Well, personnel matters are really outside my realm of expertise. Is it a loophole that an employee can retire and then immediately become reemployed --
This is beyond the normal realm of retirement, I would think, the DROP Program. Do all people that leave the employ of the City leave with the same financial condition that the DROP Program provides?
Well, the DROP Program certainly provides a benefit that's well above an employee who elected to retire and not participate in DROP, but at the end of the day, what is being credited to their DROP account is their monthly benefit. So it's a monthly benefit that if they opted not to participate in DROP, they would be receiving directly, as opposed to have it credited to a DROP account, and made available to them in a lump sum. 00559 2/25/02, COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, BILL 02001
Are you answering the question that a person in DROP today can legally be rehired by the City of Philadelphia?
I believe what I answered to is that that's not my area of expertise, personnel matters.
I did say that I am aware that employees are permitted to be reinstated or reemployed or rehired.
Who from the administration is here that can answer that question? That's sad in itself.
The person can be rehired, that's part of their Civil Service -- the Civil Service Code that a person can be rehired once they retired. Whether it was anticipated when DROP was put in place or not, I don't know. And I guess one could consider it a loophole, but again, it would have to be what 00560 2/25/02, COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, BILL 02001 was anticipated when DROP had some knowledge of the recommendations that were made at that time.
We -- and I think I can even see -- I'm not speaking for the Chair -- that she's even responding that that was not the case. The person entered the DROP Program, that they had to retire, and there was no coming back to the same job or any other job?
I don't know what was represented at that time I wasn't here. I'd have to ask someone who has some knowledge of the representations that were made at that time.
Then what was the purpose of the DROP Program -- well, obviously, we don't have the ability to --
I can only tell you the way it was implemented and the reasons it was implemented in Houston when I was there.
I guess we're going to have to wait until we get, Madam Chair, someone from the administration that can speak 00561 2/25/02, COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, BILL 02001 on this because I believe most of this -- we're lead to believe that --
-- once you file 7 that, it was basically history. And I'm already talking to employees that are going to be taking advantage of the DROP Program, telling me that they're already working to get reinstated the day after they leave, after taking advantage of this very, very lucrative program. Thank you, Madam Chair.
You're welcome. The Chair recognizes Councilman Ortiz.
Thank you. Wow, my head is swimming with the numbers that Michael just put forward. Let me ask one question of the DROP Program. You said 2,600 people were taking advantage of the DROP Program?
And out of that 00562 2/25/02, COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, BILL 02001 how many are uniformed people: firemen and fire persons and police persons?
You said we have money managers and 6 of them are minorities? 22
Did any Latinos make the final cut of anything in terms of money managers? You said you had a process, you cut them down from a couple of thousand or 1,500 down to 76 or down to 26?
My correction, one of the new investment managers that we hired, Aronson & Partners, one of the partners is Martha Ortiz. She's a partner of that firm.
Aronson & Partners. It's a local firm here in Philadelphia and she is a partner of that firm. It's a large-cap value manager.
She's a partner. It's not a majority-owned Latino firm, but she is a partner in that firm.
But it's not a majority owned. It's like Ballard getting a contract and somebody putting --
It's a rather small firm. People-wise, there are five partners 00564 2/25/02, COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, BILL 02001 there. She's one of the five.
You have somebody who works for a firm that's Latino or is a partner?
Do you know of any that you inquire, that you solicit, that you make an outreach on that?
There are two that I'm in conversation with. Both of them qualify for the Opportunity Fund.
And what do you need to -- you said they qualify, that means they don't qualify for the other -- 00565 2/25/02, COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, BILL 02001
We have a restriction in a large fund that we cannot invest more than -- we can't represent more than percent of 5 the investment or 20 percent of the total firm's 6 assets. 7 A lot of the minority funds are 8 rather small and the allocations that we 9 typically award would exceed both their fund 10 size and their total firm size. So we have established the Opportunity Fund, which was started up in August of 2000, to award smaller allocations to minority and local firms.
What's the extent of our loss in terms of Apple or when did we get out? And how much money did the Pension Fund lose because of Enron? And when did we get out? I mean, when did we get notice that they were a free fall?
As I mentioned earlier, just to repeat it, we are invested in outside funds managed by outside professional 00566 2/25/02, COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, BILL 02001 investment management firms. The estimate that we have to-date, and I think it's a pretty good estimate, we lost about $6 million. Now, that compared to a $4.3 billion fund is less than a half percent for loss. We are out of Enron and almost every single portfolio. There is one portfolio -- there are two portfolios in which we still own Enron. For one of them, it was in the Opportunity Fund and that manager's being addressed. The other one is through our private-equity investments. They bought interest in Enron as it was going down, in hopes of capitalizing on a slight upgrade.
Any other questions for members of the committee? (No further questions.) COUINCIL
Thank you 00567 2/25/02, COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, BILL 02001 very much. The last to be called is the City Planning Commission. (Witness comes forward.)
