedings of the Council of the City of Philadelphia of June 13, 2002, were reported fully and accurately by me, and that this is a correct transcript of the same. RE: COMMITTEE ON FINANCE ___________________________ Lisa C. Bradley, RPR and Notary Public .