COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE City Hall, Room 400 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Tuesday, April 29, 2026 10:00 a.m. PRESENT: COUNCIL PRESIDENT KENYATTA JOHNSON COUNCILWOMAN RUE LANDAU COUNCILWOMAN NINA AHMAD COUNCILWOMAN KENDRA BROOKS COUNCILWOMAN JAMIE GAUTHIER COUNCILWOMAN KATHERINE GILMORE-RICHARDSON COUNCILWOMAN QUETCY M. LOZADA COUNCILWOMAN CINDY BASS COUNCILMAN MICHAEL DRISCOLL COUNCILMAN CURTIS J. JONES, JR. COUNCILMAN NICOLAS O'ROURKE COUNCILMAN JEFFREY YOUNG, JR. COUNCILMAN ANTHONY PHILLIPS HELEN LOUGHEAD, The Clerk P R O C E E D I N G S
Good morning, everyone. Good morning, everyone. This is the public hearing and public meeting of the Committee of the Whole regarding Bills No. 8 260199, 260200, 260201, 260202, 260203, 260204, 260205, 260208, 260209, and Resolution Number 260227. Ms. Loughead, will you please take attendance?
Councilmember O'Neill, Councilmember Gilmore- Richardson, Councilmember Thomas, Councilmember Harrity.
Present. A quorum of this committee is present, and this hearing is officially now called to order. Ms. Loughead, will you please read the title of the bills and resolution.
Bill No. 22 260199, an ordinance adopting the operating budget for fiscal year 2027. Bill No. 260200, an ordinance to adopt the fiscal year 2027 capital budget. Bill No. 260201, an ordinance to adopt a capital program for the six fiscal years 2027 through 2032 inclusive. Bill No. 260202, an ordinance amending chapter 19-2400 of the Philadelphia Code entitled Hotel Room Rental Tax by providing for an additional excise tax on hotel room rentals, all under certain terms and conditions. Bill No. 260203, an ordinance amending Subcode A in the Philadelphia Administrative Code of Title 4 of the Philadelphia Code, the Building Construction Occupancy Code, by adding and revising zoning board of adjustment fees and provisions regarding hearing scheduling, all under certain terms and conditions. Bill No. 260204, an ordinance amending Title of the 3 Philadelphia Code entitled Error Management Code to modify the amounts of license and permit fees, all under certain terms and conditions. Bill No. 260205, an ordinance amending section 19-1806 of the Philadelphia Code entitled Authorization of Realty Use and your Occupancy Tax to clarify the imposition of the tax on the use and occupancy of real estate with respect to cell towers, all under certain terms and conditions. Bill No. 260206, an ordinance amending chapter 6-600 of the Philadelphia Code, asbestos, by adding revising provisions related to various fees, all under certain terms and conditions. Bill No. 260208, an ordinance amending chapter 19-1800 of the Philadelphia Code entitled School Tax Authorization to add a new section 18 -- 19-1808 entitled Authorization of Rideshare Use Tax to authorize the Board of the School District of Philadelphia to levy tax on the use by passenger of a transportation network company for pre-arranged ride that originates in Philadelphia, all under certain terms and conditions. Bill No. 260209, an ordinance amending Title of the 14 Philadelphia Code entitled Finance 15 Taxes and Collections to add a new 16 chapter 19-4800 entitled Retail 17 Delivery Tax to establish a tax on 18 orders for the delivery in 19 Philadelphia of retail consumer and other tangible goods, all under certain terms and conditions. Bill No. 260227, providing for the approval by the Council of the City of Philadelphia of a revised five-year financial plan for the City of Philadelphia, covering fiscal years 2027 through 2031 and incorporating revisions with respect to fiscal year 2026, which is to be submitted by the mayor to the Pennsylvania Intergovernmental Cooperation Authority pursuant to an Intergovernmental Cooperation Agreement by and between the city and the authority.
Thank you very much, Ms. Loughead. Today we will hold the public hearing of the Committee of the Whole to consider the bills read by the clerk that constitute proposed operating and capital spending measures for fiscal year 2027, a capital programing -- a forward-looking capital plan for fiscal year 2027 through fiscal year 2032. This morning we have scheduled testimony from the City's Department of Planning and Development and Commerce Department. This afternoon we'll have testimony from the Office of Property Assessment. Ms. Loughead, will you please call the first panel to testify.
Karen Fegely, acting Commerce Director, who's also joined by Deputy Directors of the Commerce team; Dawn Summerville, Dennis Murphy, Helloise Jettison, Salim Wilson, and Yvonne Boye. Also, requesting Jessie Lawrence, director of Planning and Development, who is joined by John Mondlak, first deputy director; Mark Dodds, deputy of the Division of Housing and Development, Kathleen Grady, deputy of Strategic Initiatives and Executive Administration; Octavia Howell, deputy of the Division of Planning and Zoning; and Emily Persico, deputy of the Division of Development Services. Also, joined by Angela Brooks, chief Housing and Urban Development officer; David Thomas, president and CEO of the Philadelphia Housing Development Corporation; and Angel Rodriguez, the executive director of the Philadelphia Land Bank and senior vice president of Land Services at PHDC.
