Thank you, Madam President. Good afternoon. MS. McCOLLOCH: Good afternoon.
I wanted to ask you a question to some degree following up on the Council President's Office about the new flow chart, and I continue to ask pretty much all the departments about this flow chart. You are in the flow chart under the Office of Commerce, am I correct, or you report to the Commerce Director? How does that -- MS. McCOLLOCH: Yes. I --
You report to the Deputy Mayor. MS. McCOLLOCH: I report to Deputy Mayor Andrew Altman.
But he's also the Commerce Director? MS. McCOLLOCH: Yes.
What is 322 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. your relationship with the Redevelopment Authority in that flow chart? MS. McCOLLOCH: The Redevelopment Authority, there's a contract between the Office of Housing and Community Development and the Redevelopment Authority. The Office of Housing and Community Development is the major funder of the Redevelopment Authority.
So that's the same as past years, where they're essentially contracting -- the bulk of their financing comes through the Office of Housing? MS. McCOLLOCH: Yes.
In terms of policy relating to housing, relating to disposition, anything relating to the prior contract -- because I'm assuming most of the property that was acquired through the Redevelopment Authority was acquired based on the contract with OHCD; am I correct? 323 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. MS. McCOLLOCH: Yes.
In terms of policy as it relates to land disposition, who determines how that land is disposed and the formula with respect to nominal consideration, market rate, some flexibility, since that money to purchase that land was contracted from OHCD? MS. McCOLLOCH: The policy is set by the Deputy Mayor, Andrew Altman.
So in years past, that policy was set by whom? MS. McCOLLOCH: It would have been last year -- well, it would have been the Secretary of Housing. That was the position before that.
So OHCD was never in a position to determine -- MS. McCOLLOCH: Well, OHCD has held the contract with the Redevelopment Authority. So it's -- I mean, OHCD is setting the policy. The City is setting the policy. That is carried out with the Redevelopment Authority. Now, the 324 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. Redevelopment Authority also has land that the Redevelopment Authority owns that could be --
Prior to OHCD's contract? MS. McCOLLOCH: Yes. The Redevelopment Authority owns land that it acquired before the contract with OHCD, yes.
This is my issue. You know what my issue is. If land was acquired with Block Grant dollars or some other dollars coming from the federal government that was part of a contract between OH and RDA, shouldn't the contracting entity and the entity that provided the funding determine how that land should be disposed of? MS. McCOLLOCH: If I understand the question, the RDA acquired some properties using --
For you guys. MS. McCOLLOCH: -- on behalf of 325 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. OHCD using the guidelines in the contract and so forth of OHCD.
Then they should be disposed of based on OHCD's policy. MS. McCOLLOCH: Yes.
Okay. I just want to get some clarity. With respect to housing, other related issues that contracts -- that you contract with RDA -- and I'm assuming all the contracts as relates to the non-profit or the for-profit, when you go to closing and settlement on the actual contract itself, that's done between OH and the RDA? They're also your contracting entity? MS. McCOLLOCH: Right. OHCD holds a contract with the Redevelopment Authority. The Redevelopment Authority in turn contracts with other entities to actually carry out the work. So, for 326 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. example, the Cecil B. Moore Homeownership Zone, the RDA holds loan documents with Herb's CDC to actually carry out the work of the Cecil B. Moore Homeownership Zone, but OHCD provides the funds to the Redevelopment Authority through a contract. So the money flows from the federal government to the City, OHCD; from OHCD to the Redevelopment Authority; from the Redevelopment Authority to the entity that's actually carrying out the work.
And is there any direction given from OHCD to the Redevelopment Authority? MS. McCOLLOCH: Yes, as part of the contract between OHCD and the Redevelopment Authority.
All right. So if there are issues with respect to timing, policy, disposition, those issues should be directed to OHCD? MS. McCOLLOCH: Correct.
And not to 327 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. the RDA? MS. McCOLLOCH: We work with the RDA, but, yes.
Because when Mr. Altman was here, I was trying to find out who I should talk to and he was unclear. He was saying it's this multi-tiered level of responsible entities, and I think near the end he kind of whispered that he was ultimately responsible for all of the departments. MS. McCOLLOCH: Yes.
Okay. I know the bell is going to ring on me in a minute. I'm going to start this -- (Bell rung.)
Okay. I'm going to come back on some of this 328 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. NTI-related stuff.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Just following up on Councilwoman Reynolds Brown, who was talking about the Childcare Facilities Fund, do these cuts impact the capacity at all? MS. McCOLLOCH: I'm sorry. I just didn't hear the question.
Do the cuts in the Childcare Facilities Fund impact capacity at all? MS. McCOLLOCH: Impact the capacity of the Childcare Facilities Fund?
No; impact the Childcare Facilities to house Philadelphia school students. Is there an analysis of the impact of the failure to provide this funding to facilities and the potential loss of facilities that 329 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. should care for children in the City? Is there a connection between reducing the fund by 200,000 and the capacity available that's Philadelphia Childcare Facilities? MS. McCOLLOCH: Now I understand the question. There was not an analysis of that because there is so much unspent money in the Childcare Facilities Fund.
