They have never12 been paying anything. They probably will13 remain unaware and are often the people14 who are really hard for us to track down,15 because the billing addresses aren't16 necessarily good. It's the other group17 of customers who are parking lots and18 properties that have been redeveloped19 since the original time of those20 D-Permits were taken out that are useful21 businesses, when you think about Loews22 parking lots, hospital parking lots,23 parcels of land that are very active, but24 because the way they've been redeveloped,25 87 6/6/11 - FINANCE - BILL 110297, ETC.1 the parcels are drawn around where that2 original account that was abandoned3 exists. So those parcels certainly know4 and are very much aware --5
And they6 would have gotten a bill or some7 notification?8
Thank you.12 Any other questions?13 Councilwoman Brown?14
Thank you17 very much.18 COMMISSIONER NEUKRUG: Thank19 you.20
Okay.21 Bill 110229, Community Development Block22 Grant, Deborah McColloch.23 (Witness approached witness24 table.)25 88 6/6/11 - FINANCE - BILL 110297, ETC.1 MS. McCOLLOCH: Good afternoon,2 Councilwoman Tasco and other members of3 the Finance Committee and members of City4 Council. I am Deborah McColloch,5 Director of Housing. I am here to6 present testimony on behalf of the7 Administration on Bill 110229, which8 amends Section 1108 of Chapter 21-1100,9 ("Community Development") of The10 Philadelphia Code relating to financing11 mixed-use projects on or around12 commercial corridors, under certain terms13 and conditions.14 The Administration has15 discussed a proposed amendment to the16 bill with the sponsor that would remove17 the following language under Section 110818 of Chapter 21-1100 of The Philadelphia19 Code: "At least 5 percent of the annual20 Community Development Block Grant21 entitlement, as provided by the federal22 Department of Housing and Urban23 Development, shall be allocated to24 economic development for mixed-use25 89 6/6/11 - FINANCE - BILL 110297, ETC.1 projects on or around commercial2 corridors." I would like to offer that3 amendment now.4 The Administration supports the5 Mixed-Use Development Program, which was6 created to address the issue of vacant7 commercial storefronts and upper floor8 residential units on neighborhood9 commercial corridors. This past year,10 the Office of Housing and Community11 Development and the Commerce Department12 awarded $1 million in Community13 Development Block Grant funds to five14 developments through the Mixed-Use15 Development Program. The selected16 developments will create a total of 1217 affordable housing units, nine commercial18 spaces and approximately 35 to 4519 permanent local jobs. The Year 3720 Proposed Consolidated Plan continues this21 program in Year 37 at the same level of22 funding of $1 million.23 While the Administration24 supports the Mixed-Use Development25 90 6/6/11 - FINANCE - BILL 110297, ETC.1 Program, given these uncertain economic2 times and the recent federal and state3 funding cuts of 16.5 million, we do not4 support legislation that mandates5 specific budget allocations. Now more6 than ever, we need the flexibility to7 make decisions about how best to use8 scarce resources to achieve our goal to9 serve low and moderate-income households10 and to revitalize communities.11 Thank you for the opportunity12 to testify today. I'm happy to answer13 any questions you may have.14
So what15 are we doing here, since I was16 distracted?17 MS. McCOLLOCH: We are18 eliminating -- we're removing from the19 Code a section under 21-1108, "Economic20 Development," which was included last21 year indicating that at least 5 percent22 of the CDBG entitlement must be allocated23 for a Mixed-Use Development Program, and24 rather than have a legislative25 91 6/6/11 - FINANCE - BILL 110297, ETC.1 requirement to have a 5 percent2 entitlement for the program, we are just3 including the program in our Con Plan,4 which you're going to hear later on this5 afternoon, of a million dollars for that6 program. And this original bill was7 sponsored by Councilman Jones, and we've8 met with him, and he's in agreement with9 this amendment to change Chapter 21-110010 and include the program in the Con Plan11 as we're going to present it later on12 this afternoon.13
Thank you17 very much.18 Ms. Gina Snyder. Is she still19 here? Gina Snyder, East Falls20 Development Corporation?21 (No response.)22
Ms. Snyder23 did submit testimony to support Bill24 110229, and that will be put into the25 92 6/6/11 - FINANCE - BILL 110297, ETC.1 record as presented.2 We omitted Mr. James White on3 the stormwater piece.4 Mr. White, do you still want to5 testify or do you want to submit your6 testimony for the record? Please come7 up. It's up to you.8 I'm sorry. I'm moving too9 fast.10 (Witness approached witness11 table.)12
I'm sorry, Madam13 Councilwoman. If it would please the14 Council, I would submit my testimony into15 the record.16
You want17 to summarize? You can put it on the18 record however you'd like.19
Thank you for the24 opportunity to testify today. My name is25 93 6/6/11 - FINANCE - BILL 110297, ETC.1 James White and I'm the Policy2 Coordinator of the Philadelphia3 Association of Community Development4 Corporations. PACDC is an association of5 90 community development corporations,6 CDCs, and other organizations that have7 extensive experience designing and8 implementing strategies to address9 abandoned and blighted properties in the10 neighborhood. Today I would like to11 focus my testimony on the unintended12 consequences of Bill No. 110446.13 We agree in theory with the14 intent of this bill, that charging15 properties that formerly had water16 service but were shut off for their share17 of the stormwater management fees reduces18 stormwater fees for everyone else.19 Although, if you recall the last20 stormwater management fees hike, for lack21 of a better term, did have an impact on22 lower-income property owners, folks that23 run supportive housing programs, daycare24 facilities, as well as the owners of25 94 6/6/11 - FINANCE - BILL 110297, ETC.1 rental properties that serve low-income2 residents across the City.3 PACDC would suggest -- and I'm4 just highlighting and skipping here -- an5 amendment stating that the City will6 offer hardship agreements for low-income7 property owners and for acquisitions by8 non-profits. Additionally, the City9 should offer waiver or recapture10 agreements with long-term self-amortizing11 loans that are recaptured at resale but12 are subordinate to other financing.13 We feel that by adding these14 amendments to the proposed legislation,15 it will avoid any delays that may be16 caused by liens or increasing liens on17 vacant properties in the future that18 would make them harder to acquire for19 non-profit developers or CDCs that are20 interested in remediating blight in their21 neighborhoods.22 Thank you for your time.23