Thank you very much, Ms. Loughead. At this time I'm going to ask to state your name and begin your testimony. I'm going to start off with Ms. Fegely.
All right. Good morning, President Johnson and members of Council. My name is Karen Segley. I'm the acting Commerce director. I'm here to testify on the Department of Commerce's fiscal year 2027 operating budget. I'm joined today by Commerce leadership and our buddies at Planning and Development. The Department of Commerce is the economic catalyst for the city of Philadelphia. We create wealth-building opportunities through strategic investments. We pursue ecosystem partnerships to grow quality jobs. We build capacity in communities with historic disinvestment. We make it easier to do business and promote Philadelphia as a premier business destination. In short, Commerce delivers on the mayor's vision of access to economic opportunity for all. A few of our FY-26 accomplishments are as follows: In partnership with the mayor's office and other agencies, we launched PHL PRIME, that's Project Review and Infrastructure Made Easy. The first cohort includes four companies making historic investments into Philadelphia. These are DrinkPAK, TerraPower Isotopes, Hanwha Philly Shipyard, and Rhoads Industries. PHL PRIME signals that Philadelphia is open for business and prepared for serious growth opportunities. But beyond PRIME, we help attract, retain, and grow businesses every day. For example, Liberty Coca-Cola is expanding its operations, Legend Biotech established its operations with a new facility, and Stateside Brands, a local company, expanded its operation and relocated its corporate headquarters to Market East. 5 million jumpstart small business initiative this year. This is to support small businesses navigating the changing tax environment. During year one of jumpstart funding, we're proud to expand access to capital for small businesses. For example, the incentive grant for the Philadelphia Business Lending Network increased from $35,000 to a $50,000 cap. And the Catalyst Fund also awards businesses up to $50,000 to grow. Later this year, we're excited to launch a simplified single application for our grant programs. Commerce launched Weeknights Live as an opportunity to support local musicians and to bring culture and entertainment to commercial corridors across the city. The first cohort includes Baltimore Avenue, East Passyunk, and hotels in Center City. The Open for Business Initiative continues to improve systems across departments to make it easier to do business in Philadelphia. Examples of some of our recent projects include; we worked with Health to create accessible food safety inspection checklist for business owners and inspectors in English, Spanish, and Mandarin. We worked with Special Events to create a new permitting system to make it easier for neighborhood events. We worked with L&I to reopen the Center City vending lottery to open up business opportunities. Sanitation developed a new commercial waste and recycling portal to make that process easier. And Revenue and L&I repealed outdated license requirements with Council's support. You know that the Mayor's Business Action Team serves as our front door to support all businesses accessing resources or navigating city rules. In 2025, MBAT served over 7,000 businesses, including over 500 complex cases. The Taking Care of Business program continues to expand its operations. We now work with 51 organizations and have 420 cleaning ambassadors around the city. Our litter index continues to improve with its lower score -- lowest score to date. Since the first evaluation in 2022, there has been a 50 percent reduction in observed litter in the TCB served areas. 5 million for corridor activations, beautification, and celebrations, ensuring that we bring the 2026 excitement to our neighborhoods with commemorative bells, benches, banners, festivals, and more. Bottom line, we're making it easier for businesses to start, stay, and grow in Philadelphia. If we set aside the $15 million for convention center subsidy, the proposed FY-27 general fund budget totals 106 million.
That is a decrease of million 9 over FY-26. I'm rounding off, by 10 the way. 11 The FY-27 budget reflects a number of one-time supports for community organizations and 2026 related investments that won't be continued. Plus a $250,000 reduction in economic stimulus which will be spread among our Grow Philly external partnership contracts. 5 million for jumpstart small business supports, continuation of PHL open for business to reduce the cost and complexity of business experience, and the final expansion of Taking Care of Business by 1 million to hire additional staff for program oversight as well as building capacity of our TCB community partners. To reiterate, we are open for business. Thank you for your continued support and input. My team and I will be happy to take your questions.
Thank you very much. Jessie, state your name for the record and please begin your testimony, sir.