Good afternoon. COMMISSIONER GRIFFITH: Good afternoon, Council President Verna and Members of the City Council. I am Maxine Griffith, Executive Director of the Planning Commission and Secretary of Strategic Planning. I also have at the table, Carol Reber, who is our Director of Administrative Services. I want to thank you for the opportunity to discuss the Commission's proposed operating budget for Fiscal Year 2003, of $3,679,615. This budget has three components: a General Fund request for $3,308,712; a Community Development Block Grant request of $242,403; and $128,500 in Federal transportation grant funds. You will notice that this year's General Fund request is $242,902 more than our Fiscal Year 2002, estimated obligation level of $3,065,810. This budget reflects funding for 68 00568 2/25/02, COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, BILL 02001 positions, an increase of positions over FY02. The new positions are a landscape architect, an information officer, a clerk stenographer III and a clerk typist II. The Commission has received three Federal Transportation Administration grants. The $73,900 Short Range Planning grant will support staff who carry out basic capital programming and public transportation analysis. We will receive a $54,600 grant for the North Delaware Riverfront Public Transportation Study. The staff will continue to examine opportunities to make the City more -- I'm sorry, the staff will continue to examine opportunities to make the City more competitive with suburban communities in retaining and attracting residents. The work focuses on strategies for improving the quality of life in neighborhoods through a variety of public and private actions to improve the physical environment. The North Delaware area of the City contains a challenging mix of under-utilized industrial and port facilities, public 00569 2/25/02, COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, BILL 02001 utilities, as well as institutional, recreational and residential uses. Under the direction of the Planning Commission staff, a concept plan for the redevelopment of the North Delaware Riverfront has been completed by consultants, and the Commission has begun the process of evaluating and responding to the recommendations in the plan. This response includes reviewing recommendations for re-zonings where appropriate, working with others to refine the public space and environmentally-oriented elements of the plan, and working with our sister agencies to promote other plan components and the development of publications and other marketing tools. Housing redevelopment support activities, including blight certification and redevelopment planning, continue to require a high level of Commission staff involvement. These activities are undertaken in conjunction with the Office of Housing and Community Development and the Redevelopment Authority. In addition, Commission staff is responsible for developing the community 00570 2/25/02, COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, BILL 02001 planning component of the Mayor's Neighborhood Transformation Initiative and will coordinate planning and community participation during implementation through our chairmanship of an Interagency Task Force. We will continue to provide ongoing planning and technical support for community-initiated zoning changes such as those in South, West and Northeast Philadelphia. But in addition, the Commission has begun the process of drafting proposals for the modernization of Philadelphia's entire 40-year-old Zoning Code. We have eliminated redundant passages and unmapped districts, purged the text of arcane and overly complex language, and made the code easier to understand and use. Because the code does not acknowledge the technological innovations and new uses that have emerged over the years, it can be a difficult tool to use when rehabbing old buildings, reinventing neighborhoods, or responding to the needs of the 21st century business.
We will, therefore, work with our 00571 2/25/02, COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, BILL 02001 private-and public-sector colleagues to promulgate additional needed changes in the coming year. The Commission's Urban Design Division will continue to work on a long-range plan such as Avenue of the Arts North and Parkway enhancement. They are also developing a graphic guide to Center City development regulations and will maintain an active role in planning for the Schuylkill Riverfront. The division has also begun developing prototypical urban design guides for new NTI neighborhoods. And the Commission's vacant land use study continues to be the basis of the work we undertake with others to develop a menu of options for the aesthetic treatment of vacant lots and other vacant land in preparation for redevelopment and reuse. We have already issued our first analytical documents using 2000 census data. As census data continues to be released over the coming year, the Commission will continue to compile and publish population, housing, and 00572 2/25/02, COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, BILL 02001 socioeconomic data in both print and electronic formats. These will include maps, various data bulletins, and neighborhood profiles. These documents will be made available to the public and will provide the basis for in-house analysis and policy development. In addition to the specific projects and initiatives that I have highlighted, the Commission staff will continue its traditional responsibilities in neighborhood and development planning, environmental review, zoning and capital program preparation. And in conjunction with members of the City Council and our colleagues in other agencies, we also hope to host a broad conversation in a variety of formats to discuss the future of the physical City and to design a broad framework for future growth and development. I will be happy to take questions. Thank you.
Thank you, Commissioner. Could you elaborate on the work your 00573 2/25/02, COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, BILL 02001 office is doing in making the City more competitive with suburban communities? COMMISSIONER GRIFFITH: Well, one of the things that the development community and the real estate marketing community has told us is that we really don't have the products that people want to buy in terms of housing; that is, market rate housing. For instance, the North Delaware area and in other areas, we are trying to produce that product so that the person who has done fairly well, and maybe would still like to live near his church or near his mom, doesn't have to go across the river to New Jersey to find that product.
Do you think the City schools and the City tax structure are two of the City's largest impediments? COMMISSIONER GRIFFITH: Well, to be honest, taxation is not my strong suite. But certainly, in terms of the school situation, we are very interested and very concerned about bringing schools into sort 00574 2/25/02, COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, BILL 02001 of the neighborhood planning loop so that we are not just planning sort of denuded neighborhoods. We are looking at commercial facilities, we're looking at schools, we're looking at parks and playgrounds, et cetera.
What activities will your office be undertaking for the NTI program? COMMISSIONER GRIFFITH: We have fairly focused on an important area in NTI. We are coordinating the community planning aspect and also trying to promulgate Citywide criteria so that NTI can be judged against what we want to happen in Philadelphia and also can be judged against national standards.
Would you explain what the planning criteria is and what areas have been assessed and what areas you are planning on assessing? COMMISSIONER GRIFFITH: Planning criteria you may remember, we may have called it something a little different, but some months ago we handed out to Council, first I think, at an NTI briefing session and then in a packet a 00575 2/25/02, COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, BILL 02001 list of criteria. For instance, how close should any resident be to a public library or to a health clinic, that kind of Citywide criteria. We would then map those facilities and make judgments about -- to the extent that we can, given resources, capital budget planning, et cetera, based on those criteria. They came not only from our own studies over the years, but also from the American Planning Association, the American Library Association, et cetera. And we looked at what others were doing and what we thought was appropriate to Philadelphia. And then we circulated that criteria not only to Council and staff, but also to the agencies that, frankly, might know more about those areas of expertise than we do.
Thank you. In your testimony, you mention an Interagency Planning Task Force. What is the charge of the task force and what is its makeup? COMMISSIONER GRIFFITH: During the NTI planning, during the planning for the planning, the NTI Steering Committee, under Pat 00576 2/25/02, COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, BILL 02001 Smith's purview, formed a number of task forces to focus on various areas. We shared the Internet Agency Task Force on planning. That worked so well, the determination was if that was a good working model to continue as we implemented NTI. The call went out to all the secretaries and all agency heads that were involved in NTI in any way. We held the first meeting actually last week, in anticipation that we might actually be starting implementation very soon. And the idea is -- you mentioned schools, for instance. The idea is that all knowledge does not reside in the Planning Commission. We want to make sure that as we plan for these communities, agencies that have responsibility for various components of a community all can step up to the plate, speak about their issues, critique and comment on the plans, and are also there to respond to Council and community when necessary so that you won't have to -- one, won't have to shop or plan around to various agencies to get a response. 00577 2/25/02, COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, BILL 02001
Thank you. My last question. If I recall correctly, in last year's testimony and again today, you mention that the Commission is working on modernizing the Zoning Code. When do you anticipate or expect that this will be completed? Are we going to be talking about this next year also? COMMISSIONER GRIFFITH: I'm pleased to say, Council President, that we have completed a draft of this code. And as you know, we have been working with Council staff on this. It is now being reviewed by the Law Department for whatever magic they do, compliance. And frankly, we would hope to be able to bring that to Council in the spring or shortly thereafter.