Okay. So the answer is, you don't believe there will be an impact on capacity? MS. McCOLLOCH: I don't believe there will be, because there's so much unspent money that it will have sufficient funds to carry it through the next fiscal year.
Is there any impact on external funding as a result of these cuts? MS. McCOLLOCH: I don't know.
If you would provide that answer to the Chair. 330 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. So during public budget testimony last Wednesday evening when City Council was out in the 5th Councilmanic District, Gina Koo of the Non-Profit Finance Fund, which manages the CCFF, testified that the Administration planned to launch a new after-school plan that focused on licensed facilities only. Is there sufficient capacity in terms of licensed facilities for all of Philadelphia school kids? MS. McCOLLOCH: I don't know.
Okay. Are you aware of any support aside from the Childcare Facilities Fund available to help facilities improve their facilities so they can become licensed? MS. McCOLLOCH: No, I'm not aware of another fund.
Okay. If there are any, if you'd provide that to the Chair. With respect to the cuts to 331 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. Community Legal Services, their funding has been reduced by 300,000. Was that funding for foreclosure prevention work? MS. McCOLLOCH: Yes.
So we're increasing property taxes by percent 8 at least, assuming we don't go into 9 contingency Plan B. What is the impact 10 of cutting this funding on foreclosure 11 prevention in the City of Philadelphia? 12 MS. McCOLLOCH: My expectation 13 is that some of those funds could be made 14 up once we get the guidance from HUD 15 either through the American Recovery and 16 Reinvestment Act funds or if the new 17 round of Neighborhood Stabilization 18 Program funds when that comes out, we're 19 also anticipating that foreclosure prevention will be an eligible activity, so that the funding that was reduced here can be made up through other sources of funding.
And will you come before -- do you have to come before 332 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. Council to do that again? MS. McCOLLOCH: Yes.
Okay. So you don't know how many additional foreclosures there will be as a result of the $300,000 drop in their budget, though? MS. McCOLLOCH: I don't.
-- get an estimate and provide it to the Chair. Last week I had some questions and Councilman Jones had some questions for the RDA. I sent Ms. Gillen an e-mail or one of my staff members sent Ms. Gillen an e-mail. So the questions were the amount of commercial property in the City, City-owned property inventory, the value of that property -- these are Councilman Jones' questions -- and the projected ability of that property to 333 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. create tax revenue. Do we have answers to these questions that were asked last week? (Witness approached witness table.)
Hi. I'm Terry Gillen. We're working on getting you answers. The data that we have is not fabulous. We're in the process of trying to get it to be fabulous, but it's not there yet. So I can tell you that roughly 14 percent maybe of the RDA's portfolio is commercial, but we think we can break it out by Council district or at least by zip code. We don't actually have things by Council district, but we think we can give you zip code approximations. So we think by the end of this week we'll be able to get you a rough list. And I have had a conversation with Councilman Jones about that.
So would the 334 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. same apply to the questions that I asked that were in the e-mail? I don't want to press you. If we're going to have them by the end of the week, I can certainly wait until the end of the week.
I can't remember what they were. I remember looking at them and thinking they were all doable.
Okay. Well, whether the RDA knows the location, value and status of all City-owned property.
The status of a citywide database reflecting this information for all City-owned property and the cost of the City building its own database versus buying an off-the-shelf commercial property management system and whether the City has explored a program similar to the SCOPE Program in Baltimore.
Yeah. I can tell you on the last two, we think that the 335 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. investments that the City has already made in its database, which is the VPMIS database, are probably worth building on.
And how much would a commercial off-the-shelf system be, that what then private companies would be maintaining it rather than us maintaining our own system? Have you looked at the long-term operating costs of having our own unique system versus using a commercial system that private companies are --
Right. The new head of DOT is actually asking that same question, so we're -- the first goal for us would be to try to get the existing system to work. So if we can get the existing investment without any new money, we're going to try to do that. If the answer is we've got to make new 336 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. investment, Councilman, then we're going to ask that question, which is, should we continue to put money into this system or should we do an off-the-shelf. And the truth is, the technology world has changed so much in the last four to five years that it's actually a good time for us to ask that question. But right now we're still trying to just get the $4 million investment to work and see what that gives us.
But, I mean, we continue to spend additional resources on that system, don't we?
It means -- well, I mean additional resources in the sense of staff time, but we're not spending any money on outside systems or outside experts.
It's an opportunity cost for other things the 337 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. staff could be doing, like figuring out how much commercial property the City owns, what it's worth and how quickly we can move it.
Sure. Yeah. But having $4 million sunk in the system, I think we're trying to salvage it, if we can.
Sunk cost is sometimes is sunk cost. We have to move forward, and I can tell you that commercial off-the-shelf systems are not that expensive and the ongoing maintenance of them is provided by a third party rather than our own in-house IT staff, and it's far cheaper, because the cost of maintenance, of course, is spread around every customer of that software company versus just the City of Philadelphia. So I urge you to begin looking and stop using staff resources to try to fix what's broken. Maybe it's time to move on.
I hear you, but I 338 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. don't want to suggest that it's broken. I think we haven't quite reached that conclusion yet.