Good morning, everybody. My name is Jessie Lawrence, director of Planning and Development, here in the city of Philadelphia. Good morning, Council President, members of Council, joining me today, in addition to myself, are divisional leaders from different divisions and units within the Department of Planning and Development. I'm also joined by Angela Brooks, our chief in housing -- chief housing and urban development officer; David Thomas, the president and CEO of PHDC; and Angel Rodriguez, who is the executive director of the Philadelphia Land Bank and also the senior VP of Land Services at PHDC. I'm pleased to be here today to provide the testimony on behalf of the Department of Planning and Development and its fiscal year of 2027 operating budget. When it comes to our mission DPD, what we're known by is partners -- we are partners with communities who promote, plan, preserve, and develop safer, cleaner, greener neighborhoods that offer economic opportunity for all. By aligning these city agencies that are focused on the built environment, DPD fosters vibrant, thriving, and accessible housing in a dynamic public sphere and a resilient economy. Through thoughtful planning, sustainable development, housing production and preservation, as well as housing stabilization and incentive programs, the department helps build intergenerational wealth and strengthen community wellbeing. DPD includes the divisions of executive administration, planning and zoning, development services, housing and community development, known as DHCD as well. DPD also collaborates closely with PHDC, the city's full- service community development organization in order to create neighborhoods that are safe and inclusive for all Philadelphians. E, and will continue to make strides toward ensuring that Philadelphia is the safest, cleanest, and greenest big city in the nation with the access to economic opportunity all -- to all -- for all. This work will be formed by a robust and intentional engagement across stakeholders. E initiative to advance those goals of 30,000 units; new and preserved housing while leveraging funding from federal, state, and local philanthropic sources -- and philanthropic sources. E initiative and creation of these target goals for 30,000 units. New programs to launch include facade improvement, curbside appeal, home service, clearing house and concierge, and the acquisition fund. The city will also work with private lending institutions to establish that One Philly Mortgage program that you've heard of, which reduces the mortgage interest rates and eliminates the private mortgage insurance requirements for participants. Existing programs will also be maintained, enhanced, and/or scaled, including but not limited to the production and preservation of affordable rental housing, the adaptive modification program, basic systems repair program, eviction diversion and targeted financial assistance, mortgage assistance, permanent housing for individuals experiencing homelessness, investments in the Philadelphia accelerator fund and also Philly First Home. E initiative. The marketing campaign will initiate and engage a public process via earned -- excuse me, engage the public via earned media, paid advertising across outdoor transit, broadcast, and digital channels. Also, along with print and promotional materials, video content, and social media. We will leverage the vacant land to advance the housing and greening priorities via implementation of the recommendations of the Land Bank assessment, which is expected to be finalized by the end of this current fiscal year. With a proposed increase FY27 investment, DPD will work in partnership with the Land Bank to increase its operational capacity and enhance transparency through increased staffing and the addition of new reporting tools, including a new customer relationship management system.
That proposed increase in funding will also support additional acquisition, which will be aligned with the vacant land strategy that is under development for acquisition, maintenance, and disposition of properties. We'll also complete the due diligence for the Modular Housing Factory Effort which will -- which will create family sustaining jobs within the city and contribute to reduced construction periods for housing. We also plan to engage communities and stakeholders in the planning of the future of Philadelphia. Particularly, the vision of planning and zoning will be completed -- will complete two significant planning efforts including the Market East Revival Initiative and also the Philly -- the Philadelphia 2050 citywide vision. Both of these efforts were focused on broad engagement, data- driven insights, and pathways to implementation, which also include the establishment of partnerships and grant opportunities for implementation. We are also committed to boosting residential production and preservation by streamlining the development process, which you've heard through the executive charge of executive order number 325 last year. DPD will continue its partnership with Philly STAT 360 to utilize a data-driven approach, shrinking that time tax to incentivize the creation and preservation of safe, healthy, quality housing for buyers and renters at all levels of cost. And finally, DPD will monitor the progress that provide the capacity and expertise where applicable to assist in the coordination of reporting that work. 8 million over fiscal year 2027 -- 2026's estimated obligation levels. E initiative. The Department of Planning and Development also receives allocations from the US Department of Housing and Urban Development, as you know as HUD, including the community -- the Community Disaster Block Grant, CDBG -- the CD -- Community Development Block Grant, excuse me, CDBG, Community Disaster Recovery, Housing Opportunities for Persons With AIDS, otherwise known as HOPWA home, not our home, but the other home, and HOME American Rescue Plan. The department will continue to pursue other funding and state funding resources were available and applicable. And quickly, I'll try to summarize the remainder of our testimony, which is going to get into the programmatic-based budgeting sections. More detailed explanations of this section is provided for every program strategy and funding component within the written testimony that was submitted to Council. For program No. 5, housing development; the proposed general fund amount for FY-27 is just over $10 million. That program anchors the city's housing production preservation, home ownership assistance, and eviction prevention work. It houses many of the major initiatives that we know -- that live within home, including the core expansion of that initiative, facade improvement as we heard, the Home Repair program such as BSRP, the acquisition fund, Philly's First Home and Turn the Key programming, One Philly mortgage and eviction program -- prevention programs as well. The goals there are to prevent at least 850 foreclosures, repair over 8,000 homes, deliver over 1200 homeowner assistance -- homeowner assistance programs, grants, and also create over 300 units to preserve even more. The community development program, which is program number 4, FY-27 general fund budget is $11 million. That program focuses on the community engagement piece, neighborhood stabilization, and also land management, including the cleaning and greening. In that program, we'll continue to work off the proven model of greening and stabilizing under land care. Our curbside appeal will also be uplifted. Special land disposition plan; we have a FUSE fellow that is redesigning the public land process to improve speed, predictability, and access the affordable and workforce develop -- and access for the affordable and workforce developers -- workforce, housing developers.
