COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA PUBLIC HEARING COMMITTEE ON RULES - - - Room 696, City Hall Philadelphia, Pennsylvania March 6, 2003 2:10 p.m. - - - BILL 020683 - An Ordinance amending Title of The Philadelphia Code... 10 BILL 020826 - An Ordinance amending Title 14 of The Philadelphia Code... 11 BILL 030113 - An Ordinance amending Title 14 of The Philadelphia Code... 12 BILL 030114 - An Ordinance amending Section 14-1610 of the Philadelphia Code... 13 BILL 030117 - An Ordinance establishing a neighborhood improvement district... 14 BILL 030024 - An Ordinance to amend the Philadelphia Zoning Maps... BILL 030081 - An Ordinance declaring that it is desirable for the health, safety and welfare of the people in the area served by Temple University Hospital... BILL 030099 - An Ordinance declaring that it is desirable for the health, safety and welfare of the people in the area served by Thomas Jefferson University Hospitals... RESOLUTION 030033 - Resolution initiating action to establish a neighborhood improvement district... - - - PRESENT: COUNCILMAN JAMES KENNEY, CHAIRMAN COUNCILMAN DARRELL CLARKE COUNCILMAN FRANK DICICCO COUNCILMAN MICHAEL NUTTER COUNCILMAN BRIAN O'NEILL COUNCILMAN ANGEL ORTIZ - - - V A R A L L O, INCORPORATED 2 I N D E X BILL 030081 DONALD CRAMP, Hospitals and Higher Education Facilities Authority of Phila. ......... DREW MASER, Temple University Hospital ...... HARRISON JAY, Temple University Hospital .... 6 BILL 030099 7 DONALD CRAMP, Hospitals and Higher Education Facilities Authority of Phila. ......... 16 8 NEIL LUBARSKY, Thomas Jefferson University Hospital .............................. 17 9 BILL 030017, RES. 030033 KELLY PHILLIPS-ERB, Roxborough Dev. Corp. ... 23 LISA NAGY ................................... 24 ROBERT TORRES, Roxborough Dev. Corp. ........ 25 CHARLES MCELRONE, Roxborough Dev. Corp. ..... 26 JOHN DAVIS, Roxborough Dev. Corp. ........... 28 JOHN BOYCE .................................. 34 VALERIE COYLE ............................... 39 SHARON CRAWFORD, Roxborough Civic Assoc. .... 40 BILLIE JEAN GRESHAM, Wissahickon Neighbors Civic Association ...................... 40 ELAINE LASSITER ............................. 42 WILLIAM SPALDING ............................ 42 RON CLARKSON ................................ 46 HARVEY RUSSAKOFF ............................ 51 COLLETTE STROH-SNYDER (ph) .................. 54 BERNICE KESSLER ............................. 56 BILL 030113, BILL 030114 HEATHER HARRIS, Old City Civic Assoc. ....... 64 ELLEN CURRY ................................. 66 CYNTHIA PHILO, Old City Special Services District ............................... 71 BOB BERMAN .................................. 84 THOMAS CHAPMAN, Planning Commission.......... 85 DUANE BUMB, Commerce Director ............... 90 BILL 020826 THOMAS CHAPMAN, Planning Commission ......... 114 BILL 030024 THOMAS CHAPMAN, Planning Commission ......... 116 3 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030081
Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. Thank you for your patience. The City Council Committee on Rules is now in session. We have a quorum with Councilmembers Clarke, O'Neill, Nutter and DiCicco. The first Bill on our list is Bill No. 8 030081, an Ordinance declaring that it is desirable for the health, safety and welfare of the people in the area served by Temple University Hospital, a Pennsylvania nonprofit corporation in the vicinity of 3401 North Broad Street, for the Hospitals and Higher Education Facilities Authority of Philadelphia to undertake a project whereby the Authority will finance the costs of the development and construction of a multi-level ambulatory health care building and other hospital improvements and related costs.
Can I just state on the record that I'll be abstaining from this matter? The law firm which I am affiliated with, Fox Rothschild, represents Temple. I did not participate in any discussions in this matter.
Thank you very much. The record will so indicate. 4 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030081 Mr. Cramp and whoever else on your team to testify. Please identify yourself for the record and proceed.
I believe we provided testimony, and if I may, however, follow the usual protocol of putting it on the record. Mr. Chairman, Committee Members, my name is Donald Cramp. I serve as a Chief Executive Officer of the Hospitals and Higher Education Facilities Authority of Philadelphia. I wish to make a brief introductory statement in support of both proposed bills this afternoon before you today for Temple University Hospitals and Thomas Jefferson University Hospital. Temple University Hospital and Thomas Jefferson University Hospital submitted application to the Hospitals and Higher Education Authority of Philadelphia seeking the Authority's assistance in financing the applications. The applications were accepted for consideration by the Authority. 5 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030081 A Public Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act, known as a TEFRA hearing, on behalf of Temple University was held in our boardroom on February 19th, 2003. A Public Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act, TEFRA, hearing on behalf of Thomas Jefferson University Hospital was also held in our boardroom, that being on the day of February 10th, 2003. The Authority, Temple University Hospital, and Thomas Jefferson University Hospital were represented at those respective TEFRA hearings. Today, we have the privilege together of assisting Temple University Hospital and Thomas Jefferson University Hospital and the many people associated with these remarkable organizations. To close, I sincerely and genuinely express my appreciation to each Member of the Committee and the Council on behalf of the Board of the Authority for the scheduling of these hearings so promptly. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you very much for your testimony. Any questions for Mr. Cramp? (No response.)
Seeing none, please 6 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030081 identify yourself for the record if you would like to testify. MR. MASER. My name is Drew Maser. I'm with Temple University Health System. On behalf of Temple University Hospital, I'd like to thank the Committee for hearing us. We're here today for a price increase from our previously approved Ordinance. If there's any questions, I'll be glad to answer them.
Thank you very much. Any questions for this witness? Councilmember Clarke.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Good afternoon, gentlemen. I'd actually like to talk to the representatives of Temple briefly about the construction phase of this project. As you know, it is a relatively substantial project and we wanted to get some sense of the neighborhood participation, MBE, WBE. I understand that traditionally, I know on the campus, on the university, that the Greater Philadelphia Urban Affairs Coalition is hired to solicit and 7 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030081 monitor activities for contractors and employment. Is that the case in this particular facility?
Yes. As with our last big building project in 1986, we worked with the Urban Coalition. And I believe we reached a 33 percent participation with MBEs and WBEs.
In the '86 project when we built the big facility. I know that the University and facilities work through renovation projects. They try to do the best they can.
So we did 33 percent in '86. So we'll do 43 percent in 2003.
Interesting times. I don't think any of us were on this Committee at that time, or the goals would have been much higher. For the record, because I know that this is somewhat of a hot button issue in terms of participation, I'd like to do a little more than 8 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030099 simply contract with an agency that has done a good job. Too often they interact with the building and trades. And, more often than not, there are people who are already either in the trades as journeymen or pre-apprenticeship programs or apprenticeship, and it doesn't really give the existing community an opportunity. Too often, the first time they know that anything is going to happen is that there's a bulldozer that shows up one day. We start construction. People in the community want to participate in the job and they're not able to do that because they're not in one of the building trades union. What's the timeline on the start on this project?
Forty-five days. All right. We have to hurry up. What I'd like to do is ask for the University to work with my office and the community organization to sponsor a job fair. At that job fair I'd like to have representatives from the various pre-apprenticeship programs, be it the DAP 9 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030017, RES. 030033 program -- I know Greater Philadelphia Urban Coalition does one, Congreso, maybe TOP/WIN, those programs that have been relatively successful. To do that within the next couple of weeks to kind of pull something together to give individuals an opportunity, that if they're not already in the pipeline, to get them involved in some sort of an apprenticeship program.
Mr. Chairman, good afternoon, Councilmen. My name is L. Harrison Jay. I'm Director of Community Relations for the Temple University Health System. The Councilman is right on target. We do plan to involve a variety of community organizations in the participation and building of this project, as we did with Temple Children's. And we would like to work very closely with your office to identify those community organizations, such as Congreso, the DAP program, which we have had at a community meeting about three weeks ago to talk about their involvement in the program and how we can recruit minority electricians and carpenters to participate in this building. Because as you know, it is a good asset to the community. And we would 10 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030017, RES. 030033 like to get community involvement and take a proactive stand in getting our community involved. So the Health System is looking at that. We have an advisory board meeting coming up next Tuesday, which we'll make sure community leaders are informed as to when the project is going to start, how we get them involved in the construction jobs and the union trade jobs. So that is on the table and we have discussed it.
Okay. Can you notify my office when you will have your next meeting -- or your first meeting -- with the Coalition to talk about the targeted areas in terms of Zip code for the program that they currently are contracted with you?
I just caught the last part of it. When do you start work on this project?
As my esteemed colleague said, 11 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030017, RES. 030033 within the next 40 to 50 days we're going to start that process.
How far are we along in terms of minority representation in all of these different areas?
That's what we were just discussing with Councilman Clarke, that we will involve community organizations, such as Congreso, Concilio, the DAP Program, community organizations.
None of the contracts have been awarded as of yet. They're waiting until we have our funding in place.
But you're breaking 12 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030017, RES. 030033 ground in 45 days?
I guess what I mean is the ground breaking ceremony. I know that the construction manager wants to get the foundations dug as quickly as possibly, as soon as the ground thaws. But I don't believe that any contracts have been awarded as of yet.
We've been going through this now for the last two-and-a-half years, and we always get this type of promise, that this is going to happen. And I would like to see something that we can hold people accountable to and that is going to be done in terms of minority participation in this construction project. Do you have any idea right now, in terms from the contractor, as to what the percentages are going to be and who is he looking at in terms of -- because Congreso is not a construction company. Congreso has a training program that is more or less for carpenters' unions and such. I'm looking to see where it is that meetings with minority contractors are taking place. That's where the issue, I think, would lie. And I'd like to hear if you have reached out to minority contractors to come in and present a 13 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030017, RES. 030033 bid for any of the work that is being proposed.
The only thing that I can comment on at this time is our past experience with both the Children's Hospital and the original '86 project. I know the University, we set out a guideline of to percent, and in '86 we topped 8 out at 33 percent. I still believe that the 9 University facilities is looking to at least attain 10 that again, in that range, 20 to 30 percent 11 participation. 12
Well, I'd like to 13 have more information from you as to that. 14
Thank you very much. 15 Just one question on the process. It's understandable how you can reach out to minority contractors and subcontractors to be included from a contractual standpoint. How does it work with the actual workers? What happens to the people out of DAP, people out of Congreso; do they go into the union? Are they accepted in the apprentice program? Do they ultimately get a card, or does their job just exist as long as the construction work exists in that particular site? My understanding is it's very difficult 14 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030017, RES. 030033 to gain entry into the formal apprenticeship programs in all the trades. Is this just a temporary situation, or are these people enlisted into that particular union or trade and go through the normal apprentice program and at the end of it, move up and move on to be a journeyperson and other things?
The DAP program did a presentation to Temple about, like I said, three or four weeks ago, and they work very closely and, I think, are sponsored with the unions. The experience from Temple Children's, as my colleague Drew talked about, several people actually got jobs to continue on. They got their license. They got their carpenters' license. They got their electrical license and then became a part of the union.
I'm just curious as to what happens in the process. Because I'm not sure whether or not -- if the construction period is 2 years, say, 24 months. After 24 months, is that 15 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030017, RES. 030033 relationship ended, or do they move with an apprentice designation to the next job site?
I would have to get that information to you. But they have moved on with the actual carpenters' union or the electrical union. What we had before was, the community had an active participation in identifying those community folk to participate in those electrical school training programs, the carpenter school training programs. And I know that some did --
I would be interested in knowing if you could find out how many went on after the project was over and how many are still there. Just out of curiosity.
Thank you very much for your testimony. Are you going to stay there to offer testimony on Jefferson?
Okay. Thank you. Any other questions for these witnesses on the Temple University issue? (No response.)