Have you24 talked to the Water Department about25 95 6/6/11 - FINANCE - BILL 110297, ETC.1 this?2
We had several3 conversations ongoing, either through4 Regional Legal Housing Services or5 through our members, with the Water6 Department. I just believe that we feel7 that we need to really investigate this a8 little bit further before passing9 immediate legislation that will have an10 immediate impact on our community without11 fully giving a scope to what the impact12 of the legislation is, Madam Chair.13
So are you14 saying that there could be possibly15 vacant properties that your CDCs might16 want and --17
And there could18 be -- these could end up with increased19 liens due to these fees that we may not20 be aware of. Time and time again we've21 had problems when approaching the22 Administration to acquire properties, as23 you know, in the past, and sometimes the24 intention of the legislation, although it25 96 6/6/11 - FINANCE - BILL 110297, ETC.1 has a great meaning and a greater good,2 sometimes we incur an unintended3 consequence that may be unforeseen. So4 we're just asking for a little bit more5 time to get a little bit deeper dive into6 exactly what the Water Department is7 proposing.8
So if9 there are liens on properties, you have10 to satisfy those liens when you are11 acquiring those properties?12
In some cases, yes.13 In some cases, these liens aren't14 resolved. In some cases, they end up15 being bills that are passed on to the16 non-profit developer in the process from17 the City.18
Yeah.21 Thank you, Madam Chair.22 That's what I was trying to get23 at. So if there's taxes or water owed on24 these properties, sometimes you have to25 97 6/6/11 - FINANCE - BILL 110297, ETC.1 pay those?2
They're3 inadvertently passed on to the developer4 in the process because they aren't5 extinguished in a timely manner.6
Mr. White,10 you said that you are currently in11 discussions with the Water Department?12
Yeah. We have13 different members of ours, Regional Legal14 Housing Services and some of our other15 CDCs, that have had conversations16 regarding stormwater management issues in17 the past. We've also had conversations18 where the Water Department has come out19 to our Association and did presentations20 regarding the increases in the fees of21 stormwater.22 So our question becomes, Madam,23 with all due respect, is if this is going24 to be a bill that's going to be, as soon25 98 6/6/11 - FINANCE - BILL 110297, ETC.1 as it's passed, immediately enacted, I2 think we need to take a little bit longer3 look overall at what the scope of what4 this does beyond what its intent is,5 because what we've discovered is6 sometimes the good intentions7 sometimes --8
The9 conversations are good. The discussions10 are healthy. At the end of those11 presentations, what was the ask? What12 were the expectations raised by the13 Association of the Water Department? And14 have those concerns been adequately,15 appropriately addressed in writing or at16 all?17
No, ma'am, they18 haven't. That's why we're coming here19 today at the last minute when we realize20 that this bill was introduced and would21 have an immediate impact. We've asked22 several questions about what the23 long-term projections would be of these24 fees beyond the fixed years 2012 and25 99 6/6/11 - FINANCE - BILL 110297, ETC.1 2013. We have asked -- and these are2 questions that we're still waiting to get3 the answers for from the Administration.4
We put, yes, in the7 form of e-mail and the form of other8 memos that Regional Legal Housing9 Services has developed. So this for us10 has been an ongoing concern, and what we11 would ask, as I stated, is that if this12 bill were to pass, that they would amend13 the bill to include hardship agreements14 for low-income property owners such as I15 suggested and for the acquisitions by16 non-profits of these vacant properties so17 that there is -- or some type of waiver18 or recapture agreement so that we can19 avoid any unintended consequences that20 this bill may have.21 COUNCILWOMAN TASCO:22 Mr. Clarke, Councilman Clarke.23
Thank you,24 Madam Chair.25 100 6/6/11 - FINANCE - BILL 110297, ETC.1 Mr. White, how are you?2
You're5 talking about private acquisitions by6 CDCs, not government-assisted7 acquisitions?8
We're talking about9 private acquisitions and some10 government-assisted acquisitions where11 we've had problems.12
We can't13 hear you. Would you please speak into14 the microphone.15
Well, on17 government acquisitions, all the liens18 are -- and I'm assuming we're talking19 about using NTI or some other kind20 condemnation measures -- that those liens21 actually assist the City in the22 condemnation process, because the23 acquisition -- the compensation to the24 property owner actually goes against the25 101 6/6/11 - FINANCE - BILL 110297, ETC.1 lien. So we actually don't have to pay2 for that, if there are substantial liens.3 So that's actually beneficial. If it's a4 private acquisition by a CDC, which, to5 my knowledge, at least of the ones in my6 area, it's like very minimal. I mean,7 most of the acquisitions done by the CDCs8 are either government-assisted or they9 acquired already publicly owned10 properties. So to change the program to11 address three, four, five properties I12 think is --13
We also have14 private developers in the Association,15 sir. So it's not just the non-profits16 that you're speaking of.17
Please20 speak into the microphone, Mr. White. We21 have old ears. We can't hear you.22
I'm sorry.23 The Association consists of24 also private developers and non-profit25 102 6/6/11 - FINANCE - BILL 110297, ETC.1 associations and supportive housing2 facilities.3
Yes. The end use6 in most cases is affordable housing. In7 some cases, it's supportive housing or8 community facilities.9
And my10 limited knowledge of that is that at the11 closing, which all of those require, that12 the City traditionally waives if it's for13 affordable housing or a non-profit use14 that's going to be supportive of the15 community or a low-income community, that16 normally -- and I'm sure somebody can17 correct me if I'm wrong, which I am18 frequently -- that that should normally19 be waived at the time of settlement.20
Off the top of my25 103 6/6/11 - FINANCE - BILL 110297, ETC.1 head --2
Personally3 I don't ever remember a situation with a4 non-profit --5