Land Bank gets enhancements as mentioned before. And also support for continued efforts and supporting affordable housing within our development finance compliance, public art, and capital support registers. Program No. 3, development services, the proposed budget there is just over $400,000. And development services is responsible for coordinating across the agencies to improve our development processes in the city. Again, referencing executive order number 325 mapping and housing -- mapping and development processes for housing and reducing those delays. Coordination continues with Philly STAT 360. Our development services committee modernization, adapting some practices from other cities to improve that coordination. And also collaborating with our law department to standardize leasing and compliance procedures with our mixed income housing bonus and overlay programs. And finally, our executive administration. Executive administration provides a core operational and strategic support across the department. E program amongst other things and scaling, including cross training coaching and onboarding improvements for recruitment, hiring, and retention, performance management and data systems, advancing the departmental culture of transparency across the board, innovation and evidence-based decision making. E outreach efforts and public communications for things like Market East and the Philadelphia 2050 plan. More detailed explanations as I provided are in the -- for each program are in the deliverable that was provided to Council ahead of time. And we are here to address any question that you may have based on this testimony. Thank you.
Thank you very much. Appreciate your testimony and we'll allow questioning of both departments throughout this session. One, I just want to -- as always, I want to acknowledge you and your team for the work that we have done working together on the historical billion- dollar investment when it comes to addressing the issue of housing and equality here in the city of Philadelphia. That includes Angela Brooks, that includes Rob Thomas, that includes Angel Rodriguez, individuals who I talk to on a daily basis, as well as John Mondlak. And so I just want to thank the team as a whole as we walk through the process. At the end of the day, what I'll always stand on is that this is a historical and significant investment. The problem never will get done in our lifetime again. Particularly on this issue of housing, and housing as addressed to those who are vulnerable and are at the end of the day making sure that the city of Philadelphia is a place where people can live regardless of their checkbook and/or the applicable. So I just want to start off by acknowledging that.
I also want to thank Karen Fegely as always, for the work she's continued to do with the Commerce Department from an economic development standpoint. I think you're doing a good job as the interim director, so continue to -- keep doing the work that you're doing. And I also want to acknowledge Dawn Summerville. She worked with me when The Bellwether District came to the 2nd Councilmanic District and made sure we got that project right when it comes -- came to supporting our young people and making sure there's a pipeline for our young people, when it comes to internships. And so, Dawn, as always continue to keep up the good work. And with that being said, the Chair recognizes Councilmember Cindy Bass.
Let me start with Commerce. Can you talk to us -- and first of all, let me say -- just say it's a pleasure to work with the Commerce Department. Karen, you've been there for many years, not to date you, but, you know, you've been here and so you know this lane and you do it very well. But you don't just do it by yourself, you have a great team that I've worked with for many, many years. And so I just really wanted to applaud each and every one of you and say, you know, a big thank you for all of the work that you all do. We wouldn't be able to work without Commerce. And so I wanted to drill down, though, on community -- like, local businesses, neighborhood businesses particularly, sort of, like corner store establishments. One of the things that is happening right now, and it has been happening for a while and we've been talking about it, it's sort of, like, the wrapping around the building and, you know, that you can't see -- you walk into a store, you can't see what's going on. And we know that this is primarily regulated through L&I, but does the Commerce -- like how does commerce interact or work with L&I on these kinds of issues? Not just -- you know, something like the, you know, the window coverings and all that, but just to really beautify and enhance our neighborhood's small businesses.
Yeah. Thank you for that. I'm sort of smiling because I literally just walked into my neighborhood corner store and was talking to them about why do you have all these posters up on the window? It actually makes you less safe, and it makes your store not even -- it's a nice store on the inside and it doesn't look like it from the outside. So -- but what do we really do about that, right? So one, we do work with L&I, we go out with them on corridor walks where we do -- it's a -- it's an educational walk, right? So L&I is there -- the -- this is Bridget's team; the Quality of Life team, go out and they're just looking for things that are, like, quality of life type violations or anything that's really dangerous. But our team -- the important part is the Mayor's Business Action Team is there with them. So it's very much an educational visit. And while we're there, we can talk to them about how we can help them. So the storefront improvement program is the one clear way we can actually incentivize them to take a different look at their storefront. And what's nice when you apply to that, is you actually get free advice too, right? We have a design team that actually helps people think through what things are going to look like. People are too busy running a business, they're not really thinking about what their sign looks like or what their windows look like. They're just running their business. And so when we can use that incentive to give them some advice. And we just encourage best practices. Again, having your windows clear actually makes your business safer. If there's, you know, something criminal happening in there, you want people on the outside to be able to see --
If there's a fire in there, you know, you want people on the outside to be able to see. And so we always encourage that. But I know it's a constant challenge, I think we just have to constantly stay up on it. And we're happy to go out and talk with any business, like, if you have particular ones --
And as you know, we rely on -- right. Well, they're everywhere, yeah. We rely -- you know, we rely on our partners too. So the corridor managers are having these conversations.
I mean, I'm glad you all go out on the walks, but specifically around enforcement, because we just don't see any enforcement. You go tell them to take the, you know, the window coverings down. They say, okay, I guess. And then nothing happens. It never changes. And so the enforcement, I think, is what we need. We need some enforcement on these rules. It doesn't make sense for us to, you know, promulgate all these rules and regulations and then nobody is following them. Yeah.