Did you say Council staff? COMMISSIONER GRIFFITH: Yes.
May I ask who on Council staff? COMMISSIONER GRIFFITH: We can get back to you on that, but I'm told that both Rich 00578 2/25/02, COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, BILL 02001 Lombardo and Tom Chapman have been in conversation. It may have been a while ago, because frankly, we had finished our work about three or four months ago.
And I really don't know of anybody on staff. And I think that Mr. McPherson, who is sitting next to me, and I would ask, do you know anything about it? MR. McPERSON: No. 12 COMMISSIONER GRIFFITH: I will have to get back to you, Council President, with names.
Have any Councilmembers been shared the information that's on this draft? COMMISSIONER GRIFFITH: Antidotically, there's been sharing, but I've been -- it's been suggested to me that until it's been thoroughly reviewed by legal, it's not in a form that should be formally shared with Council. I did, however, to reiterate --
You said it shouldn't be shared with Council and you are 00579 2/25/02, COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, BILL 02001 also saying that it has been shared with Council staff; which is it? COMMISSIONER GRIFFITH: Well, I'm really saying two separate things and I apologize if I'm being unclear. I was told by my staff that the drafting of the -- and let me be clear. This first phase is not so much a change in substance, it is a change in format and the clarification that there were discussions stretching back almost a year ago. And again, I will get that information to you. In terms of the formal communication with Council, that is this is the bill that we would like to have submitted that would await legal review because they may have concerns about format. If I am incorrect about conversations with Council staff --
Well, I would like to know who in Council staff has any knowledge of this and I'd appreciate your getting back to me on that. COMMISSIONER GRIFFITH: I certainly will, Council President. 00580 2/25/02, COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, BILL 02001
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman Kenney.
Thank you, Madam President. Just as a facade to that last conversation, just imagine what would have happened prior to the year 2000 had Council staff or Councilmembers had information shared with them by the Rendell Administration prior to running it through the President's office. Could you imagine the outcry?
I believe you're Chair of the LNI Committee, are you not?
No, not any longer. Ms. Griffith, the North Delaware Riverfront project, I just would recommend to you a very thorough review that we did 50 pages two years ago relative to that exact issue. I sent copies to the administration, I think, more than once, so I would refer that to you for review. There's some pretty good ideas in there and not all of them mine, and maybe you won't 00581 2/25/02, COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, BILL 02001 have to reinvent the wheel. COMMISSIONER GRIFFITH: Thank you.
Just one question relative to some information I had received and I would like to clarify it, clear it up, debunk it once and for all. During the course of the discussions over redistricting, the Council redistricting plan, was any City Planning Commission staff formally or informally assigned to assist with information-gathering, research, strategic planning, anything relative to the discussions on the redistricting of the Seventh District or the First District or the Fifth District? Was any Planning Commission staff either assigned to or worked with members of Council on redistricting? COMMISSIONER GRIFFITH: We were asked only to provide maps. Our GIS Division was asked to provide any maps that we would have in our database that would reflect the district boundaries as they existed, and also -- and I'm forgetting because I come from a place that calls it different things, the sub -- 00582 2/25/02, COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, BILL 02001
Divisions? COMMISSIONER GRIFFITH: -- divisions. Actually, we did not have that information, but we were able to provide maps related to the existing district boundaries.
As plans changed and as plans were submitted and things discussed, did the Planning Commission ever run or crunch any numbers relative to demographics or to division alignment, border alignment, nothing like that? COMMISSIONER GRIFFITH: No, sir.
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman Rizzo.
Thank you, Madam Chair. In reference to your testimony here where you're going to hire a landscape architect, how many consultants does the Planning Commission have? COMMISSIONER GRIFFITH: At this 00583 2/25/02, COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, BILL 02001 point, the Planning Commission has no 3 consultants on staff.
Did you consider rather than bringing on a full-time employee with benefits, a landscape architect of -- utilizing maybe one or two landscape architects, which we have many of in the area, rather than bringing on an additional person? COMMISSIONER GRIFFITH: Yes.
How much are you planning to pay that landscape architect? COMMISSIONER GRIFFITH: Well, let me answer that question in two parts. We had from time-to-time brought in consultants. As a matter of fact, the North Delaware Riverfront study was led by a prominent landscape architect out of the University of Pennsylvania and we may have occasion to do that in the future. However, because of the amount of vacant property that we will be asked to plan for within the NTI project, which is a three-to five-year program stretching over a period of time, it was determined that we really needed someone on staff and that the cost of benefits 00584 2/25/02, COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, BILL 02001 of actually having a staff person there and able to interact freely with the other staff would be beneficial. I should point out that we have no 6 landscape architect or landscape designer at all in our staff. So when we look at the census of vacant lots and when we look at accumulation of property and how to deal with that in an interim basis prior to development, we had our urban designers and architects calling up their friends who are landscape architects, trying to get the terminology correct, et cetera. So we did think that one landscape architect -- and frankly, we are now talking to Personnel. It will probably be someone at a lower level than landscape architect. It will probably be a landscape designer, someone comparable to a planner to which has been the $30,000 range because that's the kind of -- the only word I can think of is "grunt work" that we need done. We really don't need a supervisorial person because we'll only have one person.