Okay. But12 don't you think that 20 is relatively13 easy to just simply waive it as opposed14 to changing the entire Water Department15 program? I'm just asking a question.16
Do I think it's21 easier to change the 20? Probably, sir,22 but given the back and forth that we've23 had, I would say no, because it hasn't24 been resolved.25 104 6/6/11 - FINANCE - BILL 110297, ETC.1
Can I just add one5 more thing? I think if it was resolved,6 I think our members wouldn't be7 concerned, I wouldn't be here, and I8 would have just passed on testifying9 about it. So to us, it's an issue of10 concern, and all we're asking for is a11 deeper dive, a closer look at what we're12 getting into with this bill.13
The Water14 Department has left, so they're not here15 to respond. We'll try and figure it out.16
Thank you,24 Madam Chair. I'd like to ask that we25 105 6/6/11 - FINANCE - BILL 110297, ETC.1 briefly go into the public meeting so I2 may record my vote on all of the matters3 before us today as a yes vote and then4 come back into the public hearing.5
We will6 recess our public hearing and go into the7 public meeting to allow Councilman Green8 to leave his vote.9
Thank you,10 Madam Chair. I request your consent to11 vote yes on all bills appearing before12 the Committee.13
All right.21 We'll go now back into our public22 hearing.23 Next we have Bill 110444,24 Community Development Block Grant25 106 6/6/11 - FINANCE - BILL 110297, ETC.1 ordinance, Ms. Deborah McColloch, Mr.2 Alan Greenberger.3 (Witnesses approached witness4 table.)5 MS. McCOLLOCH: Would you like6 me to begin?7
Beg your8 pardon?9 MS. McCOLLOCH: Would you like10 me to begin?11
Sure. I'm12 sorry. 13 MS. McCOLLOCH: Good afternoon,14 Councilwoman Tasco and other members of15 the Finance Committee and members of City16 Council. I am still Deborah McColloch,17 Director of Housing. I will present18 testimony on behalf of the Administration19 on Bill No. 1 and the state funds from the Department2 of Community and Economic Development,3 DCED. The bill refers to Exhibit A,4 which is the Year 37 Consolidated Plan,5 the required HUD funding application. In6 order for the City to receive funding7 from HUD, the City is required to submit8 an approved Consolidated Plan to HUD no9 later than August 16th, 2011. 1 1st, 2011 details our plan for spending2 funds from four primary federal sources,3 the state's Department of Community and4 Economic Development and Housing Trust5 Fund. 5 percent reduction,17 or approximately $9 million less, than in18 Year 36. 6 percent reduction, or21 approximately $2 million less, than in22 Year 36. 1 Assistance funding, represent an2 additional loss of nearly $5 million. In3 Year 37, based on the current rate of4 earnings, the Housing Trust Fund budgeted5 amount is $7 million, a decrease of6 $500,000 from Year 36. 073 million. 3 Reductions to core programs4 were minimized by not making5 across-the-board cuts. 7 million less9 funding, which would result in 40010 households not receiving basic home11 repairs. 13 Second, non-core programs were14 reviewed for performance and impact. 20 Third, we identified other21 eligible funding sources to fill gaps in22 funding for core programs. 7 Instead of making across-the-board cuts,8 the staffing and delivery of programs at9 each agency was examined for impact of10 services. 16 Finally, after completing the17 steps outlined above, additional18 reductions were required to balance the19 budget. 6 The Administration remains committed to7 affordable housing production, housing8 preservation programs, mortgage9 foreclosure prevention and other key10 housing services. Within the11 Consolidated Plan budget, continued12 funding is proposed for homeownership13 housing and rental ventures financed in14 conjunction with the Low Income Housing15 Tax Credit and special needs housing to16 assist the homeless and those with other17 special needs. 32 million in Year 37. 6 In addition to CDBG and HOME,7 the Year 37 Consolidated Plan includes8 federal funding from the Housing9 Opportunities for Persons with AIDS10 program, which the City of Philadelphia11 administers for a five-county12 metropolitan region, including13 Philadelphia, Bucks, Chester, Delaware14 and Montgomery Counties. The federal15 formula for HOPWA funds is based on the16 historical and contemporary AIDS caseload17 in the region. Rental assistance to18 allow persons with AIDS to rent their own19 apartments or home is the largest single20 expenditure of HOPWA funds. 4 million from Fiscal Year24 2011. 1 related to the decrease in the number of2 newly diagnosed people with AIDS. 8 Another source of federal9 funding for housing in Year 37 is the10 Emergency Shelter Grant program. 17 In the past, another major18 source of funding for housing has been19 the Section 108 loan program. Under the20 Section 108 loan program, the City is21 allowed to borrow funds against future22 CDBG entitlement grants. 1 economic development ventures and to2 support specific housing development3 ventures. While economic development4 Section 108 loans are self-sustaining5 through the repayment of debt, subsidies6 for housing funded with Section 108 loans7 must be repaid from CDBG entitlement8 funding. 17 Thank you for the opportunity18 to present this testimony. In order for19 the City to receive funding from HUD, the20 City is required to submit an approved21 Consolidated Plan to HUD no later than22 August 16th, 2011. 6
Would you11 like to go back to 1987, '89 when the12 rafters were filled with...13 So just kind of wrap it up and14 tell us what does all of this mean for15 us?16 MS. McCOLLOCH: Well, what it17 means is that we have the $16.5 million18 reduction in funding, but that to the19 best of our abilities, we've maintained20 funding for our core programs, and our21 core programs are affordable housing22 production, housing preservation --23 that's the Basic Systems Repair24 Program and the programs that go along25 117 6/6/11 - FINANCE - BILL 110297, ETC.1 with that -- for housing counseling,2 which includes the Mortgage Foreclosure3 Prevention Program, the diversion4 program, and also for community economic5 development programs.6 So as much as we can, we've7 avoided reductions in those programs.8 We've moved money around between CDBG and9 the Housing Trust Fund to try to maintain10 those programs, which is the example of11 the Heater Hotline, which in the past has12 been funded with state money and it's not13 in the budget this year. We feel that's14 a core program. We have to make sure we15 have the Heater Hotline. So we're16 funding that with Housing Trust Fund17 money, and we've done our best to18 maintain those priorities.19