I hear you. Right. Creating new rules if -- like, we can just enforce the ones we have. I don't want to say -- those first walks are educational. I wanted to stress that, because that's sort of Commerce's side. But L&I and I does follow up in -- and I don't remember, 30 days or 60 days, whatever the exact time is, I'm not sure.
And I -- and I heard the bell ring, so I'll honor the clock. I'll come back on a second round. But is there -- so they're made aware when you do the walk; that's the educational component. And then there's enforcement that should happen through L&I afterwards, and then if it doesn't happen -- I guess what I'm trying to say is that I think that Commerce is really the arm to do that kind of follow up and coordination with L&I to make sure that it happens. And I'll come back because I have some questions for Mr. Lawrence as well, but I'll get on the second round.
All right. I'll just say we have to walk a fine line of -- we always go out and tell businesses we are not the enforcement agency because we try to do that; build that relationship.
-- I'm not saying you're wrong; I just want to say that's -- we'll talk about that more.
Did you say that you have to tell the business that you're not an enforcement agency? I didn't hear your last comment.
Yeah. When Commerce talks to businesses, we try to make it clear, like, we are -- you know, we are -- we, Commerce, are not an enforcement agency. We are part of the city of Philadelphia that clearly has enforcement, but when we go out, we're going out to instruct, to educate, to help to connect to resources. Yeah. But that doesn't mean we don't partner with L&I.
I think that they're just not getting the memo. Because it feels like a lot of these small businesses, commercial corridors, the stop-and- go's, nuisance businesses, they do what they want to do. They do whatever they want to do. And we have to figure out how --
They don't just do what they want to do, it depends on what neighborhood they in.
It depends on what neighborhood they're in. They allowed them to do what they want do.
You're right, it depends on what neighborhood you're in.
Because if you're in certain neighborhoods, like if you're downtown, oh, no, that's not working. Listen, I represent Chester Hill, you're not doing that up in Chester Hill, so you shouldn't be doing it anywhere else.
But, you know, like the level of enforcement that you get in certain neighborhoods, it varies. And I -- again, I recognize that that's L&I but I guess what I'm asking is for commerce to sort of --
-- step up and step in. And to feel free to be an enforcer because these are some of the same businesses that want, you know, help with their facade improvements, the camera programs, all the goodies that the city offers, they want all of that. And, you know, they have to be good players too, so.
Thank you, Member Bass. Always on the case on that particular issue. I said Rob Thomas, but I want to clarify for the record, Dave Thomas. We've done a million Turn the Key projects together. Matter of fact, we are in Cindy Bass' District next. So it's the very Dapper Dan Dave Thomas over there. Wanted to make sure I acknowledge him as well as Nadir Jones who is working with my DEI task force to transition us into a new arena of how we address local and small businesses to make sure there's equity and they have a seat at the table. With that being said, the Chair recognizes Councilmember Jim Harrity.
Thank you, Council President. Good morning, everybody. Thank you for coming today. I'm going to ask my questions that way I can get them on the record for the sake of time. Trying to stay on time. Planning and Development; how many units of housing are projected for 2027? What type of units will they be? And then for Commerce; how has the transition to the removal of the BIRT exemption gone thus far? Have we run into any issues with businesses not being aware of the changes and fighting them? How many new businesses have started in Philadelphia this past year, and how many have left? And finally, what is the Commerce Department's opinion on the new taxes the administration proposed for FY-27's budget? Thank you.
To hear this, he's saying I go first so he has time to pull his numbers so. Thank you, Councilmember. I'm going to start with -- you talked about the change -- the unfortunate removal of the BIRT exemption and how that's been going. We've worked -- we've done a lot of outreach. We've worked with the Revenue Department, and I can speak for Revenue. They've then -- they've sent out 120,000 postcards. They've, you know, met -- they meet regularly with tax professionals. They've issued official notice letter to over 80,000 BIRT accounts. And they were sending a mailer to anyone who was a $0 filer in the past, like, with a specific instruction that the rules have changed. Commerce has also worked with Revenue to do 40 plus workshops; we've reached over 1,000 businesses. And some of them were in person in different neighborhoods all around the city, some of them were virtual. We also contracted with -- we have a marketing firm who has done paid ads through Meta and LinkedIn. And we've done some paid ads on -- in El Sol and WURD Radio and used our own social media, of course. We also really rely on our partners to get words out to businesses. We -- I mean, our team is out talking to businesses every day, but we can't get everybody. So we really rely on our partners. We started a new -- we have new contracts this year with groups that we're calling affinity groups, another -- the way to reach more businesses. So every one of our partners is, you know, responsible for telling people about this. We have over 210 community and nonprofit partners and about 40 -- and then we did our free tax rep Program. So we really let people know about that. I think we've served about 2000 people -- businesses so far through the Free Business Tax Prep Program. Are there still businesses that don't know about it? Yes, of course.
Can I get a point of information though? How many businesses have taken advantage of the actual funds that we put aside? The health businesses that were dealing with the BIRT exemption going away? What's the actual number of businesses served? And how much of that budget is still -- how much was allocated in the budget? And then how much of that budget has actually been exhausted?