Seeing none,we'll now move to Bill No. 030099, which is an Ordinance 8 declaring that it is desirable for the health, safety and welfare of the people in the area served by Thomas Jefferson University Hospital and its affiliates for the Hospitals and Higher Education Facilities Authority of Philadelphia to participate with the Hospital in the refinancing or restructuring of certain outstanding indebtedness of the Hospital and its affiliates and the acquisition and construction of capital improvements to the facilities of the Hospital and its affiliates. Please identify yourself for the record.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Again, my name is Donald Cramp, and I did make a combined opening remark, if I may.
Okay. Great. 17 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030017, RES. 030033 Would you please identify yourself for the record?
Yes. I'm Neil Lubarsky, Senior Vice President for Finance at Thomas Jefferson University Hospital.
Thank you. Are you available for questions, if necessary?
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Rules Committee and distinguished guests, thank you for considering our proposal to borrow up to $7.5 million through the issuance of bonds by the Hospitals and Higher Education Facilities Authority of Philadelphia. Since 1995, Thomas Jefferson University Hospital has been a subsidiary of the Jefferson Health System, which is an integrated health system located or headquartered in Radnor, Pennsylvania. Prior to the formation of that health system, the University Hospital was a division of Thomas 18 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030017, RES. 030033 Jefferson University, which is located at 11th and Walnut Streets here in Philadelphia. Thomas Jefferson University Hospital has benefited from several Authority bond issuances when it was a division of the University, and we also participated in the issuance of a $135 million bond issuance through the Jefferson Health System in 1997 with the Authority. We've not had the occasion to borrow funds since that time and appreciate the opportunity to work with the Authority on this project. Our operations include the activities of Thomas Jefferson University Hospital at 11th and Chestnut Streets here in Philadelphia, Methodist Hospital, and Methodist Hospital Nursing Center in South Philadelphia, and a small group of physician practices and other ancillary health services operations such as home infusion, medical equipment and ambulance services. Some key statistics about our organization are that we have revenues of $800 million. Over 75,000 patients are treated annually in our emergency rooms. There are approximately 40,000 patients admitted to our 19 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030017, RES. 030033 hospitals for more than one-day stays. And we have 8,000 employees in our organization. Based on current sizing requirements, the proposed borrowing would likely be in the range of $6.5 million and the approximate uses of bond proceeds will be as follows: $5.2 million to refinance existing indebtedness of our Methodist Hospital Division, which includes the Methodist Hospital Nursing Center; $1.2 million for equipment and renovations at Thomas Jefferson University Hospital and at our Methodist Hospital Division; and $100,000 transaction costs. In closing, I'd like to just point out that operating a hospital enterprise is very challenging in this day and age. This project will help us in two ways: The refinancing will enable us to lower our interest costs and we can use that savings to help fund rising costs in other areas, and the $1.2 million for equipment and renovations will help us continue to provide state-of-the-art healthcare services for this community. Thank you.
Thank you very much for your testimony. Would you like to add something, 20 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030113, BILL 030114 Councilman?
We all know who you are, but you have to identify yourself for the stenographer.
Austin J. McGreal, general counsel to the Hospital Authority. Mr. Chairman, I would request, if you see fit, to vote these Bills out affirmatively, that suspend the rules on the final hearings.
Thank you very much for your testimony. I'd just like to take the opportunity to thank both Temple University and Thomas Jefferson University for their continued work and investment in the City, both as an anchor in North Philadelphia and Center City Philadelphia and, as a South Philadelphia resident, along with my colleague Councilman DiCicco, for your work with Methodist, a very critical institution in South Philadelphia. We were frightened when it was potentially going away, both from an employment standpoint and from the building structure 21 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030113, BILL 030114 standpoint. So your coming to the rescue for us in South Philly is much appreciated, and we thank for coming here and participating in this process. Thank you again for your participation. No questions for that witness? That will end that particular Bill. Bill No. 030017, which is an Ordinance 9 establishing a neighborhood improvement district in an area that generally includes both sides of Ridge Avenue from Main Street to 7220 Ridge Avenue and certain blocks of streets that intersect that portion of Ridge Avenue to be known as the Roxborough District; designating the Roxborough Development Corporation, a Philadelphia nonprofit corporation, as the Neighborhood Improvement District Management Association for the District; approving a plan for the District, including a list of proposed improvements and their estimated cost, and providing for assessment fees to be levied on property owners within the District; authorizing the Director of Commerce, on behalf of the City, to execute an agreement with the Roxborough Development Corporation relating to the District; and authorizing the Roxborough Development Corporation 22 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030113, BILL 030114 to assess property owners within the District a special property assessment fee to be used in accordance with the approved plan; all in accordance with the provisions of the Community and Economic Improvement Act, and under certain terms and Conditions. We also at this time will be considering a related Resolution, Resolution 030033, which is a Resolution initiating action to establish a neighborhood improvement district in an area that generally includes both sides of Ridge Avenue from Main Street to 7220 Ridge Avenue and certain blocks of streets that intersect that portion of Ridge Avenue, to be known as the Roxborough District, and for which Roxborough Development Corporation, a Pennsylvania nonprofit corporation, would serve as the Neighborhood Improvement District Management Association; approving a preliminary plan for and report concerning the District; and authorizing and directing the Committee on Rules and the Clerk of Council to take all actions that are required by the Community and Economic Improvement Act prior to enactment of an Ordinance that would formally establish the District. 23 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030113, BILL 030114 Would you please identify yourself for the record and proceed with your testimony?
My name is Kelly Phillips-Erb. One of the things that my husband and I have done in the last few years, that I hear not a lot of people are doing these days, is we actually bought a house. We moved into the City and established our business in the City as well. And we love Roxborough. We love being there. I'm not only a business owner, I'm a property owner and also a landlord. I own property on the Ridge that's directly affected by the improvement district and I also am involved in our local civic association. I'm on the board. We complain a lot, I think, about our neighborhood. I think Councilman Nutter hears a lot of things that we have to say about things that need to be improved. And I think one of the threads, though, that run through a lot of the business owners and why we're so committed to the BID is that we also see a lot of really good things in our neighborhood. We love our neighborhood and that's why we stayed. One of the reasons that we're so 24 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030113, BILL 030114 committed to the BID is that it gives us a chance to have a say going forward in what the shape of Ridge Avenue is going to be and what our future is, and we have the ability to shape our own destiny. I've been involved in this process pretty much from the beginning, and I've been to a lot of the community meetings and a lot of the business people's meetings. And one of the things that I hear resonating over and over is there's a lot of positive change that we feel this is going to bring, and a lot of the business owners see this as a chance to make an improvement and to speak for ourselves and not have our destiny shaped by someone else.
Great. Thank you. Could you please identify yourself for the record?
My name is Lisa Nagy. I'm a district leader for the Hair Cuttery Salon on Ridge Avenue. We've been in the Ridge Avenue community for probably about 15 years, and we're also very interested in seeing the community revitalized, specifically as far as getting a cleaner area, getting in more businesses. 25 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030113, BILL 030114 We're looking at the cost being minimal for the return on investment specifically for the central area between the library and down to the hospital. They would have the properties assessed at 1.3 percent for the central area, and that would include the sidewalk cleaning, as well as other services which are very much needed. And then for the upper and lower areas, .7 percent of the property value.
Thank you very much for your testimony. Could you please identify yourself?
My name is A. Robert Torres, President of the Roxborough Development Corporation. I, too, have a business in the community. I'm an architect and I've been in practice in my immediate neighborhood for approximately five years. So I'm committed to seeing the revitalization of Ridge Avenue to be turned around. It's obvious to the business community that something needs to be done. I think it's critically important that this BID be strongly considered. Because if it's not, then I can just 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030113, BILL 030114 see the deterioration just continue on and on and on. The art you see will monitor and support the BID with volunteers. We have a group of volunteers in place to monitor the financial reporting. We've got good representation from the business community, from the immediate property owners. I feel that we have good support and I feel that it's critical that we seriously consider this for approval.
Thank you very much. Could you identify yourself for the record, please?
Yes. My name is Charles McElrone. I'm a member of the Roxborough Development Corporation Board. I just wanted to go over some of the things that we would hope to accomplish with a successful BID. Three areas basically, marketing services, appearance services, parking and safety issues. Under marketing, we're looking to develop and distribute a district map promoting businesses on the Ridge. We're looking to market 27 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030113, BILL 030114 available, vacant space; initiate a Weed and Seed Program and financial incentives. We're looking for an E-business promotion through a Web site, develop a collaborative print media marketing strategy to promote businesses; customer-attracting community events, car shows, pet shows, concerts, 4th of July, and get volunteers active; marketing by direct mail, marketing to employers near the Ridge, possibly using their in-house newsletters; advertising in the Ridge/Manayunk Phone Directory, coupons, vinyl cover, et cetera; develop a slogan, like, "Ridge Avenue, the High Point of Philadelphia"; print and sell T-shirts, maps of Ridge Avenue and the public parking lots, bus shelters, et cetera. Under appearance, we're looking to clean hot spots, kill weeds, adopt a block, community sweeps, develop a professional streetscape plan that would include pedestrian lighting, benches, trash cans, trees, planters, banners, directional, those types of things; market financial incentives and marketing streetscape plans to the property owners; purchase the streetscape furniture not funded by the City; things like banners, trash cans, bicycle racks, signs, et cetera. Holiday lighting and 28 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030113, BILL 030114 decorations, Sponsored design contests for Ridge Avenue gateways, encourage merchants to keep display window lighting on after hours, street banners, informational kiosks along Ridge Avenue; provide professional design advice for storefronts, window, facades, et cetera. And under parking and safety issues, we're looking to re-paint crosswalks, review public parking options, parking meters, parking validation, parking tokens, et cetera. Sponsored police bicycle patrol, work with PDCA, and publicize City security program, et cetera.
Thank you for your testimony. Please identify yourself for the record.