Have you considered at least seeing if Fairmount Park 00585 2/25/02, COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, BILL 02001 Commission, which I believe they have landscape architects already employed, seeing if they could provide some assistance to you? COMMISSIONER GRIFFITH: They will be providing assistance to NTI, and indeed, there are a number of very fine landscape architects on their staff. However, as you know, they have vast plans that they have to plan for and maintain, and their landscape architects are extraordinarily busy simply doing that and doing the kind of upgrade planning for the park that we foresee as part of the Neighborhood Transformation Initiative. I mean, I think your point is well taken. We were very careful about asking for additional positions, and believe me, this administration made us do reams and reams of justification and look at a number of options which the Budget Office also reviewed. And we did feel that one junior landscape architect was important not only to do the work, but so there would be someone on our staff that could judge the work of outside consultants and other assistance as we move 00586 2/25/02, COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, BILL 02001 forward, but we are not thinking of enlarging that staff.
What does an information officer do? COMMISSIONER GRIFFITH: Again, this relates to both our NTI charge and our community planning charge. As you will remember in my testimony in NTI and in the plans we have for that, we're talking about a lot of interaction with the community, a lot of communication. We're now trying to develop an actual document that would go out every couple of months to keep people apprised of what the Commission's doing, we're trying to upgrade our website, et cetera. What's happening now is, technical planners have undertaken that role, which means when they're doing that, they can't do the planning work that they were trained to do. So, again, this is what we believe is an opportunity to allow the planning staff to do the work that they got their graduate degrees to do, and to get a non-planner, though someone hopefully who is interested and involved in planning to focus on this very important 00587 2/25/02, COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, BILL 02001 community interaction component, Council interaction component. We are now, or hopefully soon will be, partners in this enterprise. There needs to be someone developing documents in ways to get the information out to the Council. And it's also a way to decentralize a little bit, I think, information that perhaps has traditionally come out of City Hall.
How many years -- the official NTI Program, what happens after NTI -- obviously a landscape architect comes with the Planning Commission. I don't think I would run off too quickly. I think you're going to inherit two positions that you're going to be funding for the next years. 18 What happens after NTI and all the 19 vacant lots have their pretty greenery and 20 things like that? You really believe that you have a need, long-term, for a landscape architect and an information officer? COMMISSIONER GRIFFITH: With all due respect, we are only talking about two people, and yes. 00588 2/25/02, COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, BILL 02001 As you know, what happened with the Planning Commission over the years is the Commission staff has shrunk from a high, some staff tell me, of over 80 to 50 to 60 when I came on board. So a lot of activities that had been traditionally part of the planning commission were sort of truncated and reined back. I know you are also probably tired of hearing this, but we also see the Neighbor Transformation Initiative not simply as a program with a beginning and end, but a different way of planning and developing through the City. So this new way of looking at things is permanent. The fact that we're going to be communicating more with communities and with a development community and with Council, we see is permanent. The fact that there' be some property that will need to be maintained in green and up-kept for many, many years to come. And the fact, and it's been pointed out, and I think correctly, so that a lot of the community-based organizations and others that 00589 2/25/02, COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, BILL 02001 are eagerly accepting responsibility are going to need help and assistance. So we're going to try to develop a menu of options and brochures and web based help lines. And we think this is pretty permanent. Cities grow and they contract and they change and new areas get developed and concerns happen. And, indeed, we think that one information officer and one landscape architect is not overly ambitious.
What motivated my question. And maybe the Chair can -- I thought we had a hiring freeze. COMMISSIONER GRIFFITH: We do, and we haven't been unfrozen. We still have to -- even though these lines are here on paper, I mention the reams of paper I had to submit to the Mayor's Office and to Rob to get these positions authorized. There will be other reams of paper that I have to submit on a case-by-case basis to show why in times of scarce resources each and every position is needed. So the same hard questions that you ask, Councilman, will be asked of me yet, again, 00590 2/25/02, COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, BILL 02001 by me and Mr. Dubow and others here at City Hall. And frankly, we have a number of positions, not just these new ones, that have not been filled, and we will hopefully be making a reasonable argument to unfreeze each one, but I doubt it.
And these are civil service positions so they will be civil service employees? COMMISSIONER GRIFFITH: These are all civil service positions, yes. By Charter we are unable to, at the Planning Commission, take on exempt employees. We can only take on civil service employees.
The Chair recognizes Councilman DiCicco. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Thank you, Madam Chair. Good afternoon. Are you familiar with the RPROD Bill, Bill number 010424, residential, preservation, revitalization, overlay district? 00591 2/25/02, COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, BILL 02001 COMMISSIONER GRIFFITH: Yes. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Because I think the Planning Commission played some role in formulating that legislation. COMMISSIONER GRIFFITH: Yes, as a -- the only word I can think of is, as a service to Council, we did -- COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: It would basically be something we drafted through some legal people in and outside of government. There are a number of different roles that government plays in the City of Philadelphia when it comes to neighborhoods, and the historical districts, obviously, have a certain amount of revenues and concentration pay that has paid attention to them. And then you also have in the lower-income neighborhoods with the Mayor's Blight Program, but we'll address some of those needs. There is kind of a layer in between the lower, middle income neighborhoods that really don't have any protections. That's one of the reasons that we thought RPROD might be beneficial. 00592 2/25/02, COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, BILL 02001 Do you think that there's any role that the Planning Commission should be playing or may want to play going forward when it comes to RPROD, and how would you like to see the Planning Commission's role play out? COMMISSIONER GRIFFITH: I think the Planning Commission -- I can't necessarily speak for each and every Commissioner, but I think the objectives of legislation are ones that we have a great deal of sympathy with, and in general, concur with. I think we do have some concerns taking off our service-to-the-Council hat and putting on our support for development. I think we do have some concerns about having another, what seems to be fairly complicated, layer of interaction before someone might be able to build or renovate something in the community. Not to say that there isn't some kind of mid point or to say that my view would necessarily prevail, but without having the legislation be forming and reviewing it in detail, I would say that that's sort of our general concern. I know that the Historical 00593 2/25/02, COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, BILL 02001 Commission also had some concerns, which were a little more legal in focus and I have a request from Mr. Tyler to discuss it. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Yes, and we'll continue to discuss this as it moves forward. I mean, my intention was certainly not to place another layer in the bureaucracy, but it's kind of one of those things, I think, that was necessary. What it says in a nutshell is that it would give community groups who choose to create an APROD, a district, the ability to basically make decisions on or make recommendations for either existing buildings or future development as to the types of materials that would be used on facades of buildings. I know there's a zoning process for a number of units and certain other things that are required on new construction and even some rehab. What really brought this to my attention is that in a lot of neighborhoods throughout the City of Philadelphia, from the Strawberry Mansion section through West Philadelphia, every neighborhood has its 00594 2/25/02, COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, BILL 02001 uniqueness, and even some of the uniqueness is to the character of the facade of the buildings or the properties that are within that neighborhood. South Broad Street, the area that both the Council President and I represent -- she's on the west side -- I'm on the east side, has probably some of the most beautiful brownstone buildings in the City of Philadelphia, as do other neighborhoods.