You talk20 about on the four CDBG-funded21 programs that were cut by 16.5 percent,22 YouthBuild, Utility Emergency Services23 and ECA and the Child Care Facilities24 Fund. How does that look in terms of25 118 6/6/11 - FINANCE - BILL 110297, ETC.1 dollars?2 MS. McCOLLOCH: In terms of?3
I mean, I6 know because we use -- all of them are7 good programs. YouthBuild is a good8 program. Certainly we've supported the9 Utility Emergency Fund in the past to10 keep people warm, same thing with ECA and11 the Child Care Facilities Fund.12 Do you have an idea of -- what13 do they go from, from what to what?14 MS. McCOLLOCH: Yes. Yes.15 Hold on one second, I can tell you.16 Utility Emergency Services Fund17 goes from 1.4 -- 1.525, I beg your18 pardon, 1.525 to 1.275. So it's been cut19 by $250,000.20
Okay.21 What about ECA?22 MS. McCOLLOCH: ECA goes from23 800 to 669, 669,000. The Child Care24 Facilities Fund goes from 650,000 to25 119 6/6/11 - FINANCE - BILL 110297, ETC.1 543,000, and YouthBuild goes from 600,0002 to 502,000. And in each of those cases,3 that's just the standard cut -- we were4 cut in federal funding by 16.5 percent,5 so we just applied that cut to those6 programs.7
So does8 YouthBuild have other funding other than9 the funding from your department?10 MS. McCOLLOCH: It has direct11 funding from HUD for the YouthBuild12 program, in addition to this funding that13 we provide.14
What about15 the Child Care Facilities Fund? That's16 our fund, right?17 MS. McCOLLOCH: Child Care18 Facilities Fund also has some funding19 from the William Penn Foundation, but the20 Child Care Facilities Fund has remaining21 uncommitted, unallocated funds from the22 current fiscal year that it can carry23 forward. So it will actually have over24 $700,000 available to it in the next25 120 6/6/11 - FINANCE - BILL 110297, ETC.1 fiscal year to carry out its program.2
What about3 ECA?4 MS. McCOLLOCH: ECA has5 additional funding through the state6 weatherization program, and this funding7 will not reduce the funding for the8 neighborhood energy centers. They will9 continue to be funded.10
Okay.11 Well, they'll probably testify, I guess.12 You have questions?13 Councilwoman Brown.14
Good15 afternoon, and thank you for your16 testimony. Too often professionals in17 government do not get thanked for what's18 called follow-through, which is19 fundamental in the work that we do. So I20 want, on behalf of my office, I want to21 say thank you for at least a half dozen22 seniors we were trying to be helpful to23 who all needed heat in some way, form or24 fashion. So the Heater Hotline works.25 121 6/6/11 - FINANCE - BILL 110297, ETC.1 The follow-through on the number of2 persons that I talked with personally on3 the phone made a difference in seniors,4 and the intervention during those cold5 winter months made a difference for them6 as well. So thank you.7 MS. McCOLLOCH: Great.8
Well, I12 guess we can't go back to 1987, '88, '8913 and have all the discussion.14 Councilman Clarke. I'm sorry.15
That's16 fine. No problem, Madam Chair. I just17 had one quick question.18 You may or may not be able to19 answer it. First, I want to thank you20 for doing a good job with a bad situation21 and figuring out a way to maneuver the22 finance go-around and ensure that we keep23 the core program.24 HRP, I understand that we25 122 6/6/11 - FINANCE - BILL 110297, ETC.1 haven't been using it as much as we would2 have liked. In terms of the criteria, is3 that a local policy? I know part of the4 problem has been community groups. You5 have to establish a certain level --6 there can only be a certain level of7 vacancy on the block to qualify for the8 HRP dollars. Is that a local policy?9 MS. McCOLLOCH: Yes. That's10 been a local -- that's a local program11 policy, mostly to ensure that the12 property can get a mortgage. It's based13 on rehabbing a property and the home14 buyer getting a mortgage to put that15 portion into the development budget. So16 properties with high vacancy rates are17 less -- properties on blocks with high18 vacancy rates are less likely to get19 mortgages, so we've been making that20 requirement of the program, but it is a21 local policy, not legislative.22
The reason23 I ask that, because I know of instances24 where, say, for instance, 28th Street,25 123 6/6/11 - FINANCE - BILL 110297, ETC.1 the Project HOME is working on up in2 Strawberry Mansion, they have been3 essentially on hold for two years because4 there are two PHA properties that take5 them over that threshold because they're6 two vacant PHA properties, and you know7 how difficult it is to get properties8 through the inventory, so they've been9 unable to move forward on that HRP. So10 I'm wondering given some of the changes11 in the way --12 MS. McCOLLOCH: We could13 certainly look at that, yeah.14
And just15 from a policy perspective, because there16 happens to be a lot more vacant17 properties now for unfortunate reasons.18 Could we possibly look at changing that19 local policy?20 MS. McCOLLOCH: Yeah. One of21 the reasons why the HRP program was not22 allocated additional funding this year is23 because it has unspent funding from the24 prior fiscal year, as you and I have25 124 6/6/11 - FINANCE - BILL 110297, ETC.1 talked about, and we have thought we need2 to take this time to look at that program3 overall, and that may be -- the sort of4 change you're describing may be one that5 we need to look at.6
If we do10 utilize HRP, it will call for other11 people to say, You know what, I'm going12 to actually go out and renovate or try13 and purchase and renovate a property on14 that block.15 MS. McCOLLOCH: Right.16
Because we17 can be the stimulus, not the fill-in.18 You understand what I'm saying?19 MS. McCOLLOCH: I understand,20 Councilman.21
All right.22 Thank you.23 Thank you, Madam Chair. That's24 it.25 125 6/6/11 - FINANCE - BILL 110297, ETC.1 COUNCILWOMAN TASCO:2 Ms. McColloch, how many vacant properties3 do we have in the City now? What is the4 official number?5 MS. McCOLLOCH: The official6 number? I don't know what the official7 number is.8 DEPUTY MAYOR GREENBERGER:9 Publicly owned or all told?10
I12 think -- I'm going to look back at -- is13 it in the 40's? I think it is in the14 40,000's, of which about 25 percent is15 publicly held.16
I was just17 telling Councilwoman Blackwell in 197318 there were 37,000 vacant houses. We19 haven't made much headway, have we, or20 they just -- people just keep abandoning21 the houses.22 Thank you very much. You have23 testimony, Mr. Greenberger?24 DEPUTY
Thank you.2 All right. Thank you very much. Would3 you stay around? We have other people to4 testify.5 MS. McCOLLOCH: Yes.6