My name is John Davis. I'm a business owner on Ridge Avenue. I'm just outside the center focal point. We've given as much publicity, almost 50 to 60 percent of our publications were on the front cover of the Review, our local paper, to let people 29 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030113, BILL 030114 know what's going on, and there's still a lot of people that don't grasp the whole thing. Being a business owner -- I am a resident. I own my own home five blocks from the Roxborough core. It's just a coincidence I am president of trustees of my church, which is less than 50 yards from the center of the core, right off Ridge Avenue on Green Lane. I've been a trustee for 30 years. I've been involved with sports. As a few people have known, that I have presented over 12 years of experience with kids working with adults 13 and getting them throughout the community. When I 14 was asked over a year ago to consider being on a 15 committee -- and I, again, what am I getting myself 16 into? I thought it over carefully. I looked at all 17 the situations and the possibilities. 18 Being a resident all my life here, now 19 owning business, we need an improvement. To be able 20 to bring it up to par, bring new businesses in. And we have to make it attractive. It's important. It's my home. I'll be here until. I'd like to thank you for listening to us. And if you have any questions --
That's what we are 30 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030113, BILL 030114 supposed to do. Thank you very much for your testimony and to everyone for coming in. That was a panel of people that was scheduled to testify. I'll recognize Councilman Nutter for a few comments. And if there's anyone else who would like to say anything, I'll ask for that at the time. Councilman Nutter.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman and my colleagues on the Committee, I wanted to wait until after the first panel came on to have comments because I think they articulated, certainly better than myself, not only the need for, but the interest in and the support for what is now generally referred to as a Neighborhood Improvement District under recent state legislation. Mr. Chairman, there is a fairly extensive process that has been put into place by statute, but I've also had some experience with these, as Council has supported the efforts of Main Street and Manayunk with the creation of the Manayunk Special Services District, as well as City Avenue in the unique creation of a bi-jurisdictional 31 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030113, BILL 030114 special services district, known as the City Avenue Special Services District, combining Philadelphia and Lower Merion on City Avenue. This Roxborough Neighborhood Improvement District, I believe, one, will significantly improve the efforts of the Roxborough Development Corporation and the individual businesses to better promote the area and certainly make it, in the words of the slogan of Center City Special Services District, "Safe, Clean and Attractive." I wanted to put on this record a couple of the highlights of this extensive process. One, special services districts in general, and certainly this neighborhood improvement district, they're not imposed by the government. They are done at the request of the business people in these particular corridors. There is a voting process, but the business people have decided to come together to request this of the government, and certainly I want to be supportive. The Resolution and the Bill in front of us were introduced on January 28th, 2003. On February 3rd, 2003, my office, through the Chief Clerk's office, sent out a mailing of the 32 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030113, BILL 030114 Resolution, the Bill, and the preliminary plan to 434 entities. There was a newspaper advertisement for this first hearing, which requires at least a 10-day notice, on February 7th, 2003. And then, naturally, today is the first hearing of two on this preliminary plan, today March 6th. There will be a second mailing to the same 434 entities on Monday. There will be a second advertising with at least 10 days' notice later on this month for a second hearing. I will also announce that the second hearing on the final plan is scheduled for Thursday, April 10, 2003 at 1:00 p.m. here in Room 696 in City Hall. There is then a 45-day objection period, which begins the next day. And then subsequently the Bill, hopefully, will be reported out of this Committee and further action taken by this Council. So there is an extensive process and procedure that is required. And we will follow that process and procedure to ensure that everyone who has an interest and a concern in this matter has the opportunity to express their view, not only here in City Council, but to the Roxborough Development Corporation, as they are required to manage this 33 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030113, BILL 030114 particular process. With that, Mr. Chairman, we can certainly take additional testimony, but I wanted to lay out just how involved this is, how committed the business people are. And certainly I support their efforts and our collective efforts to improve another neighborhood in what many of us think is certainly one of the great districts here in the City, the 4th Councilmatic District, but the Roxborough community in particular, in addition to the 1st Councilmatic District and the 10th Councilmatic District and the 5th, and for the other four members who are not here who represent great districts in the City. But certainly there is a great enthusiasm about doing this in the Roxborough Ridge Avenue community and I wish to support those efforts. But we will follow the extensive process that is laid out by the State Statute. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you very much for your comments and thank you all for your testimony and for coming in. There's one person indicating that they want to have something else to say. Please come forward. 34 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030113, BILL 030114 Anyone else?
Councilman DiCicco, Councilman Kenney, Councilman Nutter, Councilman Clarke, thank you for this opportunity. Hi, Councilman Ortiz. I saw you guys Monday too. I was here at the hearings for the Department of Rec and Fairmount Park. I'm the president of the Friends of Gorgas Park in Roxborough.
Thank you. I've been a community activist in my neighborhood for a long time. And as a volunteer and as a citizen of Roxborough, I work in the community. I've been helping out with Ridge Avenue for about the past 10 years. I just briefly would like to give a background. This is a picture of my grandfather that was taken in 1925. He was a shoe mender in Manayunk. At that time, Ridge Avenue was the best 35 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030113, BILL 030114 place in the world to shop and Main Street was going downhill during most of my grandfather's life. Things go full circle. Main Street is now, you know, is the affluent, successful business place and Ridge Avenue has struggled. And that malaise was precipitated, as most of you know, when the malls were built. People took their shopping elsewhere, to strip malls. They took their shopping to King of Prussia. So what has happened is that, even though volunteers like myself have tried for two years, volunteers from Gorgas, to clean Ridge Avenue. And I calculated. We had 10 volunteers every Wednesday evening for two years. $15 an hour working kind. That calculates to about $12,000 of volunteer service working kind, according to the president's measurement for volunteer service. The reason why we did it is we love our community. We don't want to see our Ridge Avenue, which is our "Main Street" continue in a malaise and a tailspin. But at a certain point we stopped. And even though we still help out, we know it's beyond our ability, as volunteers, to turn the Ridge around. And what I'd like to testify to is that 36 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030113, BILL 030114 we need a business improvement district. It's been successful throughout the City. I'd like to thank, by the way, Councilman DiCicco. I don't know if Councilman Kenney was involved. I'm very proud of what happened on South Street with Mardi Gras. I know that there are very active people there. " And I'm happy to hear that. That's what we're trying to do in our community. The reason why I brought my grandfather's picture is because we have a residential community. People have lived there a long time. My great-grandfather started the shoe mending shop in Manayunk in the 1880s. So my mother was born in the house that she lives in. Councilman Nutter, who has been our outstanding Councilman for the past 10 years, knows my family very well and knows my mother and father. And that is the backbone of our community. I just wanted to say that Gorgas Park -- if a gentleman can 37 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030113, BILL 030114 take this and show you this picture. This is a new sign that we got in the park. We started with Gorgas Park seven years ago to revitalize it. It was a dump. What happened was -- I'd like to allude to this article. I wrote a letter in to the Review last week. I didn't intend to read it today, but I'd like to read it anyway because I think it points to the reason why we've been successful in revitalizing our park, in addition to the great support of our Councilman. " Seven years ago, we wrote a grant. Volunteers at the park wrote a grant for a William Penn Foundation Grant that partners us with the Pennsylvania Horticultural Society's Philadelphia Green and with the Department of Recreation. We got a $30,000 grant and we get technical assistance from Philadelphia Green and from the Horticultural Society. As a result of this partnership over the last seven years, we have been able to revitalize our park. We have a summer concert series. We have a new playground. We're getting new steps installed. We're getting a band stand. The park has become a community asset. Ten 38 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030113, BILL 030114 years ago, concerts festivals -- I'm reading from the letter -- site improvements and attractive signage were just a pipe dream. Gardens growing in the park were even less likely than the appearance of healthy grass. Most summers the park was either weed infested or a desolate dustbowl.
Today, as we look forward expectantly to spring 2003, the bleak past is history and the park's resurgence continues. The point that I'm trying to make is, without a business improvement district, just individual businesses on their own or volunteers like myself or some of the other folks in this room 14 are not going to be successful in revitalizing Ridge Avenue and helping bring Roxborough along economically. And our City is going to continue into a tailspin unless we duplicate the efforts of some of the other business districts in the City. So again, in order to move forward, we need this BID. We need the investment that will come about as a result of partnerships with City Council, with state government, with foundations, with business people. And I'm sure that I'm talking to people who, like yourselves, already know how these things work. But if we don't continue to do 39 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030113, BILL 030114 this, we're going to lose out economically, continue to lose out to the strip malls, to the malls, and our neighborhood and quality of life is going to suffer. Thank you very much.
Thank you very much for your testimony. Please identify yourself for the record.
Good afternoon. Valerie Coyle from Coyle's Cafe located on Ridge Avenue in Roxborough. As a resident and a business on Ridge Avenue, I'd like to -- we're talking about businesses. But I also must bring up the -- as a resident, living there and growing up and walking on Ridge Avenue growing up, the beautiful shops, there was a lot to offer. Now we have many buildings that are vacant. We don't see the strollers on Ridge Avenue. So this is very important. We want to keep my family there. They will move if it's not safe. It's not desirable. And I have been involved just for a few months, and I'm not used to talking in front of all these people, but it's vital that we do get this.
Thank you. Please identify yourself for the record. 40 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030113, BILL 030114
Thank you for listening to me today. My name is Sharon Crawford. I'm a resident of Roxborough and a member of the Central Roxborough Civic Association. I'm actually a board member. I'm here today representing them because they support the formation of the business improvement district for the following reasons. The streets will be cleaner, the streetscapes will get improvements, and the storefronts will be maintained in some cohesive manner that will make Roxborough's business district a place that all of us want to go to. Thank you very much.
My name is Billie Jean Gresham. I'm a member of Wissahickon Neighbors Civic Association. I have a letter here written by our president, Forest Aegiano. I've given a copy to Julia and I'd like to read it. Wissahickon Neighbors Civic Association supports the legislation creating Ridge Avenue Business Improvement District administered by the 41 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030113, BILL 030114 Roxborough Development Corporation. A revitalization of the business district along Ridge Avenue will support the residential development that is underway in our community. The long-term health of the residential community is tied to the health of the business district and vice versa. A Ridge Avenue BID will be an important asset to the interrelationships between the residential and business communities. Roxborough Development Corporation has been diligent in its design of the Ridge Avenue BID, obtaining professional services that fully involves the whole community in the discussions and planning. Our civic association was fully informed during this process, and we participated where appropriate. We anticipate an ongoing collaboration between the BID and the area civic associations. In conclusion, WNCA encourages City Council to pass legislation authorizing the formation of the proposed Ridge Avenue Business Improvement District. We appreciate your consideration of our position on this matter.
Thank you very much 42 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030113, BILL 030114 for reading that into the record. I appreciate you coming. Please identify yourself for the record.
My name is Elaine Lassiter and I am manager at the Ridge Avenue Hair Cuttery. I'm simply here today because -- number one, I really wasn't planning on coming, but I had this morning a 23-year-old coworker come to me and ask me whether I was attending the meeting today. I said, no, not really. But she pleaded with me because she feels as though the things that she sees going on with the business declining and everything that it was real important that someone be here today to represent and state our case. We need the funding. That's simply all I wanted to say.
Thanks for taking the time to come in. We appreciate it. Thank you. Anyone else here to testify please come forward. Please identify yourself for the record.
Good afternoon, gentlemen. William Spalding. I am an attorney and I have a business located on Ridge Avenue in the affected district. I'm here to speak and ask the 43 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030113, BILL 030114 Council not to approve this Ordinance. I think that in this day of individual responsibility, the imposition of a tax, which is what this really amounts to, is a substitute for each individual business owner taking responsibility for keeping his business up, maintaining his property, seeing to it that he promotes his own self interest. It should not be substituted by a government program which is designed to impose an additional tax on the business and property owners. Much of the things that are covered within the marketing, the appearance, the parking and public safety, the street cleaning, everything that's proposed here is something that any responsible business owner is already doing or is already paying substantial business and property taxes to the City of Philadelphia. The safety with the police district up there, I think is outstanding and does not require additional expenditures, unless the City sees to it that they're going to just generally increase the Police Department. The cleaning of the sidewalks in front of my business and in front of my property, I think 44 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030113, BILL 030114 any responsible businessman does that. As far as the nice to do things like T-shirts and tokens or coupons or something, any businessman that wants to attract business, he should not have to rely upon the government, especially in this economy and in this day and age with an additional expense that's going to be foisted upon. I see this becoming a Public Works project, which may have an unending and ever increasing budget that will require additional assessments and will result in having, unfortunately, exactly the opposite effect of what is going on right now. It may drive businesses out. And the other thing I would suggest to this august group is the fact that the physical layout of Ridge Avenue, the type of business there mall does not lend itself having the activities suggested here unless the businesses that are currently there are going to be displaced and removed. And if they close up, then, okay, there will be further loss of revenue in the City. They want to do on Ridge what happened in Manayunk. None of the businesses down in Manayunk were there. That 45 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030113, BILL 030114 real estate hot, speculators bought up the properties. People saw business opportunities and moved in. And that was a boot straps, grass roots effort that did not require the government to get involved in taking care of that. I will point out also, you do not see things down on Main Street in Manayunk like gas stations and other types of service businesses, transmission repair, CVS pharmacy, and things of that nature. So if those exist up on Ridge Avenue right now, even to include the supermarkets, they will have to be displaced so that nice little restaurants go in or nice little clothing boutiques or antiques shops. What will happen to those business owners at that point? I would suggest to this group, this Resolution and proposed plan should not be approved and that, instead, the owners of the property and businesses that are located there should look to themselves. And if they're not willing to put up the money to improve their own businesses and promote themselves, then the taxpayers along Ridge Avenue should not be required to pick up the slack for those who are not willing to do for themselves. 46 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030113, BILL 030114 Thank you very much.
Thank you for expressing your opinion. Please identify yourself for the record.
