Excuse me, Mr. Chairman.
One second, I apologize.
Ms. Tenere has some questions for you.
This is a resumption hearing.
So do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Yes, ma'am.
Have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership tax compliance,
refusal referral photos under plans of the property five days in advance of this hearing
and have you met with the RCO and do you have a letter we did that before the June 30th 2021
original hearing okay great you may proceed good morning where we left off at the last hearing on
June 30th 2021 Mr. Jenkins was about to be redirected at the conclusion of Mr. DeMarco's
cross-examination of them and that's where i'd like to uh commence uh the hearing today if i may
please proceed can you please uh re-swearing the witness um he's seated to my right mr jenkins
please spell your full name sir and i'll swear you brian c jenkins b-r-i-e-n middle initial c
last name g-e-n-k-i-n-s we're affirmed to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
I affirm. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you. I'm going to call you back to a June 14, 2021 RCO meeting. Do you recall having that meeting? Yes. Can you please tell the panel what transpired at that meeting with regards to the people present?
Well, the coordinating RCO was the PEC, and we had a Zoom meeting.
We also had passed out flyers throughout the community where people could either come in person if they didn't have access to Zoom or technology, or they could go on to the Zoom meeting.
There were several folks that were on the Zoom.
There was also 23 people present in the building.
We put up a 70-foot flat screen for the guests that were there, that they could be able to see the information and also see everyone that was on the Zoom meeting.
And likewise, we had a camera that was focused on the 23 guests to ensure that everyone could see the people that were in attendance as well.
And who was the coordinating RCA?
That was PEC.
And who's the individual that's the manager of that PEC?
Kevin Brown.
And when you say PEC, is that People's Emergency Center?
That is correct.
And did you, you were present at Chosen 300?
I was.
And that's located at the property 5939 Lancaster?
3959 Lancaster Avenue.
I apologize.
That's right.
And the people that were present, did you record every individual that was present?
That is correct.
I took a span of the room as far as the video so that everyone could see the people that were present.
In addition, each person filled out a form confirming that they were there, what their
vote was, their address, their phone number, and their signature.
Um, at the, right at the end of the meeting, um, the, uh, people that were on zoom took the vote on zoom. Um, I did inform Kevin Brown, um, that the people that were at the building, uh, wanted to vote as well. He indicated to send those votes over immediately after the meeting within five minutes, I scanned everything and send them over to directly to Kevin Brown.
Right at the end of the meeting, the...
And did those results of the vote include the names and addresses of everyone that voted in person at the chosen 300?
That is correct.
And as a result of that, was the votes recorded and was there a letter produced dated June 14th by Mr. Brown on behalf of People's Emergency Center?
That is correct. The letter indicated that there were 29 persons in favor, six opposed, and nine abstained.
And that, Mr. Chairman, is already part of the record. And it's our understanding that Mr. Brown is available to testify today as well.
There was discussion about the use of the lower level, which is subject of this request for variance for group housing.
You submitted in a package back in June for this.
So if I may, Mr. Chairman, if I can have the screen, I will put up some of the pictures to show walkthrough of what that use is.
Are you asking us to put up the screen?
No, I'm going to share the screen.
I'm just.
Oh, okay.
I thought you.
all right please advise if you are able to see that sir yes okay
jenkins as i uh scroll down
can you please uh identify to the panel what the uh what they're seeing here
is part of the lower level here? So this is the lower level where the beds would actually
be at. This area is approximately about 1,500 square feet. We've made several improvements
since the original zoning gearing. One is the floors themselves. We put an anti-slip resistant
floor in there. It costs about $23,000. That has an epoxy and then there's the decorative flakes and
And then there's a polyurethane on top and which creates grooves in the floor.
So that way that prevents anyone from slipping.
There was a question about a window.
There was an existing window that was that you'll see at the far corner there.
That window was boarded up previously and there was some debris in the existing window well.
We replaced the window, put in a brand new window, cleared all the debris out of the window well.
and there was an existing grate that was actually covered in cement, and we actually
replaced that grate and put a new grate into there, but that is the area there. Now, this is
considered the lower level of this building. When was the last time it was in use, as far as you're
aware? My understanding has been used for a very long time. We've owned the property since 2010.
We've had very little use for this property.
I mean, when I say very little use, we had a vaccination clinic down there, which lasted about two hours.