That's10 all right.11 May I say thank you as well.12 We've worked together for many years.13 These are tough times, but we do14 appreciate it. Thank you.15
Thank you.16 We now call on Anthony Council.17 Next to testify after Mr. Council will be18 Mr. White, John Rowe and Robert Grossman,19 if you're here.20 (Witness approached witness21 table.)22
Good24 afternoon.25 127 6/6/11 - FINANCE - BILL 110297, ETC.1
Good afternoon,2 Madam Chairperson. 20 Local 1971 members have not21 received a cost of living adjustment from22 2003 to present, or approximately eight23 years. During that time, in 2004 and24 2006, there were layoffs. 1 that was a concern because there was a2 budget cut in funds. 12 Although our numbers have13 dropped, the members continuously have to14 maintain the same level of work, which15 means that they sometimes have to do the16 job of at least two or three of their17 former comrades who were laid off. 1 and they have been placed in other2 agencies and receive as much as $13,0003 less that they were making. 9 Sorry. Excuse me. It just10 upset me that I have to say this. 1 my testimony, and, that is, why every2 time there is a cut in funds it is3 balanced on the back of the members of4 Local 1971 or the bargaining unit5 members? In fact, in an example, in one6 agency you could lay off every single7 bargaining unit member and still not8 cover the budget shortfall. 18 The members of Local 1971 are19 hard-working citizens of this city. 1 and their pay, and in some agencies, they2 cannot even receive the small sum of a3 longevity pay that is sometimes no more4 than $25 a month. 6 In fact, in the case of where7 everything is going up, my members are8 actually in the hole. They continuously9 lose against the economy, and yet they10 continue to perform their duties11 admirably. 18 Therefore, I am requesting that19 Council provide some extra funding to20 continue this good service that these21 individuals that provide it. You hear22 about the Basic Systems Repair Program23 and how well it's doing. 1 program work are actually the members of2 Local 1971. 14 One of the things that my15 members are very proud of is being16 citizens of Philadelphia. 3
Thank you4 very much.5 Any questions?6 (No response.)7 (Applause.)8
Let me9 just ask you a question. Are all of10 your -- what department are the members11 of your Local 1971, what major12 department? Are they throughout OHCD?13
Well, they14 consist of members from OHCD, RDA and15 PHDC. Those are the three housing16 agencies in which I represent and which17 my members are a part of.18
So have19 you gotten any notification as to how20 many of them would be laid off?21
No. At this time22 we have not been notified as to how many23 members will be laid off, and that is a24 concern for me and my members.25 134 6/6/11 - FINANCE - BILL 110297, ETC.1
Could we2 have someone come up from these3 departments, RDA, PHDC, and Deborah,4 Ms. McColloch, would you come back,5 please, to the table.6
You've14 heard the testimony from Mr. Council.15 Could you please have a response to that16 in terms of the number of people who have17 been laid off. But the question I want18 to ask, are these cuts from the Community19 Development Block Grant dollars or how20 much money comes from the General Fund?21 Does any money come from the General22 Fund?23 MS. McCOLLOCH: No.24 DEPUTY
No.25 135 6/6/11 - FINANCE - BILL 110297, ETC.1 MS. McCOLLOCH: It's cuts from2 Community Development Block Grant and3 HOME.4
Beg your5 pardon?6 MS. McCOLLOCH: It's cuts from7 the Community Development Block Grant8 program and the HOME program, both.9
So if10 there are layoffs coming down the pike,11 is that because of the 16.5 percent cut12 from the federal government?13 MS. McCOLLOCH: Yes.14
Why don't15 you all just tell us what's going on. I16 don't have the questions. You heard the17 testimony.18 DEPUTY
I19 have the numbers. In Ms. McColloch's20 testimony, she said that the operating21 costs that are the department operating22 costs are also being proposed to be cut23 16.5 percent from the CDBG side and 11.924 from the HOME side. That adds up to a25 136 6/6/11 - FINANCE - BILL 110297, ETC.1 little over about $5.3 million of cuts2 that we think, in fairness, the agencies3 collectively needed to take while we were4 at the same time cutting programs to that5 same extent.6 We don't have the breakdown by7 agency yet, but the overall impact is8 probably -- and most of that money is --9 the vast majority of that money is to pay10 for people's salaries. So the impact is11 approximately 58 positions, 21 of which12 we think are currently unfilled and 37 of13 which are currently filled and would need14 to be layoffs.15 COUNCILWOMAN TASCO:16 Thirty-seven layoffs?17 DEPUTY MAYOR GREENBERGER:18 Mm-hmm, spread over five agencies.19
The other20 question was in terms of his comment21 about the salary increases of some and no22 salary increases for others. Do you want23 to talk about that?24 MS. McCOLLOCH: There's not25 137 6/6/11 - FINANCE - BILL 110297, ETC.1 been -- there's not a new collective2 bargaining agreement. We are still3 working on now a seven-year-old4 collective bargaining agreement. And so5 the employees who are covered by that6 collective bargaining agreement have not7 had increases because we have not8 negotiated a new agreement for that9 period of time, and that's why there10 haven't been increases for members who11 are governed by the collective bargaining12 agreement. There are three different13 agreements, one at OHCD, one at PHDC and14 one at the Redevelopment Authority.15
So those16 employees who fall into this local,17 because you do not have a collective18 bargaining agreement, have not19 been compensated for the number of years20 without the collective --21 MS. McCOLLOCH: They haven't22 had a raise for that period of time23 because we are still operating under the24 old collective bargaining agreement.25 138 6/6/11 - FINANCE - BILL 110297, ETC.1
Thank4 you.5 And yet they say they've gone6 from 300 positions down to 133.7 DEPUTY
They10 say their positions have gone down three11 to one, from 300 to 133. Would you12 comment on that?13 MS. McCOLLOCH: I don't know14 what the numbers -- that's what15 Mr. Council has said. I don't know that16 independently. I don't have any17 independent information about what the18 reduction in the numbers is.19
Has there20 been any increase in hiring in any of21 those departments in the last year or22 two, and what level of employment?23
There's been24 increase in population at the25 139 6/6/11 - FINANCE - BILL 110297, ETC.1 Redevelopment Authority based on receipt2 of NSP dollars, the stimulus money. So3 staff was added to deliver the programs4 associated with the NSP. So there was an5 increase in staffing associated with --6