And what is sad is when you drive down South Broad Street, many of those neighborhoods, because there were no real controls -- and no one is at fault for this, I'm not suggesting that someone is to blame -- but there weren't any controls to protect the integrity of the facades of those brownstones, where now you have eight or ten brownstones in a row, and then someone decides to put yellow, or green, or whatever color, aluminum siding on the front of the property, and then you have additional brownstones. Or you have the properties that have some mixed use where they have some retail/commercial office space. And the signage 00595 2/25/02, COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, BILL 02001 becomes so offensive that it really distracts from the -- I mean, the beauty of what South Broad Street, and again, other neighborhoods leant itself towards the City of Philadelphia and that uniqueness. I mean that was really my intention. And I think what it does in the process, if you can maintain some level of continuity in the aesthetical value of the neighborhood, I think it does a lot for resale by values of properties. And it just gives somebody a place to say, I live on Broad Street or I live in such a neighborhood, and people can almost immediately identify. I mean Girard Estates, when you think of Girard Estates you think of twins with stone fronts and porch fronts. When you think of Strawberry Mansion, you think of these beautiful brownstones with these, I guess, English type of roof fixtures and the porch fronts and all. And someone comes along and decides to go -- I call it "on the cheap" to rehab it for investment purposes only, not even for their 00596 2/25/02, COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, BILL 02001 own use and just slap something on it without paying attention to the materials or even window sizes. You have a 30-inch window and someone goes to one of the home improvement centers and buys a 20-inch window because they think they're saving money and they plop it in. It doesn't meet with the facade of the building, and then you're bricking it up or cinder-blocking up the base, and it just -- it actually, in my opinion, turns something beautiful into blight. And I'm sure people may disagree on what I -- art is in the eyes of the beholder, but I think we all understand what I'm talking about. So I just was curious if you had any opinions on it. COMMISSIONER GRIFFITH: Well, it's something that we would like to continue to work with you on. As I said, I think we have enormous sympathy for the objectives and I could cite blocks where a wonderful block was ruined with aluminum siding. Of course, there are the protections of an Historic District, but you're talking about -- 00597 2/25/02, COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, BILL 02001 COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Yet, there's no 3 protection for that -- COMMISSIONER GRIFFITH: -- that in-between -- COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: In between. That's really what it was all about. COMMISSIONER GRIFFITH: -- area, and I know that there are those of us who are very interested in, as we move forward with the development of the City, looking at ways we can preserve the aesthetic value of the City. When friends of mine come here they always say this is such a pretty city. So we would be very interested in working with you on it without, frankly, committing to every line of the bill that you discussed. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Thank you. No 20 further questions.
Thank you. Councilwoman Blackwell, your lights on did you want to be recognized?
Thank you, Madam President. 00598 2/25/02, COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, BILL 02001 I only wanted to thank the head of the Planning Commission. I'm surprised they didn't have some of those staff positions filled, but certainly we think they do an excellent job for us. In fact, we couldn't do what we do without them, and certainly, I look forward to supporting their budget request. COMMISSIONER GRIFFITH: Thank you, Councilwoman.
Thank you. Are there any other questions for members of the committee? The Chair recognizes Councilman Nutter.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Good afternoon, Ms. Griffith. COMMISSIONER GRIFFITH: Good afternoon.
I may have missed this; if I did, I'll read it in the notes of testimony. I seem to remember either from this testimony or some other day's testimony discussion about the neighborhood plans. Have 00599 2/25/02, COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, BILL 02001 you talked about those already? COMMISSIONER GRIFFITH: Briefly, but in sort of global terms. If you have a specific question, I'd be happy to answer it.
Yes, when will that process start? And did you get -- was it in the last budget six or eight or nine -- COMMISSIONER GRIFFITH: Right --
-- additional people? When will the Neighborhood Planning Process start? And could you maybe bring us up to date on -- I'm left with the impression from other hearings and other testimony that some of that has actually started. Do you have plans for other neighborhoods that you've done already? COMMISSIONER GRIFFITH: What we've done -- and we haven't initiated any planning under NTI. What we've done is we've done a call for existing plans. As you know, it's not that there hasn't been community-based planning going on in Philadelphia; there's been a lot of very strong community-based organizations and block 00600 2/25/02, COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, BILL 02001 associations and others that have in some cases, worked with the Planning Commission, and in other cases, just gone ahead by themselves and develop plans. What we wanted to do in this interim period while there was still dialogue between the Administration and Council over the details of the NTI Program and sort of gather those plans in and be ready to go by letting them based on the NTI language and criteria. For instance, we did a chart, which we'd be happy to share with you, that takes all of those existing plans and takes the TRF neighborhood nomenclature and categorizes that. We look at the funds that the group say would be necessary to move the project forward, we look at the Council District. So what we've done, I believe, at last count there were 39 plans. We did both an E-mail call, a call through the Consortium of CDCs, the name escapes me right now, and we also looked at simply the plans that we, over the years, with my staff over the years, have promulgated with community organizations, and we 00601 2/25/02, COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, BILL 02001 have them charted and sort of ready to go. We have not started an engaged community planning process. We had our first Planning Task Force meeting, and I did respond to the Council President's question in this regard, last week, which was the sort of kickoff meeting, again, hoping that we would be given the go-ahead to start sometime this week, where we gathered all the agencies together that would be involved in the planning process. We sort of walked through the process that you got as part of my testimony and had each agency sort of report back to where they saw themselves placed in this spectrum. We also are trying to get the planning process hooked in somehow to the Helaganet Flemming Project (ph) tracking process. So just as Council tracks individual projects, you would be able to see how a plan moves through the process. A plan is just about ready to come to the Planning Commission, for instance, or a plan has been held up for legal review for some reason. And you would be able to hopefully, input comments, critiques or other 00602 2/25/02, COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, BILL 02001 issues. I'm sorry, that was kind of a long answer, but I'm frankly excited that it looks like we finally will be getting started, but right now we are poised to start. We are looking at the plans that have come to us as possible candidates to start first since we can't start everywhere at once. And also, perhaps equally important, looking at those areas, those neighborhoods in Philadelphia where there are no plans, where there has been no community-based capability, and that's where the new planners will come into play. Let me answer --
Kenney Gamble was doing work on Federal Street, and he was supposed to proceed on, and there is a plan, but we were told that there was no acquisition money available at this point in time. You are aware of that plan, are you 00603 2/25/02, COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, BILL 02001 not? COMMISSIONER GRIFFITH: Yes.