Good afternoon. Ron Clarkson, Express Vac and Sew Centers. And I regret to inform you, I have no pictures. Contrary to what Councilman Nutter has said about the businessmen agreeing to this particular Bill, Resolution, it's been my experience -- I went out one day and tried to get some feedback on how the businessmen actually felt about this particular Resolution. I only hit stores. It 15 was a cold day. I'm an old man. I can't take it 16 anymore. And I walked into those businesses and 17 felt like I was some kind of savior or something. I 18 was getting hugs and handshakes and squeezes. The 19 majority of the businessmen along the Avenue are 20 against this Resolution, which will be brought out 21 in the final analysis. You'll find this to be fact. 22 Here are some of the names. I have about 24 here. 23 I went into one establishment that was 24 opposed to it. I found out that I was in, like, the den of inequity surrounded by this organization. 47 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030113, BILL 030114 They told me to get the "blank" out of here. I won't mention how he said it, but it was not a nice way to end a conversation. However, getting to this Roxborough Development Corporation, they've been in existence many years. They've accomplished absolutely nothing. They presented all of these programs over the past years. Not one of those programs were 10 really ever accomplished. I'll tell you what they 11 accomplish. I got a dead tree outside my store. 12 They got 15 trees up the Avenue. They got planters 13 on the Avenue that the people use as trash disposal 14 units. They're ridiculous. The pavements are too 15 narrow for those planters to begin with and they aren't maintained. We try to do the best we can, but my guys don't want to work as trash men every morning cleaning those little planters out. The Roxborough Development Corporation invested tons of money in a farmers market, which they still call farmers market. Well, it hasn't been active or turned in any revenue in the past four years. It's vacant. They're renting some of it out to another agency, which is a government agency. I don't know if they're paying them with 48 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030113, BILL 030114 government money. I don't know this. I know that it's there. What they've done when they started this particular farmers market, it was going to be like the saver of the Avenue. It was going to bring consumers and people to the Avenue and really lift everyone's business. Boy, it really worked out great. Mismanagement. They didn't know how to run the damn thing. They aren't business people. It went down the drain. If they can't manage there, build a business to make a little business like a farmers market -- a farmers market, a 10th grade student could make that farmers market work. These people want to tax all of the little businessmen along that Avenue. It comes to millions of dollars. You're going to trust millions of dollars to these people to create business traffic for our business and build our business when they couldn't even keep a little farmers market going? You got a problem here. There's an issue here. It's a farce. That building is still there, it's still vacant and it drove the supermarket next door to it out of business. He sold meats.
I do get the 49 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030113, BILL 030114 understanding that you have a lack of faith in their ability to manage, and I gather from your testimony you are opposed to passage of the legislation.
Well, being opposed to it is one thing. Breaking it down and seeing what they've done is another. They have accomplished nothing.
I understand. I don't mean to cut you short. I just want to make sure that the record is clear. You are opposed to it, and I don't know if the record should be burdened with critique of an organization. What's before us right now is the actual Ordinance and Resolution. The one good thing about this whole process is, if you are accurate, it won't happen because all these business people will say no. 18
If we form a committee and have the time that they have to get this thing going.
But that's what's good about this democracy and this process, is that if you are correct, the majority of business owners are opposed to it, it won't happen.
I see your point. 50 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030113, BILL 030114
Let's get into, like, how about the fact that the T shirts are going to build our business. The park benches that they're considering putting up there for people to sleep on is another thing. Since these guys have been in business, our business has declined 50 percent since these people have been in control of Roxborough Development Corporation by bringing in the Parking Authority full blast. People can't go from their car to a store to get change without getting a ticket. That's all I have to say.
Thank you very much. Just before the next witness, I recognize Councilman O'Neill.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have to temporarily leave the Chambers. In case I'm not back before the end of the hearing, I'd like to have my abstention recorded on the first Bill, 030081.
Councilman, you will be voting in favor of the Jefferson piece?
Well, I'll go 51 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030113, BILL 030114 through the rest. I'm voting yes on all Bills, all amendments, all amended Bills and, finally, voting yes on the final plan in Bill No. 030017.
Okay. Thank you very much. Let the record reflect that. Please identify yourself for the record and proceed.
Hi. My name is Harvey Russakoff and I operate a business at 5711 Ridge Avenue. It's Award Cleaners. I'm right off the corner of Ridge and Walnut Lane. I am opposed to the Bill as it is written. On the corner where I am are three gas stations and a car repair shop, Maggiano's. There's a church across the street. The original plan, I believe, was set up to stop at the hospital, which is right next to me. And I think the plan was set up that way because Ridge Avenue definitely changes right at the hospital. The business district where all the 52 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030113, BILL 030114 businesses are right in a row is further up Ridge Avenue. Once we get to the hospital, Ridge Avenue changes dramatically. Between me and Main Street are gas stations, a broken gas station. There's two ice cream places. There's her law shop, but there is no business district like there would be on Main Street or like there is in Center City. I also have a building in Center City and pay Center City District tax and I'm glad to do it because they do a tremendous job. I live in the area and go to Main Street all the time and they do a tremendous job. But for me to pay for the businesses on upper Ridge Avenue makes no sense at all. It would be fine with me if they have a business district that works for them, but I believe that the demarcation should clearly be at the hospital. And business owners beyond there should not be responsible for paying for it, just like somebody in Chestnut Hill shouldn't have to pay for Roxborough's businesses. Thank you very much.
Thank you. I understood you to say that you have a business in 53 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030113, BILL 030114 Center City and you pay to the special services district there?
And did I also hear you say that you think it's worth the extra cost?
So in theory you would agree that a special services district adds to the improvement and is worth the investment, notwithstanding your issue as to where the boundaries begin and end as it relates to your Ridge Avenue business, but a district in general you agree is a positive --
I believe it can work. It worked in Center City. It worked on Main Street. Whether it will work on Ridge Avenue is a whole different story.
Well, we got that argument. I've had about five special services districts in my Councilmatic district and I've heard the same argument every time a district has been proposed. And I've yet to have one person come to me since the district has been implemented to say that it is not working. All of them have met with 54 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030113, BILL 030114 favorable accounts of what the district has meant in terms of improving the quality of life and businesses. So in the history that I've had in seven-and-a-half years in City Council, the nay sayers are now saying yes. Thank you.
Thank you. Would you please identify yourself for the record? MS. SNYDER (ph): Collette Stroh-Snyder. I'm a resident. I purchased a home in September '99 a few doors off of the Ridge Avenue. And I look right down into the center and it is a shambles. It's gritty. It's dilapidated. It's like yesterday forgotten. There's several points I'd like to make -- I want to keep it brief -- to address this gentleman here. Between Walnut Lane and Main Street on Ridge there's over two dozen thriving business that are largely -- they're not pedestrian, but they're car operated, so you generate trash and there's a lot of commerce going on. There's two large ice cream shops. There's half a dozen, at least, hair salon shops. There's a large hardware store and they've done wonderful things with their property. There's a number of mom and pop. There's a large 55 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030113, BILL 030114 strip as you head up the hill of pizza, the deli, a number of things. It's not on a large scale there's thriving business there. My concern is that the status quo is not working, that we're in a tailspin and nothing is being done to bring it back up, at least to catch a breath and say, Okay, let's go forward and lift ourselves up. And when every man lifts himself up, there are others that will then come and help also. And that's where the City comes in. I see that when we have a voice, a unit, saying, we are doing things. We are lifting ourselves up by our boot straps because we believe, then you have a valid voice to have other services, other amenities for civilization, such as an increased police force, increased services, cleaning the street, a number of things. Increased funding for a streetscape. I would like to see a lot of things happen.
Great. Thank you. Please identify yourself for the record.
My name is Bernice 56 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030113, BILL 030114 Kessler, and my husband and I have been business owners in Roxborough since 1965. We have seen the decline of the business district due to business trends, not due to anything in particular that anyone has done. We are in favor of this district. One, because it will accomplish things that individual business owners cannot do, doing it themselves. They must do it as a group and with the help of the City. I would like to answer back the people who have attacked the Roxborough Development Corporation. I have attended many meetings and I have to say I have met many energetic and creative people with very good ideas who have worked very hard for this project. Thank you.
Thank you very much for your testimony. Councilman Nutter.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I would like to put a couple comments on the record. First, this is the finest demonstration 57 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030113, BILL 030114 of democracy that any third or fourth grade civics class could seek to observe. It's one thing to read about a democracy in a book; it's another thing to witness it in action. As I said in my opening comments, Mr. Chairman, this is an idea which is presented to this Council. If not for the hard work -- and I think the last person who testified laid it out -- if not for the hard work of a number of people, there would be no plan in front of this Council. I did not dream up this plan. This is not legislation inspired or proposed or even written by myself, as I am an active legislator. This is an idea that comes from the people. And the people have come to the people's house, at least here in City Council. And they have a right to be heard. There will be a vote, not just of this Council on this particular matter as it works its way through the statutorily driven process, but there will be a vote opportunity in the finest example, again, of democracy by the business people who are potentially affected. There is a process established. As I mentioned earlier, unlike some 58 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030113, BILL 030114 other legislative processes, even here in City Council there is a 45-day objection period. There is no voting process that I know of where you have 45 days to vote. Most normal election processes allow you to vote somewhere in a 13-hour period on one day. There's a 45-day objection period, and any of my constituents or businesses in the districts -- and I respect their opinion. That's why we have public hearings, to hear from people. It doesn't mean that we always get it right or that somebody's idea is better or worse than anyone else's, but you come here to be heard. We are going to hear people. State legislature thought it important to establish a 45-day objection period, and we're going to maintain every letter and spirit of the law. Now, when we talk about how this all happens. This is not a tax imposed by the government. It is a request by businesses to have the right to assess for mutual benefit. Many of the business people do believe that pooling their individual resources into a collective pool of dollars will benefit all of them collectively, as opposed to any single effort by any individual business. But again, the business people will have 59 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030113, BILL 030114 the opportunity to vote on that, both on the plan and any other elements of the plan. It was mentioned earlier about Manayunk in comparisons to Roxborough. Now, to the uninitiated, people can make a mistake and think that when they're in Manayunk they're in Roxborough, or when they are in Roxborough they're in Manayunk. Now, I'm very clear and I do my best not to make that mistake. But the one thing I know is that Manayunk is Manayunk and that Roxborough is Roxborough, and often never the twain shall be, no 13 matter how close they are to each other. We're not trying to replicate Manayunk on Ridge Avenue or in Roxborough. They are two very special, but separate places, although I would note for the record that Main Street and a part of its revitalization came about as a result of the creation of the Main Street Special Services District, which is exactly similar to what we're talking about here today. People have a right to ask the government for help and I think the government has a responsibility to respond. We have responded in a number of different ways across the City. There is a Center City Special Services District. There is a 60 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030024 Germantown Special Services District. There is a Frankford Special Services District. There is an Old City Special Services District. There is a South Street Special Services District. There is a Port Richmond Special Services District. There is a Passyunk Avenue Business Improvement District.
There is a City Avenue Special Services District and a Head House Square Special Services District. Different people want different things for their neighborhood. I think they go through a process, working things between and amongst themselves, these districts having been successful. It remains to be seen what will happen up on Ridge Avenue. But as they say, I would rather have something and not need it, than need it and not have it. I think there is an opportunity here to do something that makes some sense, governed by the people, not by this government, but the government utilizing its resources and assistance where it can help. I plan, if this goes forward, to help the Ridge Avenue Special Services District or neighborhood improvement district. If for some reason it doesn't go forward, I'm going to continue 61 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030024 to help the Ridge Avenue Development Corporation and any group of business people who want to improve the community. That is my job. That is my concern. That's why I ran for public office. And so we will play out this democratic process here today. And I'm deeply appreciative of everyone who has come in, regardless of their position on this, to express their view, because it reminds all of us, I think, why we got into public service in the first place. And so I want to thank everyone for coming out this afternoon. And I appreciate the opportunity to put those comments on the record. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you very much. Thank you very much for your attendance. (Applause.)