Would you10 identify yourself, please, first for the11 record.12
My name is Ed13 Covington, the Executive Director of the14 Redevelopment Authority, Madam Chair.15 And with respect to new hiring16 at the Redevelopment Authority, it's been17 primarily associated with the NSP18 stimulus money, which has enabled us to19 deliver greater housing programs for the20 City.21
Until the24 expended date, which is 2012. And so25 140 6/6/11 - FINANCE - BILL 110297, ETC.1 there will be additional time after that2 as we continue to have proceeds from the3 sale of properties that have been4 financed with these dollars, but5 basically it will amortize down over time6 and those dollars will disappear, and7 staffing will be affected accordingly.8
So the new9 hires that you brought on are basically10 funded through the NSP funding?11
That is12 correct. And they're discretely funded13 through that means, because they are a14 part of the budget for the NSP dollars15 that have been received through OHCD.16
What17 categories of employment are these18 people?19
Both bargaining20 unit individuals were added as well as21 individuals not in the bargaining unit.22
Could you23 give us a breakdown of the people who24 were hired?25 141 6/6/11 - FINANCE - BILL 110297, ETC.1
I don't have a2 precise breakdown at the moment, Madam3 Chair, but we can get that information.4
You can5 get that to the Chair, how many are6 bargaining employees and how many are7 not?8
All right.11 MR. McINTOSH: Good evening,12 Madam Chair. My name is Anthony13 McIntosh. I'm the Executive14 Vice-President of the Philadelphia15 Housing Development Corporation, and we16 too at PHDC did experience an increase in17 staffing as a direct result of receiving18 stimulus dollars to administer the19 weatherization program.20
And what21 were these -- what did these employees22 do? What is their responsibilities?23 MR. McINTOSH: They support the24 activities under our weatherization25 142 6/6/11 - FINANCE - BILL 110297, ETC.1 initiative, from inspectors to2 administrative support, as well as3 financial support as well in our Finance4 Department.5
Were any6 of these employees ever in your7 department before or worked for any of8 the other agencies, RDA, PHDC or OHCD?9 MR. McINTOSH: No. No.10
So the11 people who were laid off were never12 called back to work at --13 MR. McINTOSH: No, that's not14 correct. We've called back numerous15 people. We have a collective bargaining16 agreement that dictates the process as it17 relates to those people that may remain18 on a layoff list and their callback19 rights.20 But with respect to the21 stimulus program, 50 percent of our22 funding was received in the initial year.23 So in order to meet our production goals,24 there was a ramp-up of staff in an effort25 143 6/6/11 - FINANCE - BILL 110297, ETC.1 to meet our production demands, and as2 those stimulus dollars expire, which is3 scheduled for March of 2012, we will also4 be having a ramp-down. This is a ramp-up5 and it's a ramp-down, and it was6 discussed with the union leadership at7 that time and the plan was reviewed with8 that leadership.9
Okay.10 Thank you very much.11 You have something to say,12 Mr. Greenberger?13 DEPUTY
Just14 a correction to something I told you15 before and you wrote down. Right now the16 projection is, there are 21 vacant17 positions that will be unfilled. There18 are projected 31 layoffs across five19 departments and five people who we think20 we can change the funding source outside21 of these funding sources.22
And23 because all of your funding basically24 comes from the Community Development25 144 6/6/11 - FINANCE - BILL 110297, ETC.1 Block Grant dollars from --2
In these3 agencies, a lot of it does. Some4 Commerce does, and in Commerce we think5 there's some shift we can make to protect6 several jobs.7
Okay.8 Thank you very much.9 Any questions?10 (No response.)11
Madam15 Chairperson, I would just like to make an16 additional response to some of the things17 they said, if that would be acceptable.18
Speak into19 the microphone. Identify yourself,20 please.21
I am Anthony22 Council, President of Local 1971.23 And one of the things that I24 would like to bring also to this25 145 6/6/11 - FINANCE - BILL 110297, ETC.1 Committee's attention is this, when we're2 talking about the exempt and the number3 of individuals -- and this is based on4 information I received from the5 management itself -- if you take OHCD,6 they have 26 bargaining unit members and7 they account for 24 percent of the total8 salary costs within that agency, or9 approximately $953,955. The total exempt10 costs is $3,102,653, yet once again I11 don't know how they're going to pick the12 numbers, but as I like to continuously13 state, that as always, my members pay the14 price for layoffs. And I can provide you15 data showing you that a large part of the16 salary cost is not my bargaining unit17 members. It is not the members of Local18 1971. That if you have a large number19 with them or you hear salary, that's20 based on the number of them, but in a lot21 of cases -- and I'll give you an example22 here. In one case, such as in the RDA,23 we have the director salaries of 2324 directors, the equivalent of $2,120,396.25 146 6/6/11 - FINANCE - BILL 110297, ETC.1 That's 23 individuals, which means that2 these individuals actually direct 2.53 people. And, in fact, if you include the4 total exempt, that's including directors5 and exempt, you would get a total salary6 cost of $2,497,662. That's 30 people.7 If you count the bargaining unit members,8 you get a cost of $2,463,800. Once9 again, I'd like to point out that the10 exempt salaries are higher than the11 bargaining unit members.12 We also deal with a large13 number of salaries that reached the level14 of over $100,000, and yet, once again, my15 members will begin to pay the price for16 budget cuts.17 So I just wanted to bring that18 to the attention of the Committee as19 well.20
Thank you21 very much.22 Any other questions?23 (No response.)24
Thank you25 147 6/6/11 - FINANCE - BILL 110297, ETC.1 very much for your testimony.2 We will now have Mr. White,3 Mr. Rowe and Mr. Grossman, and then we'll4 go back to the Water Department. We're5 going to finish this testimony here.6 (Witnesses approached witness7 table.)8
Mr. White,9 are you testifying?10 Good afternoon. How you doing?11
Would you13 state your name for the record and14 proceed with your testimony.15
I'm John Rowe, the16 Executive Director of the Utility17 Emergency Services Fund.18