So when would he be able to move forward, when would the acquisition monies become available? COMMISSIONER GRIFFITH: I'm assuming that if the acquisition monies are acquisition monies coming out of the NTI bond funds that those two things are linked --
Then I hear rumors that because we didn't go out for the bonds this year, that the monies that would have been used for the bond issue are now going to be available. I don't know if Mr. Dubow could answer that. Are those monies going to be used for acquisition now? BUDGET DIRECTOR DUBOW: I think that the transfer ordinance that was just considered by the Appropriations Committee included almost 4.1 million for acquisitions.
Is that 00604 2/25/02, COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, BILL 02001 any specific area or aren't you aware? BUDGET DIRECTOR DUBOW: I'm not aware, but I know that we're actually --
Who would be aware of where that acquisition money would be? BUDGET DIRECTOR DUBOW: I'm sorry, we're actually putting together an answer to -- that came up during the Appropriations Committee hearing and we're putting together an answer to that question, and it should be over, I guess, within the week. COMMISSIONER GRIFFITH: Yes, perhaps I should say at this point, that although NTI planning hasn't been moving forward, at least an NTI engaged planning process with the community, it does not mean that plans that have been going through the process in some way and that are far forward in the process are not continuing.
I'm sorry, Ms. Griffith. When you use that terminology "plans going through the process" what process? COMMISSIONER GRIFFITH: Whatever 00605 2/25/02, COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, BILL 02001 processes were in place prior to the NTI discussion. For instance, there are -- and it's also a schematics issue. There are projects that OHCD would call plans that are in what they consider to be the pipeline. Those plans are being reviewed and considered by OHCD in a parallel process, but as I understand it, those plans are not being held up. If there are acquisition monies that have been identified, et cetera. So I want to be careful not to say that everything has stopped awaiting the NTI process. There are projects moving forward, but those plans that would rely totally on the leveraging of NTI monies or that were submitted, and many of them were, although they weren't solicited. We probably got at least a plan a month labeled "NTI". This has been a project that has been discussed for at least two years. The Planning Commission has not engaged in an involved planning process. The process that's outlined is part of my testimony, my NTI 00606 2/25/02, COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, BILL 02001 testimony.
Your NTI testimony from back -- COMMISSIONER GRIFFITH: Back when.
What is going to happen -- I mean what is the -- I understand you have to do plans for areas where you certainly anticipate significant demolition and you either want to work on public infrastructure, you obviously want to put -- if there were houses there, you want to put houses back, if it was a large commercial building, you'll try to figure out whether it should be commerce or housing use or retail use or something like that. Tell me about the planning that will go on in neighborhoods that are relatively stable, showing some signs of deterioration, never really had a plan primarily, because in most neighborhoods, plans are being done by CDCs more than your kind of average regular garden variety civic association. I mean, I guess in a more blunt fashion, what's in it for those neighborhoods where people have decided to stay? They have 00607 2/25/02, COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, BILL 02001 options, they could go, and there seems to be a tremendous amount of activity and thought and concern targeted at places, where in many instances, personally no one lives. What happens everywhere else? COMMISSIONER GRIFFITH: I'm reminded, Councilman, of someone who called me shortly after the Neighborhood Transformation Initiative had been announced and he was very polite. And he said, "I'm terribly sorry to bother you", and he gave me his address, and he said, "I just want to let you know that I don't want to be transformed, we're fine". And there are lots of communities out there who may want intervention so that when the lady down the street breaks her hip and can't keep up with the upkeep of her house and there's no one to help her out, there's a way to intervene. Or there's a way to intervene to prune street trees in a better fashion. Or a bus might need to be rerouted so that folks from the elderly center or the 202 housing can get the bus more conveniently. Not every planning effort has to be 00608 2/25/02, COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, BILL 02001 comprehensive in its impact, although it needs to be comprehensive in its review. The two components of a planning effort are: one, a needs assessment, what are the needs; and two, an existing condition study, what's the condition. If the needs and the conditions mesh, we don't have to do anything. And to the extent that they don't mesh, we have to intervene. And those communities that are in extremely distressed condition, obviously the intervention will be high. In those communities that are not as distressed, the intervention may be minimal, but it could be very important and it could be the thing that helps stabilize a community and stop it from declining. I remember when I was buying a house in Brooklyn, New York, I passed by a couple of blocks because I saw a house with a boarded up window or a house that didn't seem to be kept up well because I had other options. That may be a minimal intervention, but a very important one and one that doesn't necessarily need a lot of massaging. It's just kind of common sense. 00609 2/25/02, COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, BILL 02001
My last question, Madam Chair. Where will activities start? COMMISSIONER GRIFFITH: Well, that's not a question that we can answer unilaterally. It's going to be a question that's being discussed probably even as we speak. You've heard press accounts and I have heard as well that there are two communities that are being discussed now as really as demolition pilots to vet through the process of putting together big packages and seeing exactly how that would work. Hill International has requested that. Those will probably not be the only communities. I think from our vantage point, for the City Planning Commission's vantage point, we would like to begin in a number of communities and in a number of communities where there are different conditions so that we can -- I don't want to use the word "test", because this isn't an experiment, but so that we can put together the linkages that are necessary for the high impact, high-intervention communities, for those 00610 2/25/02, COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, BILL 02001 communities where there is development interests, for those communities where there is not development interest, and also, for those communities that require some kind of stabilization effort and where the Planning Commission's input may be minimal. We may be handing -- we may do a quick survey and hand it off to the Police Department, or the Fire Department, or the Health Commissioner, or Fairmont Park, or Recreation to follow through on primarily.