You're welcome. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Sanchez.
Thank you, Madam President. As it relates to -- and I'll start this by saying the Vacant Land Stabilization and Maintenance activities are very, very, very important to me. Why is it that we take some of that money from the General Fund and not from our CDBG money? MS. McCOLLOCH: I'm sorry. Why are we spending General Fund money on Vacant Stabilization? 339 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.
Right. MS. McCOLLOCH: There's some activities that are not eligible for CDBG. For example, the Community Land Care Program is not an eligible Community Development Block Grant program. If we're going to fund that program, it needs to be funded with General Fund. And there have just been a lot of demands on the Community Development Block Grant program, so any support that we can garner from the General Fund to support these sorts of activities, we use.
How are we doing -- one of the discussions we had last year was how do we make the program more efficient in terms of liening some of the work that in the past there was a technicality with because PHS was doing the work, they didn't have the authority to lien. Where are we in those discussions? MS. McCOLLOCH: We have had conversations with the Law Department and 340 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. it's under review at the Law Department now.
Is there a timeframe for that given the importance of the program? MS. McCOLLOCH: I can follow up with the Law Department. I'm not sure when -- I'm not sure exactly where it is, but there have been some meetings about it.
With the stimulus money, what part of the Land Care work is done that is not CDBG eligible? MS. McCOLLOCH: The Community Land Care Program, which is the program that PHS runs with small -- tends to be small non-profits, such as Ready, Willing and Able, some others, that go in and clean -- they clean and green the lots as opposed to what we call the Vacant Land Stabilization, which is sort of a more in-depth program. It's the program that you would recognize as putting up the 341 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. wooden fences around lots and also planting trees and doing some other work on the stabilized lots. That program, the Vacant Land Stabilization, one with the fences, that would be CDBG eligible. The Community Land Care Program is not.
What would your estimate be of our potential revenue had we had the ability to lien some of the work that's been done? MS. McCOLLOCH: I'm sorry. I don't know. I'd have to get you that answer. I don't know what it is.
Would you say it would be hundreds of thousands of dollars? MS. McCOLLOCH: Yes, but I don't want to -- I don't know without going back to look at it.
Okay. I think it's important, especially when you come before us for the Consolidated Plan, that some of those questions to that be done, because the idea about being able 342 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. to find a legal way to have PHA lien these properties goes to how do we create a revolving fund to sustain the project. So I think that is so important. So I want to stress the urgency of it. One of the things that happened in the rebalancing act, we cut any new work to be done. How does your reduced budget impact that or are you looking to subsidize that with some of the stabilization? Because I have a real concern that we stopped all new activities in the neighborhood. MS. McCOLLOCH: The budget that's anticipated here, again, is just maintaining what we've been doing.
We will not have the ability to do any of the hundred or so lots that were identified for the spring that were postponed for next year? MS. McCOLLOCH: If they were included in the current Community Land Care contracts or in the current 343 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. Stabilization contracts, they would continue to be stabilized or cleaned. If they were new ones that haven't been touched yet, this budget does not anticipate being able to move forward with those, because there's no -- this isn't any new resources. This is maintaining the level that we're at.
How many lots were identified, new lots were identified, that we wanted to do in the last year? MS. McCOLLOCH: I don't know, but I could find out, because I know they went to PHS.
I have a serious concern, because part of what the contention has been is that we are going to continue these efforts when in fact we're not doing -- we've reduced severely these efforts. How much would you say we've reduced our efforts as it related to land stabilization? MS. McCOLLOCH: Well, clearly, 344 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. we've reduced our efforts because the funding last year was million and the 4 funding proposed for next year is 2.4 million of General Fund and last year it was 4 million of General Fund. So it is clearly a reduction. (Bell rung.)
Because I want to clarify that, because we keep saying that we're not cutting any services, when in fact we have cut severely on our ability to do this work. MS. McCOLLOCH: In this program there's clearly been a cut in services.
Thank you. Mr. Armbrister, I understand you wanted to make an announcement? (Witness approached witness table.)
Yes. Thank 345 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. you, Council president. I wanted to inform the Council that there has been a fire across the street at the Municipal Services Building. Based on the information that I have, which is very limited, it was found in a closet on the 16th Floor. It did initiate the fire suppression system; i.e., the water sprinklers did come on, and so there is some damage in the building. The building has in fact been evacuated, and at this time, I don't know the condition of the building. And the Administration, because the Budget and Finance Office is located there, would respectfully request your patience and indulgence as we try to sort this out, particularly with respect to our ability to respond as quickly as you had asked with respect to the questions you've asked. So we will continue to work. We will keep you and this body informed as to what transpires, but at this point in time, they have not allowed the 346 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. building to be reoccupied.
Thank you. Thank you, Madam President. Good afternoon, Ms. McColloch. MS. McCOLLOCH: Good afternoon, Councilwoman.
I want to support Councilwoman Sanchez's advocacy for the Vacant Lot Maintenance Program. I think that's a very important program, and I support all that she said regarding the funding for that. Prior to NTI, we used OHCD for acquisition of properties. Can we do that now? MS. McCOLLOCH: It's an eligible activity.