Thank you,20 Councilwoman Tasco, members of the21 Finance Committee, members of City22 Council, for the opportunity to testify23 and for the continuing support of City24 Council. UESF provides emergency25 148 6/6/11 - FINANCE - BILL 110297, ETC.1 financial assistance to prevent utility2 service from being shut off and to get3 utility service turned back on for very4 poor families in Philadelphia. I5 distributed a handout which we can6 follow.7 Over the past five years, USEF8 has had the opportunity to assist over9 24,000 families. On the back side of the10 handout, the locations of the families11 that we serve by census block groups and12 Council districts are presented.13 OHCD is proposing to cut a14 quarter of a million dollars of emergency15 utility assistance in FY2012. If this16 happens, 700 very poor families will be17 without utility service this coming year.18 Since USEF is the last resort, these19 families have no other recourse. The20 utilities match USEF grants dollar for21 dollar. So the City's poorest families22 will lose an additional quarter of a23 million dollars in matching funds. The24 proposed funding cut will result in a25 149 6/6/11 - FINANCE - BILL 110297, ETC.1 total loss of a half a million dollars.2 The families we serve are very3 poor, with an annual income of around4 $13,700, or 80 percent of the federal5 poverty level. Eighty-two percent are6 female-headed households, and the average7 family consists of an adult with between8 one and two children. These funds are9 used entirely for emergency grants. No10 funds are used for operational or11 administrative costs.12 The need for utility assistance13 for vulnerable families is immense.14 During the five-week period preceding15 this year's LIHEAP season, USEF provided16 emergency financial assistance at the17 unprecedented level of $800,000 in five18 weeks. Every year we spend all of our19 funds, and there is never a carryover.20 LIHEAP is threatened with a 5021 percent funding cut from the federal22 level. This means that 50,000 eligible23 Philadelphia families who receive LIHEAP24 this year may not receive LIHEAP next25 150 6/6/11 - FINANCE - BILL 110297, ETC.1 year. Even without a 50 percent cut to2 LIHEAP, there are only enough LIHEAP3 funds to assist two out of three eligible4 Philadelphia families.5 We see firsthand the families6 who do not receive needed help. They7 come to us because we are the last8 resort, and we help if we have the funds.9 Seven hundred families will not be able10 to pay their utilities, or they may try11 to pay the utilities but not pay their12 rent, risking eviction, or not pay their13 mortgage, straining the City's mortgage14 foreclosure prevention efforts even more15 so. The families will be at increased16 risk of homelessness, costing the City17 much more either to prevent their18 homelessness or pay for extended stays in19 the shelter system. Families will not20 purchase adequate food or medicine for21 their children, resulting in unhealthy22 children and the longer term negative23 effects on children's growth and24 development.25 151 6/6/11 - FINANCE - BILL 110297, ETC.1 The cutting of a quarter of a2 million dollars not only impacts upon the3 energy utility security of low families,4 it also deeply affects these other5 crucial areas.6 On behalf of the 700 families7 who would be without utility service or8 worse, I respectfully ask that the9 quarter of a million dollars is restored.10 It will be leveraged into $500,000, and11 problems would be prevented before they12 occur.13 The provision of utility14 assistance is a more proactive and less15 expensive approach to larger problems16 that the City will have to contend with17 resulting from the loss of utility18 services.19 Thank you.20
I23 would like to thank Mr. Rowe for his24 commitment and his dedication to helping25 152 6/6/11 - FINANCE - BILL 110297, ETC.1 people with Utility Emergency Services2 Fund. I hope that all of those, Deb3 McColloch and company, will hear so that4 if there is some way that we can provide5 any assistance, some way we can restore6 some dollars, that we would consider7 that. When he says he'll take a quarter8 of a million and double it, he will.9 He's done a phenomenal job over the years10 and we're grateful for all that he does.11 Thank you, Mr. Rowe.12
Thank you.14 I agree, and we've tried every year to15 try to help you.16 So we're sending out the word17 to Ms. McColloch.18
Two21 hundred fifty thousand dollars, I'm sure22 you have that in the kitchen cabinet over23 the stove. So you can get back to us on24 that, please, Ms. McColloch.25 153 6/6/11 - FINANCE - BILL 110297, ETC.1 MS. McCOLLOCH: Beg your2 pardon?3
You'll get4 back to us on looking at how we may be5 able to fund it, because we do get calls6 all winter long and he does provide a lot7 of support services. And I'm looking at8 this map, and certainly the 9th District9 is a recipient of a lot of services from10 this program, as well as most of the11 City, but I'm looking at the 9th12 Councilmanic District.13 Thank you very much.14
Next we18 have Mr. Grossman, or who did you say19 was --20
Councilwoman,21 Drew Becher, President of PHS will be22 proceeding.23
Would you24 identify yourself, please.25 154 6/6/11 - FINANCE - BILL 110297, ETC.1
Hi. Good2 afternoon, Councilmembers. Drew Becher,3 President of Pennsylvania Horticultural4 Society.5
18 Public spaces filled with thriving19 greenery create a more appealing urban20 environment. 9 Over the past three decades with10 significant investment from the City's11 Office of Housing and Community12 Development, Philadelphia Green has13 demonstrated that greening not only14 improves the quality of life and15 strengthens community bonds, but also16 attracts investment and creates community17 wealth. We very much appreciate the18 support, and we have put these resources19 to very, very good use. 1 The Philadelphia LandCare2 Program in a recent report on vacant land3 management submitted to the RDA disclosed4 that tens of thousands of blighted and5 unattended vacant lots in Philadelphia6 have a dramatic economic impact on the7 City, not in a good way. The8 Philadelphia LandCare Program has9 responded to this, and with our Clean and10 Green program and treatment have11 transformed over 5,000 of those 40,00012 parcels that we talked about earlier13 throughout the City over the past ten14 years. This program targets15 neighborhoods that are severely plagued16 by vacancy and abandonment. 1 University of Pennsylvania is showing2 significant declines in assaults near3 LandCare sites. 7 Community LandCare is an8 important component of the Philadelphia9 LandCare Program. In this program,10 community organizations are funded to11 provide 60 jobs for neighborhood12 residents keeping up 1,700 parcels free13 of debris. 17 Also in this program is the18 Philadelphia Tree Initiative. It really19 goes to support Mayor Nutter's planting20 of 300,000 trees, and in recent years,21 the Green City Strategy has been one of22 the foundations of the TreeVitalize23 program that we run in the City. 1 Philadelphia has attracted other funds2 from public and private investment and3 has used community volunteers to plant at4 least 2,000 trees each year on City5 streets. Traditional contract planting6 programs would only yield about 5007 trees. 10 Over the past 16 years, PHS and11 Philadelphia Green program has been12 instrumental in the creation of the13 citizen support groups of "friends of the14 parks" groups, a network at over 10015 neighborhood park sites. 1 with the people of Philadelphia using2 greening to create safe and attractive3 neighborhoods and again to watch this4 city grow. 6