Thank you. That will end testimony on this Bill. We thank you for your time and your patience, for coming in today and for your offering your opinions on this issue. Thank you very much. I'll give you a moment to exit. We will continue our hearing, please. 62 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030024 We're going to take two Bills at the same time because they both deal with the same issue. Bill No. 030114 is an Ordinance amending Section 14-1610 of the Philadelphia Code, entitled "Old City Residential Area Special District Controls," by providing that telemarketing is a prohibited use within the District, under certain terms and conditions. The next Bill, which we will take testimony simultaneously, is Bill No. 030113, which is an Ordinance amending Title of the 13 Philadelphia Code, entitled "Zoning and Planning," 14 to add a section requiring a Zoning Board of Adjustment Certificate to operate a telemarketing business, under certain terms and conditions. Councilman DiCicco introduced the first Bill that I read into the record. As a result of his coordination and discussion with representatives of the Old City District, they would like a prohibition on the telemarketing operation. As a result of a number of complaints that I've received Citywide about such telemarketing operations, I thought it would be appropriate to require a Zoning Board of Adjustment Certificate so that community 63 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030024 folks could go in, listen to what the proposal is, hear what the operators or the business are going to do or not do, and to set some parameters within a zoning board environment to come to some conclusion to make the community and the business better equipped to coexist together. This is not a prohibition of the businesses. This is not a variance. It is a process that is less onerous than a variance, but it does allow for community input into the operation of such businesses. This a relatively new phenomenon in our residential and commercial business strips. It has caused some problems relative to behavior of employees, interaction with other merchants, interaction with shoppers on business strips and residents in the neighborhood. And as with all things, it is better to have some protection without totally eliminating the opportunity to run such a business in a neighborhood or business strip. We would like some opportunity for the community and their elected representatives to be heard. So that is kind of the legislative history of 030113. Councilman DiCicco can speak to 030114 when he thinks it's appropriate. 64 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030024 Who we'd like to first call is Heather Harris and Rich Thom, if they are here. Please come forward, Cynthia. Would you like to come forward also? How many are here to testify on the Old City bill? Just three? Why don't you come up also. Thank you.
I'm Heather Harris. I'm the president of the Old City Civic Association. I'm also a property owner and a business owner in Old City. Thank you for hearing this Bill today and considering it. I live and work in Old City and I'm pedestrian, so I well know the effect of a large, big box business upon the area. The Old City Civic Association urges your support of this Ordinance to add telemarketing to the Old City overlay list of prohibited uses. As outlined by our bylaws, the purpose of the Civic Association is to preserve our neighborhood's unique historic character, our quality of life, and to promote a cohesive community of residents, businesses and institutions. The Old City Residential Area Special District Controls 65 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030024 document sites the, "Unique historic character, cultural significance and residential viability of Old City," which is also a major tourist attraction. The document points out that Old City is made of, "A fragile and unique balance of residences and compatible small-scale commercial and retail development," I stress the phrase, small scale. Although Old City enjoys mixed use activities, the big box nature of most telemarketing enterprises conflicts with the scale of Old City in both the physical footprint of whatever building is needed and the sheer number of employees that such a market requires. These size considerations, along with others, make telemarketing businesses vastly out of character with the residential and small scale nature of Old City. I feel, and the Civic Association feels, that residents and existing businesses that have already made such a substantial capital investment in the area should have the right to review more especially large businesses coming into the area. Thank you for considering this.
Thank you very much. 66 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030024 Please identify yourself for the record.
Hello. My name is Ellen Curry, and my husband and I have been residents of Old City for seven years. We run two companies and we live and work north of Market Street in the neighborhood. I'm also the president of the Chocolate Factory Condominium Association. One of the many things that we both love about Old City is that it is small, but still a very vibrant part of the City of Philadelphia. Let me repeat a key word here. Small. We have small buildings in Old City. We have small businesses. We have small families. And we have very small streets. A telemarketing company, on the other hand, is large. It requires a large space. It requires a large staff that works long hours, and in some cases, those hours are 24/7. A large staff at a single company is a mismatch for our neighborhood. As I walk down our small streets with my small, young daughter, I often experience the following: Large crowds of telemarketing employees, apparently on break, congregating in front of their buildings. They completely block the street, 67 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030024 causing me to change my path, not an easy thing to do while pushing a stroller on the uneven, brick streets of Old City. Often times on the count of 40 to 50 people standing on line in front of the check cashing store on Market Street, and I assure you I have counted the number of people on line because I am astounded to see such a large crowd. Again, the sidewalk is completely blocked and I change my path. I've observed these crowds numerous times. I find their language and body motions and the often times ankle bracelets to be threatening, threatening to the point where I feel physically uncomfortable and do not want my daughter to hear the extensive cursing and language that's taking place. And again I change my path. Of the three small groceries in Old City, Mulberry Market is the closest to my home and to my office. However, this longtime presence in our community is located directly between two existing telemarketing locations. And the employees of these telemarketers frequent Mulberry Market. Again, because of the offensive language and the threatening behavior, I no longer shop at this store. I prefer to walk several blocks out of my 68 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030024 way to go to a grocery that is away from telemarketing locations, and I will do this even during evening hours. So I encourage you to preserve our small neighborhood and prohibit new telemarketing companies and the expansion of existing companies by please supporting Bill 030114. Thank you.
Thank you. I can echo your experience. We have one around the corner from -- well, two blocks away from my house on a commercial business district. It used to be a clothing store. The owner of the clothing store decided it was more financially beneficial to cram literally a few hundred people in a room, which causes situations that, in my presence, women have been sexually harassed on the street. There is outward use of drugs on the street in a commercial business strip that's struggling to survive. It is the language, again, is absolute horrendous. While we want to give people the opportunity to work in gainable employment, I think that these business operators have a major responsibility to educate and to plan and to do the things that are necessary to coexist within that 69 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030024 community, whether it's the residential area of Old City where people and families live, or whether its commercial development, where other stores are trying to attract customers and keep customers. They have a responsibility to ensure that their employees and that their operation is conducted properly. As result of my complaints about the one in South Philadelphia, the one I'm familiar with, they herded their people back in the alleyway behind the building to smoke pot. And then when I complained the second time, they said, well, they're not out front. I said, well, you know, they're in the back. And the alleyway in the back was in rear of residential properties. So we have this ongoing problem. And in times like this when people want to have uses for their properties, they want revenue, they will put just about anything anywhere they can get away with. Again, I want to reiterate for the record, that my Bill is not a prohibition. It is simply a certificated use. And what that means is, is that someone, somewhere needs to explain to some board, the Zoning Board, what it is they want to do, 70 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030024 what their operation is going to be like, what their hours are going to be. This is not an anti-business Bill. There are other certificates that are required for take-out restaurants. Take-out restaurants are a business. They provide revenue to the City. They provide employment. But we certificate that use because of the ancillary trash and other problems that are created from take-out restaurants. Auto repair shops are certificated uses because they provide jobs for people. They employ people. They pay taxes. But because of the impact on the environment or the neighborhood or the business strip, we require them to go in and get a certificate. That's all we're asking. Old City is a different situation because your representative has been informed from the neighbors that they would like to see this as a variance, which is a different standard. My Bill is simply certificated use. If we're successful in getting my Bill passed, we may wind up in the end making it a variance for that too. But we'd like to have some control with the situation. So I 71 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030024 firsthand understand your experience, and it's not a pleasant one.
Thank you. Good afternoon. My name is Cynthia Philo. I'm the executive director of the Old City Special Services District in Philadelphia. Thank you very much for allowing me to testify today on Bill No. 030114. As you know, the Old City Residential Area Special District Controls has been in effect for over about 10 years now. It's been working very successfully to preserve the delicate balance of economic vitality and diverse character of the Old City District. Today I, on behalf of the Old City District, which is the business improvement district that covers square blocks in the area, support 21 the inclusion of telemarketing as a prohibited use 22 within the boundaries of the overlay. The Old City District now supports three telemarketing companies: Colonial Penn. Many of you have seen Lou Rawls on TV and may have called 72 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030024 in. I'm not there yet, but I will be one of these days. Go Internet Dot Net. Both of these are north of Market Street. And HRSI, which is south of Market Street. Together approximately 2,000 employees comprise this group. While the district is supportive of businesses in the area, we also recognize the negative impact that different types of businesses may have in the scale of a neighborhood such as Old City. The prospect of locating another telemarketing business in the area north of Market Street, which now supports numerous residential spaces and small businesses, creates a burden on the community as a whole. We will experience an increase in parking and trash problems, more that what we've seen right now with the telemarketing that we have in those areas. The only way to ensure some type of control of this situation by a new business that wants to locate itself in the primary residential area, is to include it in the existing zoning overlay. That will give our community the opportunity to require that a telemarketing business 73 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030024 will provide necessary parking for its employees, will make sure that trash and other problems that occur with a large number of employees, like those that you had mentioned here, and many of us have experienced, be sufficiently dealt with before they even become a problem to the quality of life of both existing businesses and residents. This is no 9 different than permitting another theater or restaurant in the area without guarantees to the community. While the Old City District is definitely not in the business of saying who can do what type of business in the City and who can't, we feel that it is imperative to protect the commercial investment that large numbers of constituents have put in to upgrade the residential, historical, commercial and cultural elements of Old City. We will keep working to keep the district clean and save daily. Including telemarketing in a restriction that gives the community an opportunity to have a say in how a business may be operating is a good thing. This legislative body has recognized the need to establish special land use and zoning controls to 74 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030024 protect the investment in and foster the preservation and development of the special character of this neighborhood. While the Planning Commission also recognizes that diversity of planning types keeps Old City and its area vibrant, they also recognize that zoning controls encourage greater cooperation among residents and businesses to resolve land use conflicts. Including telemarketing in the Old City Residential Area Special District Controls will do just that. Before I go, I understand that there has been a proposed amendment to Bill 030114 excluding charitable telemarketing from this zoning overlay. I would like to say that the Old City District is opposed to this amendment because we feel that it is the large number of employees that this particular type of business brings into an area, not the type of telemarketing that they are doing, is what causes the problems.
And even if the telemarketer is for a charity, we still have this type of situation going on. Therefore, I would ask that the Bill be put in without the exception bold type that you may have before you. 75 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030024 Once again I wanted to thank you for your time today. I ask that the Bill be voted out of Committee and the rules suspended to allow for the first reading at the next Council Session. I will answer any questions you have at this time. And I have a copy of my testimony for Council. Thank you very much.
Thank you very much. So you understand, the amendment that's been talked about was proposed by the Law Department, not by the sponsor of the Bill. And from what I understand from the sponsor -- he can speak for himself right now -- it's not moving forward.
Yes. I understand that and I'm sorry if I implied that. I just wanted to clear that up.
I'm wondering if this puts a different light on telemarketing. I hate terribly when, during dinner particularly, the phone rings and a voice gets on the phone to try to sell me something or give me something for free or tell me the great fortune I've been successful in achieving, I've been picked as the right number or 76 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030024 whatever. I never thought of telemarketing the same way I think of pawn shops or check cashing agencies, which by their very nature seems to indicate that a neighborhood is going downhill, that the economic development in that area or the residential development or both of them have begun to fail. Tell me, is it just the numbers of people that create this problem? I've never heard of this situation before and I'm wondering if there's anybody from the Planning Commission here who can tell us about studies made in the City. This is the first time I've ever heard of this kind of a problem effecting residential areas. So I'd just like to find out a lot of information. I don't know how big the building is, but suppose it were filled with lawyers and their young staff members and maybe secretaries. Would it be the same problem?
If it was filled with a group of lawyers -- and I can speak as one -- I'd want an outright ban on us completely, I think. But aside from that, the situation is a little bit different. We're seeing, at one business in particular, 1,700 employees that are in a building 77 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030024 space that is very small. You know that a lot of these buildings in these older areas of the City are very tiny. And we're looking at situations where you have a lunch break where everybody comes out all at once. So you have 1,700 employees out on the street at one time in a neighborhood that likes to have and has been very successful in keeping different types of businesses in there. Right now, like I said before, we have three telemarketing businesses. I don't want to see the area become all restaurants or all retail or all telemarketing or all residents, for that fact. We want to be able to keep that balance. So, yes, this is creating problem for, not only the residents, but for other businesses that have been there in the area.