Okay. Great. Because we've been waiting for 347 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. about a year for the audit to be completed on our acquisition funds. So do you have dollars there? How much do you have? MS. McCOLLOCH: I'm sorry?
Do you have any funding available for acquisitions in your budget today? MS. McCOLLOCH: No. Are there currently Community Development Block Grant dollars allocated for acquisition?
Okay. What about in your upcoming budget? MS. McCOLLOCH: It hasn't been -- that budget hasn't been released yet. I expect the preliminary Consolidated Plan budget to be released in the next couple of weeks.
I'm sorry. I didn't hear the end. MS. McCOLLOCH: I expect the preliminary Consolidated Plan budget to 348 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. be released in a couple of weeks. As you know, we release a preliminary plan and then we have a hearing, and then we work on it and then we submit a proposed plan that comes to City Council, and City Council has a hearing on the proposed plan, and hopefully you all approve it by June 18th and we send it off to HUD.
All right. Can you provide the Chair with a list of housing development that's going on citywide? Sometimes I feel like nothing is happening, but then if I drive through certain sections of Philadelphia, I do see housing, new housing, being built. MS. McCOLLOCH: Yes, of course we can provide it.
I'd just like to know what's actually going on. MS. McCOLLOCH: Yes. Yes.
Great. And with the green jobs with OHCD or CDBG or the stimulus funds that will go into 349 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. the green jobs, how will that work? Right now -- and if you're funding ECA, I know that my office does a lot of workshops, energy, weatherization workshops in the community, and when ECA sends someone to do the actual workshop to show residents how to actually do weatherization, they provide I thought and I think a really good kit of materials, plastic, all kinds of stuff. Will stimulus dollars continue -- or will stimulus dollars fund those weatherization kits or will they just fund the people that will be going in to actually do the weatherization, or both? MS. McCOLLOCH: Well, the piece that I'm familiar with is the 14 million of Community Development Block Grant, and we have not -- since we don't have the guidance from HUD, we don't yet know how that 14 million will be allocated, will be spent.
Okay. Great. But if you -- if you can, the 350 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. kits that ECA actually gives to residents is so useful, they're so useful that people really appreciate getting that start, and some of what they give, you can't even find in any of the stores, like a Home Depot or Lowe's. They give really good window kits, and I know because we've tried to buy them. We've tried to purchase the plastic, the same type of window kit that's given away in the weatherization workshops, and we just can't find them at all. So I think that's a worthwhile project that we need to continue to do. And that's it. I mean, we'll have questions later when we have the other hearing in a month or so, but that's all that I need to ask today, except that we do need OHCD's money for acquisition if RDA is still going to be sitting around waiting for this audit. Thank you. Thank you, Madam President.
Thank 351 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. you. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Brown.
Thank you, Madam President. In keeping with the Mayor's goal to make Philadelphia the greenest city, what type of requirements or new stipulations are you putting on developers with the restoration and new development that they are doing, those who are receiving contracts from OHCD or PHDC, or has there been any discussion about amending your RFP so that new homeowners can get Energy Star appliances, et cetera, et cetera? MS. McCOLLOCH: Yes. That's all part -- we revised our technical specifications actually two years ago to ensure that the rehabilitation and new construction that we carry out are brought up to Energy Star standards. So we already are doing that and have been doing that. So there are very specific 352 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. requirements that the contractors who build or rehab houses supported with funds from OHCD have to meet.
Are there evaluation procedures in place so what they say they will do actually happens? MS. McCOLLOCH: There are inspectors that inspect all of the work to ensure that what's in the technical specifications is carried out as part of the rehab.
All right, then. We've talked about the green jobs. All my questions have been -- no. 17 The Children's Fund, the Childcare Facilities Fund, who is responsible for providing the technical assistance to those childcare agencies to ensure that they access those dollars, spend those dollars for the purposes intended? MS. McCOLLOCH: NFF, Non-Profit Finance Fund, holds the contract with PHDC. I don't know -- I just don't know 353 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. if Non-Profit Finance Fund in turn has a subcontract with someone else to provide technical assistance or if Non-Profit Finance Fund provides technical assistance itself.
So would it be more appropriate to ask that question of PHDC? MS. McCOLLOCH: Well, I just don't know sitting here how Non-Profit Finance Fund carries out its technical assistance responsibilities, but I can provide that information to you.
We need to know that if that is a factor impacting the decision to decrease those dollars. MS. McCOLLOCH: The only -- I can find it out. The only relevant point for decreasing the dollars is that there's $2.3 million unspent in the fund. So the belief was that that would be sufficient resources to carry Non-Profit Finance Fund, the Childcare Facilities Fund, through the next fiscal year to 354 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. continue its program, but that it didn't need additional resources because it had over 2 million unspent in the fund now.
Can we clarify the difference between encumbered as in there's an intended use of it and it being in the fund? Because are you telling me that there's $2.3 million that they have not identified for uses? Because my understanding is some of it is encumbered, there's projected projects for it. There's a difference between we have an agreement to use it and it being unused. MS. McCOLLOCH: I can find that out. What I know is that there's 2.3 million unspent in the fund.