Once in a while, we have a barbershop there.
But for the most part, this spot has remained vacant and without use.
And it comprises of literally a third of the entire building.
In addition, the previous owner, which was Prayer and Faith Temple Church of God in Christ, they had not used the property, I'm sorry, this level for a long time.
The previous pastor, which is Pastor Albert Thompson, actually submitted a letter verifying that the pastor before him, I understand Pastor Thompson actually was actually a child in this church and has been at the church for longer than 50 years prior to us owning it.
And he indicated that there has not been any use of that area.
They did apply the previous pastor before him, which goes back several decades.
And that use, they attempted to use it as a fellowship hall and never materialized.
So it has not been used, as far as I know, for the last 50 years.
you testified it previously regarding the window replacement is this a close-up shot of it yes it
previously regarding the window replacement is this a close-up shot of it yes it is um it is
close-up shot of the window the light coming in and then also we added in an accessory ladder
there we did not need another um area of egress but we added it anyway um you know and just put
an accessory ladder there for where it goes up to the vent um i'm sorry the grate that opens up so
someone could get out that way if they wanted to but there's already three uh egresses there's a
stairwell to the front, to the rear, and as well as out to the Mount Vernon, which those pictures
will be subsequent in a second. Okay, can you please describe to the board what this picture
blow up is? So this is the great that the pin that actually is pulled. So if someone needs
to escape. They can pull the pin. We can add a chain to it very easily to make it even more
visible, but it's basically just pull the pin out and they actually just push it open. The grate is
made of aluminum, hardened aluminum, but it's very light. A senior citizen can easily push that up
and get out. We wanted to make sure that it was easy accessible, but again, this is a fourth way
of egress but you know not a required one. And above it is the street, is that correct?
That is above it is Lancaster Avenue, yes. And this is a picture of the reposting?
That's the picture of the reposting. And that's the grate there on the bottom? Exactly.
And can you explain what this picture is regarding the exit? So this is a stairwell
directly from the hall where they would be sleeping.
That is the hallway that leads up to the front door.
The subsequent picture that's going to be right behind us
will actually show the stairwell going up to the door.
And as soon as they exit that door,
the front door is right there.
They are fire rated doors, a one hour fire rated.
And on both sides, those doors are there as well.
But when they go out,
They just simply make a left out the front door. They never even have to enter the first floor.
There's also an additional window to provide natural light to come in that area of the stairwell as well.
And this is the same outflooring material you used in the main living area?
Yes, the same flooring. It's done all throughout the entire lower level and the stairwell as well.
And then can you explain to the board what this egress stairwell is?
So this is the second egress stairwell that is on the rear side of the lower level that leads up to the second, I'm sorry, the first floor.
And from that stairwell, they can either go out the front door or they can go out the rear door.
In addition, this is a third window that is in the lower level as well.
and can you explain to the board what the picture in the rear here so this is the third
way of egress um outside of the uh the window which would make number four um but this is
leading out to mount vernon um there are just six stairs that a person would have to go up and to
get out um also um there was a question asked in a previous hearing by one of the board members of
the height above the ground and the height below the ground and we actually measured it and it's
actually 52 inches above ground and 49 inches below ground and that is the stairwell from the
ceiling to the point of where that stair line is for them for the ground level it's 52 inches and
then 49 inches going up. At the time of the last hearing, there was a discussion of letters in
opposition. And back prior to the June 30th hearing, did you see or receive letters over
the last few months, showing opposition to the proposed use. That is correct. And prior to the
June 30th hearing, did you respond to those in writing? Absolutely. I sent a letter to Andrew
Goodman, who is the assistant to Councilwoman Jamie Gutier, as well as all the, I think there's
three RCOs that were not the coordinating RCO, but there were three RCOs that sent letters.
And I responded to each of them, including Jacqueline Williams of LA21,
Pamela Andrews of West Powell of St. Saunders Park, RCO, and Bernadette Weich of the 24th Ward.
Pamela Andrews of West Powell of St. Saunders Park RCO, and Bernadette Weich of the 2014.
And did a copy of this get submitted to the zoning board as well?
That is correct.
And did you address those concerns that they raised in their letters of opposition?
Yes, that is correct. I did address those concerns. There were a few questions. One,
they wanted to know what the target population is going to be targeted. And I explained that
That there would be homeless men who would be prepared to take the next step to moving self-sufficiency.