Is there someone here, Mr. Chairman, from the Planning Commission?
Actually, there's someone here from the Commerce Department to testify on these Bills, and the Planning Commission also.
Well, I would like to know something historically about this problem. This is a brand-new problem, which surprises me after so many years in City Council to find that a 78 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030024 problem consists essentially of large aggregates of people in small spaces. There must be different requirements. Aren't there safety requirements as to how many people can be employed in particular sizes? I'm just wondering. What I know of Old City, you described very accurately. It's very narrow streets, small areas. I'm wondering about how it can handle businesses like this.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I think, Councilman Cohen, I think the testimony of these three young ladies really speaks to the whole issue. It is a question of density. 1,700 employees for the most part converging on the check cashing business at 3rd and Market almost simultaneously all at the same time causes considerable concern for the other businesses. People cannot enter or exit the other businesses. There's a behavorial issue. This is ongoing for, I think, two to three years -- maybe three years of a problem. We have been trying to negotiate to work out some compromises with the people who run these companies, and one company in particular. The problem with the employees, and the 79 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030024 behavioral problem in particular with the employees, resulted in the company having to hire additional security personnel to monitor the behavior of the employees. Unlike an office building where you have lawyers and secretaries, generally there's security in the lobby to protect the people who are in the building from someone who doesn't belong in the building from getting in. This is kind of in reverse order. The neighborhood now needs to be protected from the employees by way of the security guards that the company has hired. There's a whole host of other things that we could get into. There's actually the possibility of litigation, so I don't want to get too far into where we are with all those issues. But it is a serious enough issue that it led me to introduce this legislation. We have even attempted as recent as two weeks ago in a meeting with the principals of this company. I offered to see if there's a possibility to work with the Commerce Department to relocate them from three separate buildings where these employees are housed into one building for the potential of possible growth. Their answer to me 80 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030024 was, if we expand, we're moving out of the City. I don't know if that was meant to be a threat to make us back off. I don't want to lose 1,700 jobs. But I certainly don't want to lose the residents and the other businesses that this Council in supporting of the district and other things we've done over the last decade has proven to be a success. Old City is one of the biggest success stories in this City's history in recent years. It is 100 percent occupied. It is one of the most desirable places to be and we want to keep it that way. We're having some growing pains in a lot of other areas as well, but those things we think we can deal with a lot more efficiently. So it was my idea to introduce this legislation because we couldn't get a promise that they would not expand. And when I offered the assistance of my office, the Commerce Department and PIDC to maybe look for an alternative site, their answer to me was, if we're going to grow, we're moving out.
Well, it seems to me the City has to be able to come up with a sensible solution. The City ought to remain attractive to 81 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030024 operations like this. I know of nothing in the nature of telemarketing. I know the result. When they call in, I hate them. But I never knew before that as a group of people, I had a real reason to hate them individually. And I can understand the small space having these large numbers of people, but I'd like to hear what the City has to say. Because it can't be -- are all telemarketing companies just in Old City or are there any telemarketing places anywhere else?
There's one I'm dealing with in South Philadelphia, and Councilman DiCicco's district, which is another problem business.
Well, I want to hear from the City. What's the City doing about meeting this problem? Certainly the residents who have invested so much time and energy and money in developing Old City have a right to live there in comfort and not be subjected to the kind of abuses they testified about.
There are measures that have been taken. There's obviously police action. There's a case that is being built in terms 82 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030024 of the nuisance business, if you will. Understand that this is not an attempt to eliminate these companies. This is only an attempt to allow the community to have a voice in what future expansion and/or if a new company wanted to move in. That's really all this is about. These folks are grandfathered in. The other issues on behavioral problems and the issues that these ladies spoke about are issues that are ongoing issues that are being dealt with by the Department of Licenses and Inspection, by the fire marshal, by the Police Department. And we'll continue to do that.
I worry about the precedent nature of this. I don't know where it leads. It's a whole new area I never heard about before.
That's because you're not a district councilman. You wouldn't know.
Telemarketing wasn't around then. 83 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030024
Well, but is it telemarketing? Is that the only kind of business that creates this problem? If so, why? What is it about telemarketing that creates this problem and other businesses don't? I can understand any large company with lots of employees can be a real problem in a residential area.
Actually, that's a very good point, Councilman. And one of the things within the zoning overlay, it addresses those large types of businesses. This is not just only the business that's there. Other businesses, you've got large restaurants, dance halls, various type of businesses that are large that can bring in large numbers of people, can disrupt parking. We have very limited parking, as you probably are well aware. Increasing trash problems, congestion problems. They're all within that category. And it just is the opportunity right now for another type of business, which is a large business such as telemarketing, you really don't just have two telemarketers. You usually have 200 telemarketers. It gives the community the opportunity for that business to come before them to say, this is what we'd like to do, 84 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030024 and we are willing to work with you to guarantee that we won't have problems like we're seeing now. So it's not just this type of business. There are other businesses within that zoning control overlay that are large numbers -- it's really the use.
I've worked with Old City over many years and I applaud the work that they've done and the fact that you built a very fine residential neighborhood right in the middle of a commercial district, and the two live together well. But this seems to me to be a problem that the City must have been very derelict in permitting. And I'd want to know what does the City do to prevent such circumstances from developing? Or does the City think that your complaints have no justification? Whatever it is, I'd like to know more from the City.
We just have one more residential witness. Please identify yourself.
I'm not residential. I'm commercial. I have a commercial business there.
Bob Berman. For anyone 85 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030024 that's got a commercial business, it will kill any retail trade coming in. I've talked to people that are directly beside that. You do not want your customers to have to run this gauntlet to come to your business. It's not going to happen. They're going to come once and that's the end of it. It's terrible for commercial.
Thank you. Thank you very much. Could we have the Planning Commission and the Commerce Department, please? Please identify yourself for the record.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Committee. For the City Planning Commission, my name is Tom Chapman. Do you want me to testify on both Bills?
Regarding Bill No. 030113, -- actually with both of these bills, maybe since I'm testifying together. Neither bill has been considered by the Planning Commission because the Bills were introduced after the last Planning Commission meeting and before the next Planning Commission meeting, so I don't really have a 86 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030024 recommendation from the Planning Commission to give to you today, and that's at least part of the reason why we were asking the Committee to table these Bills. But let me just go through my testimony.
Based on what you've heard in testimony, do you have any opinion about the Bills or about the line of questioning Councilman Cohen was using to talk about the impact of these businesses on residential, commercial business operations, neighborhoods?
Admittedly, I've heard things today that I haven't been aware of before this hearing. All the information that I have on telemarketing has been gathered in, like, the last 10 days and I wasn't aware of the problem near where you live, and I also was not aware that there were 87 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030024 three telemarketing businesses in Old City. My impression was that there was just the one company that had been causing the problems. It was the same company that was written about in City Paper about two years ago. It does put a different light on what, I guess, at least part of my testimony is directed to, and I will certainly report what we've heard here today back to the Planning Commission. And if I may, I would just like to go through the prepared testimony that I have here. This Bill 030113, this Bill amends the zoning code by designating telemarketing business as a use that's required to obtain a Zoning Board of Adjustment Certificate anywhere in the City. We recognize that there may be instances where the 24-hour-a-day nature of the operation of these businesses, or any 24-hour-a-day business for that matter, could have negative impacts on the quality of life in a particular location. But we also note that there are many areas of the City where, clearly, there may be little or no impact. Many industrial areas and parts of Center City, particularly where high rise buildings are located, would not feel the same impacts. For this reason, 88 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030024 we question the advisability of requiring a Zoning Board of Adjustment Certificate for this use in every instance throughout the City. We also believe that this Bill as introduced could be interpreted to require a Zoning Board Certificate in all zoning classifications, even classifications where currently a variance would be required. It's clear that the residential zoning districts presently do not allow for this use as a matter of right, and the wording of the proposed amendments and it's placement in the Code would cause you to conclude that a Zoning Board Certificate is required in all instances in order to establish this use.
Well, just so you know for the record, there is also going to be offered an amendment today which would amend Section 19 1 of 14-1605.1 which would now read at any location where the operation of a telemarketing business is otherwise permitted, so I think the amendment does address that directly.
As I stated the scheduled meeting of the Commission is March 18th. I can move right into my testimony. 89 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030024 This Bill amends the Old City Special District Controls by designating telemarketing businesses as a prohibited use. Our concern with this Bill is the fact that the banning of this use within the Old City area has not been supported by any formal studies or conclusions of law in the body of the Bill to support its removal as a permitted use. We've also reviewed media reports and received other comments regarding conflicts with community members and employees of a particular business. These reports are representative of concerns, that this Bill proposes to mitigate these concerns might be more appropriately dealt with by the intervention of the Police Department or the Department of Licenses and Inspections. Since this Bill was introduced subsequent to the Commission's most recent meeting, but prior to its next meeting, it has not been formerly considered by the Planning Commission and, accordingly, we would ask the Committee to table this Bill until such time as we have the opportunity to vent through the issues it presents and present it to the Planning Commission for consideration. 90 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030024
The only thing that's confusing about the testimony is that the recommendation that we wait until there's a problem first and then call on the police and L&I, when on the front end with the right discussion and right process we may never have to get to the police and L&I. To me, that's really not solving the problem, or at least addressing the issue. If it's issues of behavior and crowd and control and trash and noise and other things, wouldn't it be much simpler and easier to deal with those issues up front, as opposed to calling the police and L&I six months down the road when they're already in? To me, it's seems like a waste of resources. If we can set some standards and some restrictions and some plan in advance that solves a lot of problems down the road that are more costly to the City in sending police out there every half hour to deal with the problems. Thank you. Mr. Bumb, could you identify yourself?
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and Members of Council. My name is Duane Bumb. I'm the Deputy Commerce Director for the City. I 91 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030024 appreciate this opportunity to submit testimony on Bill 030113, and specifically not on the other. This Bill 030113 requires the telemarketing companies receive a Zoning Board of Adjustment Certificate prior to establishing an operation in the City. The Department of Commerce opposes this measure. By restricting the operation of telemarketing businesses, this Bill will impede the operations and growth of an important source of employment for entry-level job seekers in the City of Philadelphia. In addition to hiring individuals with a limited work history, the telemarketing sector also has the flexibility to provide part-time employment for workers in transition or with child care assistance needs. Overall, telemarketing jobs are good quality jobs that require short-term training that can be done on site. Further, these kinds of jobs provide essentially safe, clean workplaces and competitive salaries. Notably, the majority of telemarketing businesses in the City are located outside of Center City, in our neighborhoods where they are important 92 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030024 sources of community employment. In the last three years, the Philadelphia Work Force Development Corporation has invested $1.8 million, or nearly $4,000 per person, to train 465 people in what they call customer service telemarketing. Many of the people who receive this training were welfare recipients trying to enter the work force.
Could you slow down and speak more directly into the microphone? I am hearing about every third word you're saying. I'm mystified by how the City has not acted in this. It may very well be that 24-hour operations of this kind have a large size is totally incompatible with any kind of a neighborhood residential segment or small business segment or even worse, the combination of the two of them. I would be stunned that the City has done nothing about it and has done nothing. I think it's time you do something.
Well, they have done something. They have invested in it.
I agree with Councilman Kenney and Councilman DiCicco. The 93 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030024 answer is not in having to call the police every other night or having people in the neighborhood uncomfortable by this large action. I can see the opposition to pawn shops. I don't understand why there wasn't opposition to them. Maybe there was. Maybe they lost it. Pawn shops in a neighborhood like this certainly seems to me to be sending the wrong signal about the neighborhood. And lines around the pawn shops are certainly not compatible with the peace and quiet of a residential area. But I'd like to hear, because it sounds to me like the witness is giving a pretty thoughtful analysis of the situation. And I heard about one-third of that analysis. I thought I might entitled to understand all of it.