But that 355 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. doesn't mean it's not allocated or -- MS. McCOLLOCH: I do not know. They may have identified some providers to draw down that money. I'm not disagreeing with that. I'm assuming they have or the money would just continue to sit there. I'm just saying sitting in the fund right now is 2.3 million.
But to my point is because you're making the notion that they don't need additional funds, and so for me it would be clear to understand the reason some of that money is unspent is because the Childcare Fund in some cases doesn't fund the whole renovations of a project. So I want there to be a difference in my mind -- and I think that's where the Councilwoman is going too -- between the difference between allocated and spent.
Right. MS. McCOLLOCH: Okay. I can provide that information.
And, Madam 356 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. President, my ask would be that we not wait to get that in writing. My ask would be that you return at some designated time during the budget hearing schedule and we hear from you directly on the record what the procedures are and what percentage of that is encumbered and what percentage of that is not and who is responsible for the manner in which technical assistance is provided. So often we do hear back from departments, but it's long after the hearings are over and we've moved on to our next duty. So my ask in this instance is that you come back at some point during the budget hearing process and report back your findings. Thank you. Thank you, Madam President.
You're welcome. The Chair recognizes Councilman Jones.
Thank you, 357 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. Madam President. You've been a trooper, Deb. You've been through a number of these, so you're hanging in there. NACs, Neighborhood Action Committees. At the height of NACs and their funding, how many did the City of Philadelphia have? MS. McCOLLOCH: At the height?
Roughly. MS. McCOLLOCH: At the height, 35 maybe, 36, something like that.
And these were spread around the City of Philadelphia to assist OHCD, PHDC and their housing production? MS. McCOLLOCH: To provide neighborhood planning and information and referral services in income-eligible neighborhoods.
And at that point, what was the level of housing production in the City of Philadelphia? MS. McCOLLOCH: Housing 358 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. production or you mean support, CDBG funds?
No, not funds. The number of units produced during that year, subsidized housing, neighborhood housing. MS. McCOLLOCH: I don't know off the top of my head, but it's been many years since we've supported as many as 35 NACs.
How many do we have now? MS. McCOLLOCH: I believe -- and I can get you the exact number -- I think it's 23, but I can tell you right now. I'm sorry. I just need to look it up.
That's okay. MS. McCOLLOCH: Twenty-three. I was right. Twenty-three.
You're good, 23. Would you say housing 359 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. production is down since -- MS. McCOLLOCH: Yes, because we have fewer resources. At the height of 35 NACs we were getting $72 or $75 million in CDBG funds. We're now getting 53 million.
So in the 4th, there's Carroll Park and Haddington. Are those the two funded NACs? MS. McCOLLOCH: Yes. Achievability, Haddington, Cobbs Creek CDC, Carroll Park Community Council. That's all.
And some of them are in the direct production of housing? MS. McCOLLOCH: No. NACs do not --
So they just refer? MS. McCOLLOCH: Correct. NACs are not housing producers in that sense. NACs are -- they serve as ombudsman in the neighborhoods. They provide 360 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. information and referral services. They do neighborhood planning. They engage in other sorts of community organizing activities, but they don't produce housing units.
How many subsidized housing units were produced last year citywide? MS. McCOLLOCH: About 600 from these funds, OHCD funds.
How many were produced in the 4th Councilmanic District? MS. McCOLLOCH: I don't know that off the top of my head. I can provide it for you.
Okay. That would be important, and I think it might be helpful if we broke it down by district so that this Council could get a better sense of how subsidized housing is spread throughout the City of Philadelphia, and I would ask that based on who was very much utilized last, that 361 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. last shall be first and -- I'm not saying the first should be last, but at least all of us should get some, and I'd like to see those numbers. MS. McCOLLOCH: Okay. We can provide it.
You're welcome. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Sanchez. Councilman Clarke, your light went off.
Thank you, 362 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. my friend and colleague.
Councilwoman Sanchez is yielding to Councilman Clarke.
We're a very collegial bunch. I don't care what anybody says. Thank you. Thank you, Madam President. Ms. McColloch, just quickly following up on the last line of questioning with respect to the contractual relationship with the Redevelopment Authority. Are we obligated by law to contract with the Redevelopment Authority for the work that needs to be done through OH, be it acquisitions, contracts for housing? MS. McCOLLOCH: We're not obligated by law, but there's certain activities that the Redevelopment Authority has the authority to carry out that we can't contract with anybody else to perform those services. 363 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.
Like what? MS. McCOLLOCH: We don't have anybody else to perform those services.
Like what? MS. McCOLLOCH: Such as acquisition through eminent domain, condemnation and urban renewal takings.
So you're saying there's no other entity in government, not just local government but in government, that can use eminent domain? MS. McCOLLOCH: In --
I don't think that's accurate. MS. McCOLLOCH: In the City of Philadelphia that's who has the authority to carry out eminent domain and urban renewal takings.
Doesn't the Housing Authority have the authority to carry out eminent domain? MS. McCOLLOCH: I'm sorry. I don't know, but I can find out. 364 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.