Uh-huh. So again, the specific program -- the most specific direct program was the Free Business Tax Prep Program, which we're at 2000 to date. Plus the businesses that are -- the 18 tax prep professionals who are -- 19 who are doing that work and getting 20 paid for it. 21 I am looking for my 22 jumpstart numbers. We have numbers 23 on every program we have funded with 24 these dollars, and the number of businesses we are tracking very closely; the number of businesses that are assisted. If you recall, there's a portion of the funding that we're putting towards training, education, and capacity building through our partners. And then there's a portion that is going direct dollars into businesses' pockets.
I'm a fan, but I need you to work with me. We just want the specific numbers because that's what we are -- we're -- want to go through this process to figure out how many more people want to help --
-- who were impacted by the tax going away. And we know it was a -- 38.5 million was allocated. We want to also know how much of the money is left and then how many people, total, was serviced out of that money? And I relax the time back to Harrity.
I'll have to -- I do have the numbers about how much money is left. I will need another minute on that. I can tell you the number of businesses that we've served so far. Mayor's Business Action Team has reached 3,300 businesses. Our Business Technical Assistance Program has reached 921, Targeted Corridor Management program around 2200. This is all the assistance things -- business affinity group, 166. The task prep program, like I said, is about 2000. Our grant programs, we are at -- with the Catalyst Fund, we've done 123 businesses so far. In store, we have -- we have -- this isn't -- this number is not right; it says one done. This is all -- an old number. So I know we have a -- there's about of those; that's a 6 small program. 7 Storefront Improvement 8 Program; there's only 18 completed, 9 but we have about a 100 that are 10 literally in process right now. Those -- that -- you know, it's a construction project, that takes a little longer. The acquisition loan fund, we've only done two this year so far, but we have an RFP, we're hiring another -- or we're bringing on another partner to move more of those. That's the program that helps people buy their property, so small business owners can buy their commercial property. So we look to do about 10 of those a year. Through the Business Lending Network, we are at about 15 so far with -- again, we've just increased the cap and increased the pipeline, so we expect to do a lot more on that. In the emergency grant fund, we've only funded 43, but I know that all the -- the $2.5 9 million is pretty much accounted 10 for. 11
14 Thank you, Council President. Thank 15 you for that. If you could just 16 tell -- how many new businesses 17 started in Philadelphia in the past 18 year and how many left? And then, 19 you know, of course, what's the 20 Commerce Department's opinion on the new taxes that are proposed?
I don't have the numbers of how many new businesses and how many businesses left. That's something that we can work with Revenue to get.
Okay. I'll accept that. If you could, please try to get that to the Chair. And then just -- your opinion on the taxes, and then we can get to Planning what their house is.
Yeah. I mean, as the Commerce Department, we know -- you know, we never know want to see the new taxes, but I do feel like these are very nuanced direct taxes to meet very specific -- you know, meet very specific needs that are things that we hear about as complaints from businesses, right? We know that our schools need more support and funding. I mean, that's -- that goes directly towards our workforce and our talent for our business community. We know that businesses are concerned about street homelessness and want more services for them. For example, we know that businesses want our streets to be in good condition so that their customers and employees and trucks can get through. So, you know, we are -- we are not hearing a lot of specific complaints about -- or concerns about the taxes.
All right. So is -- you're feeling that it's sustainable? In other words, that the projections that they're projecting that we're going to get are going to stay that way? Because again, we -- there were projections for other taxes that they had put up in other administrations that -- where taxpayers are now paying at least half of whatever it was going to fund. So --
Yes, I hear what you're saying, but yes, I'm -- I mean, I'm comfortable with what -- with Finance's projections.
Thank you, Director, Councilmember, your question was, what is the anticipated target for development of new homes and -- is also preservation or repair? What was -- just to clarify.
No. 17 Well, I mean, really, I want to know how many new housing units for '27 -- FY-27 and what type of units will they be like what --
Got you. So I'll give you the best breakdown I can on the spot right now. So our objective for meeting production and goal -- well, we're looking to meet a production goal of over 3,900 units in new construction. Just to break that down a little bit, based on the different divisions doing the different work, and, kind of, expanding off my opening testimony. We have about 1900 units of multifamily units that are in pre-development right now. Approximately 1500 or under construction as we speak. That's actually a combination of preservation and new construction. To give you a little bit more of a breakdown in terms of the -- what's been kind of coming under the Turn the Key roster. There is a -- we have over 1000, approximately -- actually 1,048 units that have been approved for development for Turn the Key right now. And there are 200 units specifically in Turn the Key under construction right now. So we anticipated to look for that to be done this -- within this next fiscal year. And as of now, there are 392 units seeking permits as we speak.
Okay. Yeah. Are there affordable units in there? I -- you said 1900 multifamily?
We can get you in writing the proportion of what those affordable units are. I mean, based on our disposition policy and the work that we do, most of that inventory is going to be for affordable opportunities at varying income land -- income bands. But we can get you that breakdown more elaborated and expanded.
Thank you very much. The Chair of Housing and Neighborhood Services and the Homeless, Councilmember Jamie Gauthier.