Thank you7 very much for your testimony.8 Any questions?9 Councilman Greenlee.10
Thank11 you, Madam Chair.12 Just so I'm clear here, do you13 have an ask here or are you just14 saying -- I mean, are you asking for --15 what are you asking for?16
Yes. We love what21 you're doing. We think it's fantastic.22 You probably don't hear that that much,23 but thank you so much for everything you24 do.25 161 6/6/11 - FINANCE - BILL 110297, ETC.1
Good afternoon,7 Madam Chair, and thank you for the8 opportunity to testify. My name is James9 White and I'm the Policy Coordinator for10 the Philadelphia Association of Community11 Development Corporations. 18 We understand the predicament19 the City is in given substantial proposed20 cuts in federal and state funding for21 housing and community development22 programs. 1 the Con Plan from CDBG, HOME and HRA2 alone. 16 First, reform the City's vacant17 property management system. Especially18 given reduced funding for housing and19 community development, it is critical20 that the City move toward implementing of21 a new policy stream that processes of22 reusing vacant land and buildings to23 stretch these scarce resources. 1 Philadelphia have left tens of thousands2 of trash-filled vacant lots and3 deteriorated buildings. 6 billion in8 lost household wealth, more than 209 million in City maintenance costs each10 year and at least 2 million in additional11 uncollected property taxes each year. 20 The City has substantial21 progress -- has made substantial progress22 in the past several months in developing23 new policies to facilitate productive24 reuse of blighted properties. 16 Two, expand housing17 opportunity. The demand for housing18 assistance has grown as the economy has19 weakened. 1 City, its revenues are only half of what2 they were four years ago, and we are3 facing further cuts in funding for4 federal and state housing programs. At5 the same time, recent and proposed6 increases in property taxes threaten the7 ability of residents to stay in their8 homes. We urge the City to take the9 following steps to expand housing10 opportunities and help residents stay in11 their home: Help offset a loss in12 federal and state funding for housing by13 increasing dedicated funding for the14 Philadelphia Housing Trust Fund by $415 million per year by actively supporting16 passage of state legislation HB 639,17 authorizing the ordinance approved by18 City Council in November 2009. HB 63919 was approved by the House in April. 19 Three, strengthen small20 business and neighborhood shopping21 districts. Philadelphia's neighborhood22 economies have been severely impacted by23 the downturn in the national economy. 1 revitalization of a number of commercial2 corridors. 20
Thank you21 very much.22 Would you please get copies of23 the testimony.24 Thank you very much. Any25 169 6/6/11 - FINANCE - BILL 110297, ETC.1 questions or comments?2 (No response.)3
Thank you4 very much.5 The Chair recognizes the next6 witness.7
Good8 afternoon, Council, and thank you for9 this opportunity to give testimony on the10 Office of Housing and Community11 Development Year 37 proposed Consolidated12 Plan. 17 Logan CDC is a community18 development corporation serving the Logan19 neighborhood of Philadelphia. 1 Assistance Corporation, opened its doors2 in July of 2008. In just three years, we3 have made significant contributions to4 the Logan neighborhood. After years of5 silence, our neighborhood finally has a6 strong unified voice. 1 commercial corridor revitalization2 program; plans for a mixed-use real3 estate development project on the Old4 York Road commercial corridor, with the5 recent award of funding from OHCD; the6 hiring of a part-time uniformed7 sanitation specialist to clean the8 sidewalks along the commercial corridor;9 the installation of three cameras along10 the Logan Triangle to prevent illegal11 dumping; the planting of over 50 trees12 throughout the neighborhood; and the13 coordination of ongoing vacant lot14 cleanups through the Logan NAC. Logan15 NAC is also organizing the return of16 "Let's Love Logan Day," a festival of17 family fun, food and important18 information for Logan residents. Please19 come out June 25th at TS Park. 1 months. 14 We also recently launched the Logan15 Business Association. 22 Thank you for your time, your23 attention and your interest. 7
Well, I'd11 like to comment. I'd like to thank you12 very much for your leadership, Cicely,13 and what you're doing over in the Logan14 area, and I do thank the City and OHCD15 for the support of the Logan CDC as well16 as the NAC. If we did not have this17 organization in that community, it would18 die. So they are keeping it alive and19 developing plans for the future for the20 Triangle. It's not easy, it's not sexy21 and it's not exciting, and they're22 begging and scraping and scrimping every23 way, but I appreciate your leadership and24 that support you have from a great staff25 175 6/6/11 - FINANCE - BILL 110297, ETC.1 you have. So thank you very much.2
Thank3 you, Councilwoman Tasco and Council.4 Thank you.5
Thank you6 very much.7 Is there anyone else here to8 testify on this bill?9 (No response.)10
Okay.11 There being none, Mr. White, would you12 stay here. Let's talk to the Water13 Department about your issue. Have you14 talked to them?15
We've talked16 briefly, and what I thought we agreed was17 that we would meet this week with our18 membership and our director and the19 Regional Legal Housing Services to20 address our concerns in full. But I'm21 willing to sit around and talk about it22 now, if you'd like.23
Have you24 explained to them your concerns about the25 176 6/6/11 - FINANCE - BILL 110297, ETC.1 runoff -- or the stormwater?2