I believe they do, because I had actually asked that question earlier. MS. McCOLLOCH: Okay.
And there are a number of other government entities that may not be appropriate, like the School District actually has the authority. MS. McCOLLOCH: The School District has that.
We're probably not going to do that through the purposes that we need. So there are other agencies. MS. McCOLLOCH: That's what I'm saying. It's a choice by the Administration to contract with the Redevelopment Authority to carry out a certain set of activities.
So with respect to that, then we automatically renew our contractual relationship with the Redevelopment Authority every year 365 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. without looking for options that may be cheaper or more efficient? MS. McCOLLOCH: We enter into new contracts each year with the Redevelopment Authority, yes.
I understand, but I'm saying, do we look at other possibilities? I mean, if there is -- MS. McCOLLOCH: We have not looked at other possibilities.
But we're not prohibited by law to do that? MS. McCOLLOCH: We're not prohibited, no. 17
As it relates to getting out of the acquisition issue, because that is somewhat limited in terms of who can actually do that, with respect to contractual relationships to provide housing opportunities; i.e., contracts with the developers, be it for-profit or non-profit, would you say that there are probably a lot of entities 366 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. that may be able to carry out that function other than the Redevelopment Authority or possibly doing it internally within OHCD? MS. McCOLLOCH: Yes. There are other entities besides the Redevelopment Authority that could carry it out, or in past years, at times the City, OHCD, held those contracts itself. There are a whole series of constraints for the City to hold contracts and how the City -- what the -- how the City can hold contracts, how those contracts can be renewed and so forth that make it easier to have another entity hold those contracts, and we've chosen to have that entity be the Redevelopment Authority.
So in that particular aspect, since we're in the time of reform and being fiscally prudent, could it possibly -- and I'm not asking you to say one way or another -- make sense that we may want to look at other ways, more efficient, less costly 367 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. ways to have some entity other than the Redevelopment Authority provide contractual relationships with organizations that do housing for the City of Philadelphia? MS. McCOLLOCH: We could do that. That was part of -- the housing reorganization study that was done in 2005 looked at a couple of different options for how to carry out housing programs in the City. So there's been a lot of work on that particular score.
Can you dig that up and find that out? Because I'd be interested. MS. McCOLLOCH: Of course.
Since we're in the time of streamlining and finding 368 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. other ways, not necessarily saying better ways, but other ways to do things in a less costly way. MS. McCOLLOCH: I can provide you with a copy of the report. It was from 2005.
That would be very helpful. I'm going to try this one more time. With respect to NTI budget acquisition/disposition, this is actually almost a year to a day since members of the Administration met with Council and informed us that they were suspending all of the NTI acquisition funds, and here we are a year from now, a year from that point, where we still haven't gotten a clear sense of where we're going with this, and I'm a little concerned, amazed, whatever type of terms, that in a year's time that we cannot figure out in the auditing process and the strategy to move forward. Do you have any sense of -- (Bell rung.) 369 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. MS. McCOLLOCH: It's my understanding the audit is, well, clearly underway and I think nearing completion, but I am not responsible for carrying out the audit, so I don't want to say that.
Who is responsible? MS. McCOLLOCH: It's the Controller, the Controller's Office.
And the Controller does it based on information provided. Isn't it -- since Council President is going to let me go on, I'm going to go on -- that they can only audit what information is provided to them? MS. McCOLLOCH: Yeah. They've been auditing information that's been provided through the Redevelopment Authority. The Controller is carrying out the audit. Information is being provided by the Redevelopment Authority, and anyone else who has been asked to provide information has been providing 370 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. information.
So this has been going on for a year? MS. McCOLLOCH: I don't believe the audit itself has been going on that -- I mean, it's been a year since this was presented to City Council and -- or whatever the date was that you just told me.
It was April of last year. MS. McCOLLOCH: I trust you. And so the auditors have been -- there was a whole process by which an auditor was selected, but as I say, it's being carried out through the Controller's Office, not through OHCD. So I don't want to speak to the details of it, because I don't know.
You don't know, okay. Well, the bell rang, but I'm going to come back to that issue. We may need to get the Redevelopment Authority to respond in a little more detail. 371 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. MS. McCOLLOCH: Okay.
Point of information, Councilman Green. It's your turn anyway.
Well, this is my point of information time. Does the Administration believe that opportunity cost is a real cost? In other words, the failure to spend money for the last year, how many jobs has that cost Philadelphians, NTI money? MS. McCOLLOCH: I don't know how many jobs it's cost.
Maybe you can do a calculation and provide that to the Chair. The other question I have is, what does an audit have to do with 372 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. spending money that's available in accounts for NTI? In other words, green dollars are green dollars. Money is fungible. The money is available. However it was managed properly or not in the past is not relevant to how this Administration is going to manage it. Why can't that money be spent today? (Witness approached witness table.)