Thank you, Council President. Good morning, Director Fegely. Good morning, Director Lawrence and to you and your teams. And thank you for the work that you do on behalf of the city and our communities every day. I have questions for both of you, but I'm going to start with Planning and Development. And so obviously we spent a lot of the fall discussing housing spending priorities through the H.O.M.E initiative budget process, but I want to make sure that we are still keeping our eye on the prize and making the most of the great opportunity that this program will provide. And so, first, do you have written down anywhere a full breakdown of how soon the H.O.M.E money will start getting spent on each housing program it funds? How long we think each funding allotment will last? And what other funding sources are being used to supplement H.O.M.E in FY-27?
So thank you for that question. As you know, we literally just got the money not too long ago, and we are waiting to spend that money out as we -- as we speak. As you know, our H.O.M.E program is -- it secured the bond fund -- bond funding, but it also is in combination with other forms of funding that we have access to, such as CDBG, housing trust fund, so on and so forth. But I would like to call Angela to talk about where the status -- what the status of spending is across the different programs.
Good morning. Angela Brooks, chief housing and urban development officer at the mayor's office. Thank you for the question, Councilmember Gauthier. As Jessie mentioned, we did just receive funds. We anticipate we will start seeing some of the first requisitions any day now. I'm sure Dave Thomas --
-- is sending his staff -- will be sending over BSRP and adaptive mod requisitions over momentarily. But he's here right now. I think your question was, do we have it in writing? I don't at this moment; we can certainly follow that up and get that to you. We do have projections on what we think that spend down will be. There is -- I'm not sure if it's been in -- if it's been transmitted already, there will be a bill coming -- a resolution coming to make the fiscal year of the year one H.O.M.E bond aligned. So it'll go from April 1st, 2026 through June 30th of 2027. So following -- so here I'm following the bond years; will go with the city fiscal year.
Thank you. If you could get that information to us in the next week or so, it -- we would appreciate it. And I'm asking this because it gets to how we're operationalizing this historic investment and initiative that we're all very proud of. We knew even in the fall that many programs were not going to be fully funded through H.O.M.E. And so I think we need to make sure that we aren't knowingly leaving any initiatives with less than -- well, I was going to say 11 months, but this is starting in 12 April, so it's a little more than 12 months' worth of support. So one example is the 1.8 million for PHLHousing+, which is an incredibly effective and, and important program. That was never meant to get PHLHousing+ all the way through FY-27. So that means that if we want to keep this program going through to the next fiscal year, it's going to need to be supplemented. And we're taking a big risk if we don't plan for that eventuality right now in the budget process. Another is the tenant based shallow rent program. The city committed about $6.2 million to this program, 3.5 million of that coming through H.O.M.E. But there haven't been any new opportunities for more LIHTC building owners to apply -- to participate in this program yet. So, you know, it's also an incredibly effective and important program, and we don't want that money to sit. Other programs like the Home Repair Programs, TFA, housing counseling, and many others were getting supplemented with funding sources such as CDBG and the Housing Trust Fund. And so, I think we want to make sure that we as council, understand the full spending picture, an operational plan for each of these critical programs as we go through and deliberate, and I -- and at the end of this process, approve this budget.
Council President, we would like to take the opportunity to follow up on that. As you remember and recall this body, we was a lot of -- there was an extensive conversation and dialogue about what the cash flow of proposed programs would be, right? So we certainly are okay with helping you have -- well, helping have that conversation; continuing to have that conversation to be able to dive deeper into what that cash flow looks like as a result of just receiving that money. But I would like to also -- I would like to also call up Director Dodds -- Mark Dodds, who can speak a little bit more about exactly what we're doing as we speak, anticipating everything you've just described.
Good morning, Mark Dodds, deputy director, DHD. I just wanted to touch on two of the programs you referenced. PHLHousing+. We're looking -- you're right, there's not enough funding to fully fund the program all the way through FY-27. We're looking at different scenarios working with PHDC to crunch the numbers and thinking about ways in which potentially the Housing Trust Fund might be able to help supplement that program. In the past, funding for this program has -- seems to be in jeopardy nearly every year. In the past, we've also looked at different transition plans to make sure that participants, if there is a need to exit, will be able to do so as smoothly and gracefully as possible. Also, around the shallow rent, the property based program, that did receive a sizable increase under the home bond. I believe we work -- working with our partners at PHDC that they anticipate releasing another RFP as soon as this spring, hopefully to increase the number of participants, obviously.
Thank you so much. I look forward to receiving that detailed information hopefully in the next week. But certainly in time for us to make these budget decisions on our critical housing programs. Do I have Chair privilege or do I -- is that it? Do I have privilege to ask more questions?
Okay. I wanted to spend a little bit of time talking about housing production and preservation. These are some of the highest dollar amounts in our housing budget, and also the areas where we have the best opportunity to be creative and respond to changes in the market. You all know that I am championing a very specific opportunity --
-- neighborhood restorations which could get Mayor Parker a 1,000 of her 30,000 units. And so my question is, how are we setting ourselves up to really take advantage of the production and preservation money in H.O.M.E from an operational perspective? We've been really backed up on RFPs, and if we get this infusion of cash to these programs, we have to be able to get it out in the street. What are we doing that's like -- what are we planning to do that's different from an operational perspective than we're doing now? And with just -- there has to be an acknowledgement that we've really been struggling to put up our RFPs and get money out on the street.