Right. Well, as I said, obviously too quickly, we've, through the Philadelphia Work Force Development Corporation, provided training assistance to people to go into customer service and telemarketing-type fields. So we are investing funding and training people. Telemarketing is one subset of that sort of larger training area. It is an area that is important to us because many people coming from 94 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030024 welfare rolls, people who have either low skill sets or little work history people are people who, in fact, can be competitive in this field. So it is a good entry point into the work force for people. They can be placed in jobs that are safe and secure locations for work that can provide adequate incomes to support their families. These are reasons why we sort of don't want to jump too quickly to do something that might jeopardize those sorts of jobs.
I think it may be wonderful to have these kinds of jobs available. I'm not sure whether this location is a desirable location for that kind of activity.
I don't disagree. I think that, as Mr. Chapman suggested, there should be some additional analysis. I think our position is and our concern and the reason we are opposing the Bill 20 as it was drafted is right now across the City says you can't do this without a certificate. And we believe that there are, in fact, appropriate locations. I think of places at the airport where the PNC Operation Center is, which employs thousands 95 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030024 of people in a back office operation, some of which might be considered telemarketing, and yet when they go out on break, they wouldn't be impacting a community like Old City. I think of places like 2 Penn Center in the heart of the central business district that have a telemarketing operation. When those people come out --
See, part of the problem with this whole thing is, is that in order for this to be a profitable business for the operators, they're not going into 2 Penn Center and they are not going into buildings like the PNC Bank building. They're going into places where they can afford, like the Arnold's Men Shop on Passyunk Avenue where they can get rent for $600, $700 a month and stuff 150 employees in there and make a killing. I don't think creating standards for their certificate is necessarily incompatible with finding people entry level jobs. Entry level jobs are important and they can coexist with existing commercial and residential operations with the right planning. But allowing just the "no holds barred" type of "go anywhere you want" isn't working. And since the City is 96 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030024 investing this kind of money, we don't want to see these jobs go away, but we also don't want see the people who operate business and live in the neighborhood go away either. So why don't we have the ability to have the neighbors and the residents and the business people know, and their elected officials, what's going on in a particular neighborhood, or what people plan to go on? I don't see any incompatibility between information to the public and this kind of operation. I think they can peacefully coexist. Any time an industry resists that kind of scrutiny scares me because they don't want to be scrutinized. They don't want to have to talk to this community group. They don't want to have to talk to the elected officials. They just want to get in there and plant themselves. And, to me, that's a red flag right there that leads me to believe that there is a need for this kind of process. Councilman Nutter.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Bumb, I can appreciate everything 97 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030024 that you're laying out in the record, but I'm looking at the Bill, and you probably don't know, but I think Mr. Chapman knows, and a number of my colleagues, I spend a fair amount of time actively engaged over at the Zoning Board of Adjustment. And what I'm not reading here is that this is in the section of the Code that lists telemarketing businesses, for instance, as a prohibited use. What I'm not reading here is that it's listed in the section of the Code that requires a variance. This is talking about a certificate, which is right above, as a matter of right, across the counter over at MSB. I mean, what you get here is a requirement that you post something at the location and have a hearing which allows people to come out and say something. And even then, under a certificate case versus a variance case, the burden of proof in a variance case is on the applicant to show that they're not going to be a threat to the health, safety, and welfare of the people surrounding the particular location. In the certificate case, the burden is on the opposition to show the same. So I mean, it's not like somebody is 98 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030024 saying, you can't have the business or you've got to go through some extensive process. What you're going to get is a hearing. And if you locate them, I'm assuming in the right place -- because I'm looking forward to the day that someone wants to bring one over into the 4th District -- but if you put it in the right place, there might not be any neighbors around to oppose the first place. And therefore, you walk in, you have your case, you go to the Zoning Board, you get your certificate, life goes on. Nobody is trying to put anybody out of work. It really starts to wear if we're going to go down, you know, the welfare mothers and then they're not going to have formula for their babies and all this other kind of stuff about this kind of business. I'll put on the record, I'm not thrilled about the calls from any of them at all hours of the day and night, but I don't generally let my personal biases interfere with my job here. It's a certificate. It's not the highest standard. It's the lowest above as a matter of right. I mean, what's the fight?
Just let me add on 99 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030024 one thing there. Would it not seem even more beneficial to these businesses, if when they're doing their planning and they've recognized that they need a certificate, I'm not going to go look for a place where I'm going to get a lot of grief. So I'm going to go, naturally, to a place where there's less residents, where it's more isolated, where I don't have any complaints, and maybe you'd even attract more businesses that way, as opposed to setting up this us versus them situation? If I'm the lawyer or the zoning guy or the zoning person who is being the consultant who's setting up this business, and I say, whoa, certificated use. I don't know if I want to go to the Zoning Board. Let's find a location where I won't have any grief from anybody and I can set it up in a more isolated part so that no one has to be impacted negatively by it. In some ways, I think the certificated use helps them, as opposed to a variance. I'm not trying to prohibit it. I'm trying to enable it in a way that doesn't impact on residential and commercial businesses, which you guys are also charged with trying to maintain. 100 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030024
And one of our charges, as we help business growth in the City, how do we streamline business opportunities in the City? How do sort of cut through the red tape? In that way, any sort of requirement, however slight, that we're adding to a business set-up, in fact, is sending a signal than we're streamlining business.
I understand that, but here's my point on that. Take-out restaurants, it's a great opportunity for entry level people with minimal skills. You're not suggesting that we remove the certificated use for take-out restaurants, although that's the same opportunity for people to get entry level jobs? We're not asking auto repair shops not to be able to have as a matter of right because it impacts on of the neighborhood. Obviously, through the testimony here today, there's been business and residential impact. We're not saying, go away. We're just saying, what's the plan, what are you are doing, what's your operation, what's the impact, and that gets the certificate. I mean, if I wanted to be cruel, I'd go to the variance. I didn't want to be cruel. I want 101 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030024 this opportunity, but I don't want this opportunity at any cost. At any cost. We have certificated uses for other things that provide the same employment opportunities that you're talking about here, but we still have them. We're not streamlining the zoning code by taking away certificated uses and let any business come in. The arguments are not compatible.
Right. Again, the place where we would agree is that there are certain places in the City where that sort of scrutiny is appropriate and other places where we would say -- and I think you would even agree -- that there should be no objection to it. If everyone would agree there's no objection, why would we put a requirement on it?
Because we can't cover every spot where there may be an objection. So this way at least we have a process. If they want to put a telemarketing operation in, I don't know, out by the airport, they're not going to have any complaints.
The concerns had to do with a large number of people in a very sort of congested 102 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030024 setting, and that's where I think we should be focusing. And I would say that had nothing to do with the fact that that was a telemarketer, which is where we're focused here. What if that was call center, which is not a telemarketer?
A call center could be like the Vanguard Center where I call in to ask about my 401K. Right now it could be out on the 202 corridor. That could be in the City. That is not a telemarketer. There are lots of others who are back office uses.
I would rather have as much of a net of protection as possible. And then the other ones that are isolated areas won't have a complaint. And the other ones that are, they won't be able to stop it, but at least they're going to know about it. What is the problem with having neighborhood people know about what's going in their neighborhood? Because they don't know otherwise. They won't know without this process.
Mr. Chairman, it's not unlike when someone even wants to put a high 103 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030024 rise residential building in a community. We get into the issue of density, parking or lack much parking. I'm one for trying to streamline. I think you know my record about economic development, but tied in with my pro-economic development position is always been the process. We went through that even at Penns Landing. Most people were offended when I even presented the Penn's Landing project down there, but we went through a five-year process. It never got built, but at least the community had a say and understood what was being proposed there. So whether it's take-out delis, whether it's a bar restaurant, whether it's a condominium or an apartment building or a medical institution, these are processes that people go through all the time. This is a new phenomenon, if you will, with telemarketing. And we've learned from experiences, at least in Old City, that we may -- no 20 fault of you or us or anyone -- we may not have really been paying attention to this the way we should have been. And we have these businesses in Old City today. And like Old City's overlay that was put in place years ago to restrict the number of take-out restaurants, bars, clubs, what have you, 104 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030024 this is just one more piece of that puzzle that we want to have some control over. We want the community to have a say in that process.
I know you guys are just doing your job and I really do not enjoy beating you guys up.
My concern in Old City is that if we put 1,000 tele-type operators, you know, sending cables out in one location, they all go break together onto little streets, it's got nothing to do with telemarketing.
It's more prevalent in this telemarketing business. We haven't gotten complaints about any tele-type companies.
And had the answer from the representative of the telemarketing company when the question was asked by -- it may have been Cynthia or Heather -- do you intend to expand, he said, no. And then when I followed-up and said, what about if we could maybe find the place to consolidate because it's very congested, there is a 105 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030024 density problem, maybe some of your problems we can help you resolve. The answer was, no, if we expand, we're getting out of the City. I don't know if he meant that as a threat to say, well, if you continue to do this to us, we're leaving. I was somewhat offended. I personally don't trust the answer no, because everything we've put on the table for the last two years they have rejected. So I have a responsibility, I believe, to protect the businesses and the residents that are there today from any further disruption to their quality of life. And I don't want to bring you guys into our fight, but there's no other way in which I can accomplish it. I mean, I walked out of that meeting and I didn't inform the folks that are here today until a day or two later of my intentions. This was not at their suggestion. It was my instincts telling me that I need to get some control over what this business and other businesses may cause to this community.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 106 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030024 I wasn't privy to all of the debate, but I think I kind of picked up on the issue somewhat. First of all, I want to ask the question with respects to the legislative process, and I do recall on a zoning issue relating to day care and child care, certain Councilmembers excluded their districts from the Bill. There was some question as to whether or not that can happen, but I think we did it anyway. I guess I would ask Mr. Chapman, if I was interested in excluding the 5th Councilmatic District from this particular Bill, could I, in fact, do that?
My opinion, Councilman, as you said, it's been done in the past. It was done with the day care Bill. The 6th and 10th Councilmatic Districts have different requirements than the rest of the City does, so based on that experience, I would say that you can do that.
I think I would probably would like to offer an amendment because I'm not clear if this issue has more to do with the operation specific to telemarketing or the occupancy of a particular facility and the subsequent operations on the exterior of the facility. And I 107 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030024 would be concerned about putting an additional burden on a business if that business in a particular location wasn't problematic. And as we all know, any time you add an additional burden as it relates to being able to start a business, people figure out a reason to say that this is not a business friendly City. So I'm a little concerned about putting another barrier in front of a business to locate in my district. And one of the other concerns, Councilman Nutter, you had raised the issue about the burden of proof, certificate versus variance. I agree with you 100 percent by the letter of the law. But I think the reality is, is that our illustrious Zoning Board, there's sometimes a hundred residents coming versus one applicant intent to sway the reality of the whole hardship clause. I'm just a little concerned about that aspect of it also. So I'm a little concerned about the Bill and its implications on a Citywide basis, so I may ask the sponsor to have an opportunity to amend.
We're preparing that amendment now. Anything else? Councilman Nutter. 108 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030024
Mr. Chairman, I didn't hear all of the beginning of the hearing on this particular Bill, but I certainly have a good sense of what the conversation has been. Councilman DiCicco has mentioned on a number of occasions a current situation, I don't know where it is and I don't need to know at the moment. But I will have to take it that, as with any other legislation, especially of a zoning nature, this particular provision or requirement would be on a going forward basis. And what, in your opinion, would be the effect on any current business that's functioning and operating?
No effect at all, Councilman. It would only effect businesses in the future. New businesses or a business that's in a building that wants to put an addition on to the building. It would effect businesses like that. I think maybe Councilman Kenney or Councilman DiCicco might have even mentioned that themselves.
Okay. Because I had the same experience when someone decided that they wanted to open in what was formerly a night club, they decided to turn it into a go-go place up on 109 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030024 City Avenue, and we changed the prohibited use section to encompass the creative way in which they decided to address the participants. But unfortunately, we could not take direct action legislatively against that particular business other than to continue to protest their activities. So I just wanted to make it clear that the legislation is of a prospective nature and does not take any direction action against an operating business.