Good afternoon. Clarence Armbrister. Councilman, the audit about which we were just speaking was initiated in large part because of our concerns about the proceeds of the NTI bonds. As you probably know, when you borrow money on a tax-exempt basis, there are very strict rules about how that money can be expended. There was not sufficient record-keeping for the Administration when we came in for us to be able to have confidence in how the funds were 373 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. expended, bond proceeds versus other proceeds. So we sought out the idea of trying to do an audit. We understood, I think, that this Council had in fact engaged or at least worked with the Controller to think about an audit, and so in order to not duplicate or reinvent the wheel, we agreed to allow the Controller to take the lead on that audit. He selected the auditor. We talked about the parameters of that audit, and the audit, although it's taking much longer than any one of us would have liked, has really been outside the control of the Administration. We understand -- at least I understand, I should say, from reports that the audit is near completion, and hopefully upon its completion we will have a much better idea about the allocation of the tax-exempt bond proceeds from other proceeds so that we don't run afoul of the federal tax-exempt law. So that was the purpose of the 374 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. audit, as I understand it.
Thank you. Mr. Armbrister, approximately three weeks ago, maybe a month now, this issue about utilizing NTI bonds came up in a conversation about the Administration using, I think it was, a million two, whatever it was, for the stabilization program, the whole foreclosure issue, the money that we got from the feds, and somehow more than a million dollars was available for that out of the NTI funds, and I asked in that meeting, how was that money available to use in spite of the fact that we had this whole QRB tax-exempt issue, but yet the money that the Councilmembers had in their respective budgets can't be available, and that question was never answered. So like Councilman Green said, 375 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. that if the money -- we should be in a position to proceed with spending money as witnessed when this one point something million dollars as relates to the stabilization program, that money was made available. It was a long question, but I think you know what I'm talking about.
I do. I think I do know what you're talking about. I'm not sure under what rubric or rules that that money was allowed to be expended. I know that with respect to the acquisition pieces of the funds, that certain funds needed to be at fair market value and certain didn't -- needed to be at nominal value. That was the primary focus of our audit. With respect to the Neighborhood Stabilization, I'm not sure under all of the rules that that was expended and how that had been allocated by the Finance Department.
Well, I 376 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. asked that question three weeks ago.
Thank you, Madam Chair. So, Mr. Armbrister, I just would like to follow up on the question that I asked the Director of OHCD. Does the Administration believe that opportunity cost is a real cost?
Well, the failure to spend a dollar today has an impact lasting forever. The failure to spend dollars a year ago has an impact lasting forever. In other words, there are people who can be employed, could be employed right now, with respect to NTI dollars, other dollars that the 377 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. Administration is not spending, and the longer -- indecision is in fact a decision. It's not the status quo.
I would agree with you, and the Administration has not been indecisive. The Administration has been waiting the results but for the monies that Councilman Clarke mentioned for that to be done. So that has been --
Could you please provide us with some legal authority that the money can't be spent today, anything that's currently in your possession in writing, e-mail, whatever, that says that that money can't go to Councilmembers. And if no such authority exists, let us know that, what exists today, and then --
When you say "legal authority," I'm not sure I understand.
I mean, we've 378 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. certainly done analyses within the Administration.
Please provide anything in writing on this issue, anything, e-mails back and forth between the RDA, OHCD, any place in the Administration, everything in writing on this NTI audit to the Chair, please. Also, I've heard -- what people are saying is that there's no responsibility on the Administration for the length of this audit. So please provide us with a list of all material and information that the Controller requested of the RDA in order to conduct this audit, the date that that information was requested and the date that that information was provided, or let us know it hasn't been provided yet. Because obviously half of the audit has to -- as Councilman Clarke 379 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. was suggesting, the speed in which the audit can be done is directly related to the speed at which the information is provided to the Controller.
And I would add one other factor. The speed at which information can be provided is sometimes a function of whether or not that information exists in forms that can be delivered. So there was a lot that had to be done to reconstruct records and things like that, but -- so that's another factor involved in the length of the audit. I can't tell you why it's taking so long, but I will certainly reach out to the Controller's Office and try to get those answers for you.
Well, also presumably the RDA would keep a record of when information was requested of them. So the RDA should provide information to that request also. One final question. Do you 380 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. believe the lack of an audit trail -- do you believe the implementation of technology at the RDA and other places in the City where every transaction had to take place electronically would provide an audit trail that would allow government to function more efficiently? Going forward, shouldn't none of this product be on paper? In other words, if all of this information of everything the RDA did had to go into a database and not on a paper form, wouldn't this audit be over?
Thank you, Madam President. For the purposes of time, I wanted to put a couple of questions that I hope that OHCD can answer when it comes in with its Consolidated time, because 381 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. I'm aware that we have two other units that want to testify this evening, but I wanted to put them on the record. One is an update on the reorg and the 2005 report that Ms. McColloch referenced, and if we can have that update in writing prior to that Consolidated Plan, that would be helpful, because part of that reorg included the "due to's" between RDA, for instance, and the City. So I want to request that update now so that we have it when we go to the Consolidated Plan. The other thing is that it is important that in the testimony we get clarity again on -- I'm going back to the points of where we've made significant reductions during our rebalancing act and clarifying that as we move forward for 2010, and specifically I want to look at, for instance, the Utility Emergency Services Fund, because, again, part of what's been discussed publicly is that there are no cuts in certain services, 382 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. when in fact in our rebalancing act we did, and I'm particularly concerned about the Utility Emergency Services Fund given the economy and what's going on. So I'm going to leave those questions for that time, but I want to make sure that they go on the record. All of the cuts that were made in the rebalancing act, that they be outlined as to which of those cuts are going to be sustained in 2010 and the impact that they have on services given the economic downturn. So I'm looking at lot stabilization, Land Care trust, Utility Emergency Services Fund. Councilman Jones talked a little bit about the Community Development Block Grants. Any of that stuff that impacts, I'd like to get those before, again, going to -- before the hearings for the Consolidated Plan. And then I'll leave that there, but I want to get those before. MS. McCOLLOCH: Okay.