That persons with chronic mental or an active drug addiction would not be admitted into the program.
I also went over the intake process very thoroughly with them.
And that's actually included in the letter as well.
We went over the daily structure of how the structure of the program would be.
The term of the program, the program was initially designed to be in increments of a six-month program, rotating guests, and in response to the concerns of the community, we were open to adjusting where the program can go from October to April to focus on the winter months.
We would like the program to be all year round, but if we can work with the community, we're happy to do so, and we'll be willing to accept that proviso.
in addition they had some concerns with the male group living in the area and one of the
major concerns in the community is that there are several family and women shelters that are within
the community however there are no facilities that are designated particularly just for men
and to deny any gender the ability to have the opportunity to have that type of housing but
also to move towards self-sufficiency would be definitely an act of discrimination upon them.
But we want to make sure that everyone has the ability to be able to have an equal opportunity
to move towards self-sufficiency. There was a further concern for safety. The person served
for the program will primarily be drawn from the persons that are currently involved with Chosen
300. We currently serve about 120 homeless persons during our nightly meal. We withdraw
from them, as well as people that are currently living on the street in West Philadelphia.
The assumption that people who are poor are also dangerous, denying them the opportunity.
I'm going to object, Mr. Chairman. Who's he talking about? He's talking about hearsay
testimony? No one said anything. Actually, there are letters that are produced from the RCO.
Mr. Chairman, let me state my objection properly. He's talking about conversations out of court, with people who has not identified. He's characterizing their testimony. They haven't even testified yet. I object, Mr. Chairman.
The objection is sustained. And sir, if you said you have letters?
There are letters from-
Have they been submitted to counsel for the opposition?
All the letters and support were submitted with the package, Your Honor.
Mr. Chairman, I'm sorry.
Yeah, okay.
All right, let's proceed.
Okay, so with regards to your response, it's now up on the screen, dated June 29th, 2021,
did you address the concerns that were raised by the letters in opposition from the non-coordinating RCOs?
That is correct.
And afterwards, did you follow up directly with them, these individuals that sent in the letters with regards to calls to them regarding your letter and any follow up that they had?
Yes, I responded both in email and phone.
I sent emails exactly to the same email address that each of the letters came from.
But in addition, I did follow up with a phone call.
I got voicemails for Jacqueline Williams and Bernadette Weich.
I did speak directly with Pamela Andrews and informed her that I did send the information.
And if she had any questions or concerns, and they would also reconsider their opposition, but if they could definitely address it, it would be greatly appreciated.
I didn't hear back from either RCO after responding to all their concerns.
with that uh mr chairman uh that's the uh completion of the redirect of mr jenkins
um i only have a handful of questions mr chairman can you hear me okay mr demarco please identify
yourself richard demarco i i'm here on behalf of protestants including sam development llc as well
uh based on the redirect mr demarco excuse me you're fading in and out in the meantime do you
swear for him to tell the truth whole truth nothing but the truth i do mr chairman can you
All truth. Nothing but the truth. I do, Mr. Chairman. Can you hear me OK?
hear me okay yes
Yes. OK, sorry. This mic is not so good. Anyway, Mr. Jenkins, thank you.
With regard to the use of your basement, you said that the basement is empty, right?
That's your choice to do that, right? You have a house of worship at that property, correct?
Actually, the worship area in the sanctuary is actually in the main level, which is street level.
One of the challenges is that we have people that come to worship that are actually handicapped.
Some people that are elderly, some people that are not able to climb stairs.
So that is the reason why we have the worship where it's accessible to the entire community on the main level where it is handicapped accessible.
All right. But your basement is certainly accessible to any individuals who are not handicapped, correct?
That is correct. But the idea of worship, that is a worship.
Well, if you let me answer the question.
Mr. Jenkins, you answered the question.
Mr. Jenkins, Mr. DeMarco will ask you the question.
Mr. Jenkins, so that area is accessible and is available for house of worship or accessory uses to your house of worship that you operate there, correct?
It is not accessible for worship because worship contains a community gathering of all the people within the congregation.
So if all the people in the congregation are not able to participate in the worship, then it is not suitable for worship.
So your testimony is that because there's maybe a handful of individuals who are handicapped, you can't use the basement for a house of worship use?
it is inappropriate as a christian organization as a church to discriminate against people because