Thank you very much. Any questions for these witnesses? Councilman Cohen.
How long has this telemarketing business been operating in its present location?
Well, I'd like to suggest -- I think the hearing raised very important issues. I would like to suggest that the recommendation of the Planning Commission be accepted for a temporary delay, since it's clear 110 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030024 that the legislation cannot directly effect the problem as it exists and we need a way of dealing with that too. I think we ought to invest the time to find out what we really can do to help existing conditions, because it seems clear to me that a business this size does not belong in a small, crowded Old City area. This legislation can't help them specifically right now, but from the discussions of the Planning Commission may come very sound approaches that can help us deal with the current situation, as well as the future avoidance of that kind of situation.
Well, I think the problem, Councilman, with that request is that once this cat's out of the bag and there's some anticipation there's going to be restrictions, I think you're going to have a rush to get under the wire, which may create even more problems for us. Because if they think that restrictive legislation is going to be passed, anybody who is anticipating opening one of these will open them quickly. And then we'll have more grandfathered operations in. Councilman DiCicco, I think, has other 111 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030024 issues relative to his Bill, but from my perspective, I would be concerned that there would be a rush to establish these businesses as quickly as possible given a three, four week delay, even longer maybe, because by the time we get a hearing scheduled during the budget. The issue is, frankly -- and I don't mean any offense to anybody sitting at that table -- I get the impression from the testimony that the Administration's mind is made up on this already, and I don't anticipate much cooperation based on the testimony I've heard today. I think that the Administration testimony is bending over nine ways to Sunday to try to keep this from happening. And I don't anticipate a much conducive attitude to discussion on this issue or other issues that we've had in the past.
I lives in hopes sanity and reason will prevail in this, as well as in many other situations. It may be a hopeless venture, but I've got to believe that sooner or later we all come to our senses. I appreciate those possible problems, but it seems difficult for me to imagine many 112 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030024 thousands or more employment companies being able to create locations and jobs that quickly. So I don't think it's a realistic danger in this case. I would just like to have more time. I'd like to get more involved with the community problem. The community certainly deserves relief from its existing conditions. Life ought not to be as difficult as it is for them. We may have to consider a number of things. I don't know what a pawn shop is doing in that area. I don't think people who live in Old City are the kind of folks that use pawn shops or check cashing places. So all the business for that must come from other people, and that's not the nature of this kind of community, residential, commercial development. I think what you've done in Old City is great and I want to see it strengthen in every way possible.
Well, from my perspective, I just have concern based on how busy we're going to be with this budget and the lack of availability for scheduling time for hearings. I would be willing to get the Bill out of Committee and hold it at the request of the Administration for continued discussion. But I find that unless the 113 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030024 Bill is on the calendar, you're not going to get much cooperation until it's ready to be voted on and then we have time for discussion. I do not have a lot of faith in having kind of ongoing discussions while the Bill 7 languishes in the Committee. I would like to get the Bill on the calendar and would be willing, until you're confident and comfortable, in holding the Bill for final vote until that happens. I just think the pressure, in my experience in the last three years, the pressure of the Bill on the calendar brings more discussion than kind of, we'll talk about it.
And I would be willing to have a conversation with you once the Planning Commission makes a decision, once you have had time to coordinate and to get information, I'd be willing to hold it until then. But I think the leverage and the pressure --
Will you include Councilman Nutter and Clarke and Ortiz and the other Members that are here in that understanding? I 114 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030024 would say yes.
Look, I'd like to get it passed, so I'm not going to be in a position to try to ram it through because --
Thank you very much. Is there anyone to testify on these Bills? (No response.)
Seeing none, we will now move to Bill No. 020826, which is an Ordinance 13 amending Title of the Philadelphia Code, entitled 14 "Zoning and Planning," by amending Chapter 14-200, entitled, "Residential Districts by amending use regulations in "R-6" Residential District, and by making certain technical amendments, under certain terms and conditions. Mr. Chapman, please identify yourself.
Mr. Chairman, Members of the Committee, my name is Tom Chapman. I am testifying on behalf of the Planning Commission. This Bill amends Section 14-207 of the Zoning Code by changing the requirements of the R-6 residential district. It provides that attached dwellings can 115 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030024 be in groups of no more than four and not less than feet in width. The Code presently allows the 4 dwellings to be in groups of 10 and not more than 18 5 feet in width. 6 R-6 is a district that is not mapped 7 extensively in the City. In fact, our records 8 indicate that it's only located in the 10th 9 Councilmatic District, and there are only a few 10 sites within the 10th District zoned R-6 where the 11 land has not been developed. 12 The Planning Commission is scheduled to 13 consider this amendment at its meeting of March 14 18th, 2003. 15
Any questions for 16 this witness? 17 (No response.) 18
Any other persons to 19 testify on this Bill? 20 (No response.)
Seeing none, we will move to Bill No. 030024, which is an Ordinance to amend the Philadelphia Zoning Maps by changing the zoning designations of certain areas of land located within an area bounded by 48th Street, Brown Street, 116 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030024 44th Street and Fairmount Avenue. Please identify yourself for the record.
Once again for the record, good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, and Members of the Committee. My name is Tom Chapman. I'm here to testify on Bill No. 030024. This Bill was introduced by Councilmember Blackwell on January 28th of this year. It amends the zoning maps for acres of 11 land bounded by 48th Street, Brown Street, 44th Street and Fairmount Avenue. This area is being rezoned to accommodate the development plan of the Philadelphia Housing Authority to build 120 residential units, an administrative office with a community park, and as well as a possible future community center. The Planning Commission considered and approved the 44th and Aspen Redevelopment Area Plan for this site at its meeting of November 19th, 2002. The purpose of this Bill is consistent with the action taken by the Planning Commission at that time, as well as the aims of the 21st Century Neighborhood's proposal as announced by the Mayor. Accordingly, the Planning Commission 117 3/6/03 - RULES - BILL 030024 supports the passage of Bill No. 030024.
Thank you very much for your testimony. Are there any questions for this witness on this Bill? (No response.)
Seeing none,that will conclude the Rules Committee hearing. - - - 118 COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA PUBLIC MEETING COMMITTEE ON RULES - - - Thursday, March 6, 2003 - - - Public Meeting conducted by the Committee on Rules, held in Room 696, City Hall, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, on the above date, to consider action on the following: BILLS 020683, 030113, 030114, 030017, 030024, 030081, 030099. RESOLUTION 030033. - - - PRESENT: COUNCILMAN JAMES KENNEY, CHAIRMAN COUNCILMAN DARRELL CLARKE COUNCILMAN FRANK DICICCO COUNCILMAN MICHAEL NUTTER COUNCILMAN BRIAN O'NEILL COUNCILMAN ANGEL ORTIZ - - - 119 3/6/03 - RULES - PUBLIC MEETING
We will now convene the public meeting. The Chair recognizes Councilmember Clarke for a motion on Bill No. 030081 with a rules suspension.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I make a motion that Bill No. 030081 be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation and request for a suspension of the rules. (Duly Seconded.)
There are none opposed. Bill No. 030081 is reported out of this Committee favorably. The request made for rules suspension will allow for first reading at our next Council Session. The Chair recognize Councilmember DiCicco on a motion on Bill No. 030099.
Thank you, Mr. 120 3/6/03 - RULES - PUBLIC MEETING Chair. I move that Bill No. 030099 be reported out of this Committee with a favorable recommendation, and a further recommendation that the rules of Council be suspended. (Duly seconded.)
There are none opposed. Bill No. 030099 is reported out of this Committee with a favorable recommendation. Request made for rules suspension will allow first reading at our next Council Session. The Chair recognizes Councilmember DiCicco on a motion on Bill No. 030114.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I move that Bill No. 030114 be reported out of this Committee with a favorable recommendation, and a further recommendation that the rules of Council be suspended. (Duly seconded.) 121 3/6/03 - RULES - PUBLIC MEETING
There are none opposed. Bill No. 030114 is reported out of this Committee favorably. The request be made for rules suspension to allow first reading at our next Council Session. The Chair recognizes Councilmember Clarke to approve a motion approving the amendments to Bill No. 030113. Those amendments include an addition to paragraph one of 14-1605, which now reads, "At any location where the operation of a telemarketing business is otherwise permitted by this Code, no 18 person shall establish, maintain or operate a telemarketing business as that term is defined in Section 2 of the Telemarketing Registration Act of December 4, 1996, PL911, No. 147, without first obtaining a Zoning Board of Adjustment Certificate." The additional amendment will be a new Section D which will state, "Any location within the 5th Councilmatic District," so this Bill will not 122 3/6/03 - RULES - PUBLIC MEETING apply to the 5th Councilmatic District. First of all, I'd like to ask for a motion to approve those amendments.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I ask for a motion to approve the amendments as read into the record. (Duly seconded.)
There are none opposed. The amendments as read into the record will be approved. I now ask Councilmember Clarke if he would be so kind as to make a motion to report this Bill out of Committee favorably and not requesting a rules suspension.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I make a motion that Bill No. 030113 be reported out of Committee as amended, be reported 123 3/6/03 - RULES - PUBLIC MEETING out favorably out of Committee. (Duly seconded.)
There are none opposed. Bill No. 030113 as amended is reported out of this Committee with a favorable recommendation. The Chair recognizes Councilmember Nutter for a motion on Bill No. 020826 with a rules suspension.
Mr. Chairman, I move that Bill No. 020826 be reported out of this Committee with a favorable recommendation and a further recommendation that the Rules of Council be suspended so as to permit first reading at our next Session. (Duly seconded.)
The Bill has been moved and seconded. All in favor? 124 3/6/03 - RULES - PUBLIC MEETING (Aye.)
There are none opposed. Bill No. 020826 is reported out of this Committee with a favorable recommendation. A request will be made for rules suspension will allow first reading at our next Council Session. The Chair recognizes Councilmember Nutter for a motion on Bill No. 030024 with a suspension.
Mr. Chairman, I move that Bill No. 030024 be reported out of this Committee with a favorable recommendation and a further recommendation that the Rules of Council be suspended so as to permit first reading at our next Session. (Duly seconded.)
There are none opposed. Bill No. 030024 is reported out of this 125 3/6/03 - RULES - PUBLIC MEETING Committee with a favorable recommendation and request will be made for rules suspension to allow first reading at our next Council Session. The Chair recognizes Councilmember Nutter for a motion to amend Bill No. 030017.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, on of the Bill at the top is entitled, "Exhibit A," where presently reads, "Preliminary plan," Mr. Chairman, I need to delete "preliminary" and now insert the word "final" and I move the adoption of that amendment. (Duly seconded.)
Seconded. All in favor to the adoption of the amendment to Bill No. 030017, say aye. (Aye.)
There are none opposed. The Bill is amended accordingly. The Chair recognizes Councilmember Nutter.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 126 3/6/03 - RULES - PUBLIC MEETING Now with that amendment I need to move the adoption of the final plan as listed in Exhibit A of Bill 030017. (Duly seconded.)
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This Bill will remain in Committee until the next hearing, which I mentioned during the course of this hearing.
Thank you very much. That concludes the business of the Rules Committee -- we're not done yet?
The Chair recognizes 127 3/6/03 - RULES - PUBLIC MEETING Councilmember Nutter for a motion to approve Resolution 030033.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I move the approval of Resolution No. 7 030033. (Duly seconded.)
There are none opposed. Resolution No. 030033 has been approved by the Committee.
Now I think we're done. Thank you for your attendance. (Council adjourned at 4:25 p.m.) - - - 128 C E R T I F I C A T I O N I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing proceedings of the Council of the City of Philadelphia of March 6, 2003, were reported fully and accurately by me, and that this is a correct transcript of the same. RE: COMMITTEE ON RULES ___________________________ Lisa C. Bradley, RPR and Notary Public