Because 383 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. there's been a contention made that there are no additional service cuts, but we have not spoken to the cuts that were done during the rebalancing and how they impact this year. MS. McCOLLOCH: Okay.
Thank you. Any other questions? Councilman Clarke, your light is not on.
Yeah. Actually, I was going to ask -- I was going to ask for a list of transactions by the Redevelopment Authority for calendar year '07, '08 and '09, but I'm actually going to do it in a letter form. I'll send that in a letter form, because it's not clear to me who that should go to. Thank you.
Thank 384 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. you. Ms. McColloch, you're off the hot seat. MS. McCOLLOCH: Thank you.
We will now hear from the Youth Commission. (Witnesses approached witness table.)
Good afternoon. Kindly identify yourself for the record and proceed with your testimony.
Good afternoon. I'm De'ara Balenger, Executive Director of the Youth Commission.
385 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. Please proceed.
Sure. This past January marked the Youth Commission's first full calendar year since its inception. The Youth Commission is working tirelessly to find its place in City Hall, and with that, we are becoming more familiar with the needs of our youth constituents and what type of budget we need to serve them effectively. After ten months in operation, the Youth Commission hired myself to navigate budget details and create a plan to foster the Youth Commission's sustainability. After considering the budget of other Youth Commissions and Youth Councils in other large cities, we find that the allocations of funds provided is reflective of best practices using similarly situated cities. So this budget detail goes over the changes in budget classes, our budget narrative for Fiscal Year 2010 and our significant accomplishments, as well as 386 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. our goals for Fiscal Year 2010. Just briefly, the changes in our budget class, we petitioned essentially Council to have -- to transfer monies into Class 300 and 400 for us so we could buy a computer, supplies, you name it, that we need just to be functional administratively, and that was passed. So we do thank you for that. And so as the budget narrative details, we basically now have 47,000 in Class 100 for employee compensation, $50,200 in personal services, which is allocated as follows: 4,000 for printed materials; 6,000 for contracts that assist us in youth engagement and leadership; 1,000 for postage; 3,000 for activities and conferences relevant to youth civic engagement; 1,000 for design and format of outreach literature -- just stop me whenever you may -- 3,000 in promotional items such as T-shirts, banners, et cetera; 3,000 for advertising activities; a thousand for website 387 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. maintenance; $25,000 for a strategic planning retreat.
I'm sorry; 2,500, excuse me, for a strategic planning retreat. The remainder hopefully will be used to acquire a part-time programming person, which would alleviate some of the administrative duties that I have, which leaves about $8,700 or so for miscellaneous projects that may arise; again, a thousand for materials and supplies; 1,800 for a computer. We hope to also get a laser printer and just accompanying software for computers. I'm going to let Mr. Hill take it away with the significant accomplishments.
Well, over the past year, we've done a lot. We've hosted a youth forum in collaboration with America Speaks at the Mayor's Reception Room. In 388 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. excess of maybe 200 young people came out to voice their opinion on the budget cuts and make recommendations to the Mayor on what should be included and what should be scrapped. We hosted a community building reception with many leaders from different organizations and businesses. We co-hosted -- well, we co-sponsored an outreach event with City Year at the Phillies stadium. We hosted a voter registration drive at City Hall, in addition to having a voter registration drive at 61 of the public high schools. We had a meeting with the Baghdad City Council on setting up a youth-friendly governmental agency, and we also partnered with Mothers in Charge to advocate for the City to establish its own gun laws. In addition, looking ahead and going forward, we hope to establish a Youth Commission Leadership Scholarship in partnership with other organizations, 389 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. with private donations. We are focusing on making sure that youth are included in the green economy and making sure that youth have access to training for green jobs. We're also working on the state level with State Representative Tony Peyton to establish a Pennsylvania Youth Commission, which will advise at the state level on issues of concern to youth. We're also pushing House Bill 12 520, which has now been renamed to House Bill 259, which will allow 17-year-olds to vote in primaries if they're going to be in the corresponding general 16 election. We're also pushing on the 17 federal level, along with Senator Robert 18 Casey, to push through the Youth Promise Act, which increases funding for intervention, education and mentorship to curb youth delinquency. So that's basically what we've been doing over the past year. We've only had the Executive Director for the past five months, so a lot of it has been 390 4/6/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc. planning, a lot of it has been setting up a whole new city agency, which is very difficult, but we think we've managed it to be successful with the events we've thrown. And we thank you for the opportunity to present to you.