I'm sorry, and I may have missed those accounts. Where are the two neighborhoods? COMMISSIONER GRIFFITH: Well, the press accounts that I have heard talk about Frankford and another community in North Philadelphia, which is not coming to me right now. But at least initially, that work -- and I don't even know whether it's been decided -- has been done by the L&I demolition, Managing Director's Office sort of side of the equation because they have been again, looking at the technical aspects. 00611 2/25/02, COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, BILL 02001 If indeed those neighborhoods are chosen, we would be engaged to move forward with the community-planning aspects.
Who made the decision? COMMISSIONER GRIFFITH: Again, I don't know whether the decision has been made, but I would assume that Pat Smith and others were involved in that decision, and I would assume that the Councilmembers were involved in that decision.
Well, I'm usually pretty much here everyday; I don't think I was a part of that decision. COMMISSIONER GRIFFITH: Well, again, I'm recounting sort of what I heard secondarily through press accounts. We haven't been, I keep using the word "engaged" directly. However, as I said earlier, our recommendation would be -- I think we have a capability of going into a number of neighborhoods at once, and our recommendation would be to do that and would be to work with Council to come up with a list of what we would 00612 2/25/02, COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, BILL 02001 call "candidate neighborhoods" that would test all of the models and that would vet through, as I said earlier, both those communities where there was going to be a great need for intervention and where there was demolition -- going to be demolition as well as those communities that weren't. Let me also respond to a -- I'm sorry.
When you say you're going into various areas at the same time, is that merely to address the eminently dangerous properties? COMMISSIONER GRIFFITH: No. From our standpoint, that would be to actually do the community planning. So that from our standpoint, we would engage in the community-planning aspect both where the decision had been made to go in and take down eminently dangerous buildings as well as the kind of community that the Councilmen mentioned, where that kind of extreme intervention would not be considered. I want to be clear: the Planning 00613 2/25/02, COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, BILL 02001 Commission at this point has purview only over, as I said earlier, a fairly narrowly focused area. We are not determining which buildings are eminently dangerous or what the protocol is for that.
I understand. COMMISSIONER GRIFFITH: So for that, we sort of have to follow on for those who are making those determinations.
Well, I understand that. Let me say this, I mean, with every respect possible: certainly, a decision about which building needs to be taken down, I think most days, unless there are extenuating circumstances, most of us are willing to rely on the more expert and engineering-based judgment of the folks over at L&I on a day-to-day basis. On the other hand, in terms of where do you start or what are you going to do or who has what plans, I mean, I think in somewhat, unprecedented fashion at least from a title standpoint, and I'll assume with the title comes additional responsibility and authority, I mean 00614 2/25/02, COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, BILL 02001 you're the Secretary of Strategic Planning and the Director of the Planning Commission? COMMISSIONER GRIFFITH: Indeed.
So based on that, I don't understand how anybody could be doing any kind of planning about anything without your -- certainly your knowledge if not your sign-off and approval. I mean, you mention that for some of the stuff you may have been informed through press accounts. I mean, this is an incredible enterprise here. COMMISSIONER GRIFFITH: Let me be clear about what I said and hope that I didn't misspeak. It's my understanding that Hill International, L&I and the Managing Director's Office, et cetera, is interested in understanding technically the connections between demolitions and encapsulations, putting together bid packages, understanding who the range of bidders might be, making sure the connections amongst and between agencies that have to be responsive are in place, making sure that the people who have to remove the rubble 00615 2/25/02, COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, BILL 02001 and the people who have to come and seed are in place, and they are looking at what areas would give them the experience that they need to do that. That, indeed, is a separate consideration, and I would expect that those areas will be part of the initial Year 1 candidate area determinations.
I understand somebody has to make a decision about kind of where to try to test things out. COMMISSIONER GRIFFITH: So in addition to those communities, as I said earlier, our recommendation is going to be that we move forward in a number of areas including those, but not exclusive of other areas that would vet through both high impact, very distressed communities and how we plan for those. That would look at communities where there might be targeted concerns that we could respond to, as well as communities where infill development might be the model, and also work with banks and developers about how these dollars are going to be leveraged. So we will 00616 2/25/02, COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, BILL 02001 be making recommendations. However, as you said, we are not going to say to L&I, No, don't go to that area, we don't really want to plan for that area right now, even though it meets your needs, to test the protocols that you need, to test to make sure this is a good program. Simply from the determination of how do you take down a building most effectively and cost effectively. So we will be inclusive of those communities. Those will not be the only communities. And I'm also very flattered by your discussion of my qualifications and the City Planning Commission's involvement and we will be very involved and are very involved. I also wanted to respond to a question that you raised earlier about where we were in the process of hiring staff because of the freeze and because we're in a sort of unusual situation. In most agencies if you want to hire someone, you go to a list that's been established and you go to the next two people on 00617 2/25/02, COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, BILL 02001 that list, let's say, for a manger or management trainee. You go to the next two people on that list, you interview those people and you choose one of them. Because the Planning Commission is the only agency that has the planner title, and because up until this administration, the Planning Commission was getting smaller, not larger, there was no list established. This has been especially problematic for some of our more complicated titles and for our bilingual titles, et cetera. So by the time we had finished that process, we're sort of caught up in the freeze. And as I responded to earlier, although we think we can make a good rationale for moving forward with some of these lines, it does mean that we haven't completed the hiring process.
Let me make two last comments, and I appreciate your responses. I mean, this has been a longstanding issue, and I'm sure it's not just here in Philadelphia, but for this unique program that we're talking 00618 2/25/02, COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, BILL 02001 about. I mean, I would at least ask as a part of the planning process and the decision-making process, when it comes to the expenditure of significant dollars in a unique way, that not only do you look at your high-impact areas, because I think that there are two types of high impacts in this process. The one that you mentioned is areas that obviously have serious distress and you're going to go in and do certain things. But it seems to me by definition, areas of serious distress have experienced a level of deterioration. I don't know whether based on TRF its reclamation, or I think that's the end of the line. And, fine, you'll go in and at least initially, it seems that the measure of success is the complete demolition, if not, evaporation of everything in that particular area to get it down to ground level, to then make it available for somebody in the future that we hope will come along and do something. You have the rest of the City kind 00619 2/25/02, COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, BILL 02001 of sitting around waiting to see what's happening. Some people are not sitting around waiting to see what happens; they moved, and they can move. And so there are other high-impact neighborhoods where for not much money, you can have a high impact. It's not as grand and wondrous as taking a whole lot of buildings down, but it is also to some extent, transforming, if not revitalizing, those neighborhoods at much less cost with a great amount of impact that is visible that people can actually see. I don't look at the demolition of a building or a series of buildings or a whole lot of demolition, at least initially, as any measure of success. It is the completion of the failure of things that have happened over a long period of time where people, for whatever reason, were allowed not to take care of their buildings and we now have to come along and basically clean up their mess. What I want to better understand, though, is: what are we doing with the folks who 00620 2/25/02, COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, BILL 02001 decided to stay? COMMISSIONER GRIFFITH: I hope I haven't miscommunicated because I agree with you totally and I thought that's what I was trying to say.
I hear you agree with me totally; what I'm not hearing is that the decision-making process and the directive and the -- whether it's the planning process or the ultimate decisions especially coming out of the Planning Commission will also have a sense of influence in them that says not only do we need to make -- COMMISSIONER GRIFFITH: Absolutely.
-- multiple things going on at the same time, but as much as we're focused on the places that have begun or have already fallen apart, we're going to give the same time and attention to the places where there are actually people living, paying taxes, working, whether they're coming downtown or living in the neighborhood, decided to stay, but have options to leave. COMMISSIONER GRIFFITH: Well, 00621 2/25/02, COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, BILL 02001 absolutely. I would just say we're going to give the appropriate time and attention, whatever that is, but when I mentioned that my recommendation -- and there's nothing that I've heard in discussions with other members of NTI leadership that would say anything else. We would hope to move forward in a number of areas in various stages and conditions to test various ways of intervening. That's exactly what I meant: that we would not simply start in areas where one would have to demolish every building. I would, however, beg to differ a little bit, if I may. Even in those areas where we might have to do large numbers of demolitions, in some of those areas, there's already been developer interest, some of them have come through members of Council. So it isn't necessarily that in each one of those areas, we'll then be sort of keeping our fingers crossed. Even in those areas, there are sub-types. There are going to be areas where we are going to have to wait and make a market and try to do something on an interim basis that's really wonderful. 00622 2/25/02, COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, BILL 02001 I had recently a number of artists, for instance, come to me and talk about the New York model, this art on the beach model that was a precursor to development. There will be those areas, but there will also be areas that when we're able to clear land and we're able to move hopefully, relatively a few people that will provide an immediate response that will be developer. But I don't want to obscure your more important point, which I concur with totally, that this is a Citywide program that should be responsive to each level of need that Council President earlier talked about, how do we keep people in the City, how do you we provide a base. And I mentioned product, but product isn't the only element. We have to make the City as great as we can to make sure that the middle class, the upper middle class, and everybody wants to live here. And if that means pruning a tree, or cleaning up a yard, or beatifying a vacant lot, or some other strategy, we're all for that.
All right, last 00623 2/25/02, COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, BILL 02001 question. When you were here, I think, during Capital Budget time, I asked you about funding for an area that already has a plan, which is Lancaster Avenue. You and the Streets Commissioner were at the table, you were trying to figure out, I think, where some design money might come from. Has that been resolved? COMMISSIONER GRIFFITH: Yes, and I think if not already, that response is on its way to the Council President's Office. But it's my understanding that $500,000 was appropriated for design that the Streets Department is just beginning the design process for the project. Its design is expected to take about 12 months. And also that the product design is included in the regional tip so that Federal funds will be available and that the expectation is that construction funds would follow on in the next -- so it's --
Is the $500,000 being put in the FY03? COMMISSIONER GRIFFITH: Funds totalling $500,000 -- a $100,000 City, $400,000 00624 2/25/02, COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, BILL 02001 Federal -- were appropriated for this project rolled over to $2,300, and the Streets Department is expected to begin the design process, though I bet you, after your question they have actually started the design process. And that process should take about months. 8 So hopefully the next Fiscal Year we 9 can allocate, if the resources are available, 10 construction dollars. 11
Okay, I'll 12 await the response. I am, though, left with the impression that based on the rollover language that you used that this money was actually available in '02. COMMISSIONER GRIFFITH: Apparently the original appropriation was, if I'm reading this correctly, was in '02, rolled over to 03.
Okay, because I think it was not showing in the '03 Capital Budget, which is -- COMMISSIONER GRIFFITH: Which is why you --
Which is why the question was asked in the first place. 00625 2/25/02, COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, BILL 02001 COMMISSIONER GRIFFITH: And I'm reading really the Streets Department response.
If you can get a little more backup on that, I'd appreciate it. COMMISSIONER GRIFFITH: Okay.
You're welcome. Are there any other questions for members of the committee? (No further questions.)
Thank you very much. COMMISSIONER GRIFFITH: Thank you, Council President.
This committee will stand in recess until tomorrow, Tuesday, February 26th at 9:30. (Proceedings end at 5:20 p.m.) 00626 CERTIFICATE We HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing proceedings of the Council of the City of Philadelphia's meeting of the Committee of the Whole of Monday, February 25, 2002, are contained fully and accurately in the stenographic notes taken by us, and that this is a true and correct transcript of same. RE: Ordinance No. 020001 _______________________________, Josephine Cardillo Registered Professional Reporter and Notary Public -------------------------------, Meghan Martella, Professional Reporter and Notary Public (The foregoing certification of this transcript does not apply to any reproduction of the same by any means, unless under the direct control and/or supervision of the certifying reporter.)