So there are a couple of things -- and I appreciate that question. There are a couple of things that have been in the works even prior to now that really allow us to think about and actually attack the fact that there are things like a time tax on development, and understanding that there -- you know, we should be positioned to spend money as swiftly as possible, as fast as possible, to meet these goals as soon as possible. That's exactly why the HomeOps process is important; understanding that the streamlining of development processes is whether it's, you know, DPD-specific or DPD-adjacent or development- adjacent. Understanding that there are different departments that play a role in the development process is important. So, you know, we're positioning ourselves to make sure that we are equipped to streamline approvals much more swiftly than we are right now. In terms of preservation, we recognize that that is also something that is of the utmost importance. Looking at that in a couple of different ways in the -- on the competitive RFP side, we recognize that there needs to be some reconciliation of the timing. You know, a lot of these projects that come to us for RFPs ultimately go on to the state for PHFA, for other tax credits, right? And we really kind of fill that -- we fill that gap, right? So understanding that when we put these projects, when we put these competitive opportunities out, we need to make sure going forward that they are aligned specifically with the ability to fulfill an -- complete an application with the -- proper awards that ultimately go to PHFA. And basically, you know, there has been kind of an inconsistency in the timing of it all. So, department-wise, our director of DHCD is looking at and actually exploring even moving forward with putting out RFPs in a time that's much more ideal to be able to sync up with some opportunities when folks go to PHFA for credits and so on and so forth. In terms of the preservation effort, again, recognizing that there is an opportunity at neighborhood's preservation portfolio to dive in and swoop in and really kind of save, you know, and preserve affordable housing that's coming out of a period of compliance. But, you know, again, I -- and I stressed this before, recognizing that that needs to be a comprehensive strategy citywide is very important to us. And even -- you know, and throughout the H.O.M.E process, one of the big take-aways was understanding that if folks are all coming to different funding opportunity -- different funders that would be willing to participate in this with different strategies all from the different -- from the same administration, it's a little hard for them to kind of commit to something that seems to be fragmented on the delivery, on the pitch. So I think that this is not a portfolio specific approach, but a comprehensive kind of approach that looks like, you know, something that's a structure that can be applied across the board is what we're gaming for. So, I mean, we look forward to continuing those conversations about that portfolio, but then also bringing it into the larger conversation that we're having with different implementation partners that are also looking at the same exact thing and how to bring it together under one strategy.
When will the operational program -- operational plan be completed? And when can you get that to Council?
I can't give you a date at this moment because conversations are still in play, but we would like to deliver that as soon as possible. Because please understand that we are absolutely committed to figuring out some sort of strategy that allows us to move forward sooner than later. This is not something we want to delay at all.
Thank you. Chair recognizes Councilmember Dr. Anthony Phillips, Councilmember Rue Landau, Councilmember Nicholas O'Rourke.
Thank you, Council President. So the H.O.M.E. initiative is rolling out as a major investment in housing, and to me it's really important that we are really strong with effectively and efficiently rolling out this plan. It's incredible and it's important, but a responsive government is major and essential. Will the department provide a clear public-facing one-pager explaining how wait lists, priorities, and timelines will work under H.O.M.E.?
We can get you something in writing that specifies what our strategy around that is.
That would be -- that would be incredible. And what is the expected timeline for residents who have already been waiting for services?
So I'm going to defer to David Thomas, who is managing obviously PHDC's roster of applications for BSRP and other home repair programs.
Well, as he comes up, time is ticking. So I just want ask, will Council receive district level data showing how many homes are repaired, preserved, and built through H.O.M.E in each councilmanic district?
So I believe that's a requirement -- it's a reporting requirement for the H.O.M.E plan, and we certainly will get that information to you. And David Thomas can talk a little bit about what the shift in strategy has been for our wait list to date.
Yeah, and just a reminder, David, I just want you to explain how you're going to make sure residents clearly understand what programs are available to apply to and what to expect in terms of the timelines. And then are you going to provide a one-pager explaining how wait list, priorities, and timelines -- no, no. 4 It was what is expected for the residents who are already waiting for services. Sorry about that. That's the one.
David Thomas, president and CEO for PHDC, I'm not clear on your question.
The question, what is the expected timeline for residents who have already been waiting for services? That was --
-- my wait list is anywhere from six to nine months, depending upon the type of services that you're seeking.
Is that something that can be reduced at this point? What would -- what would be needed to make it -- to reduce that wait -- that wait time?
Honestly? I don't know that it can be reduced much more because of the process of determining eligibility and the time that it takes for us to gather the documentation and do the assessment on the property and also assign the work. I think six months is probably the best I can probably get to. I would like -- now, in emergency cases, we get to that a lot sooner, like sewage in the basement and things of that nature. We probably get to that within two months.
-- they know that; they know it's six to nine months?
Okay. I heard the bell. I have other questions, but I'll save it for the second round. But just -- I just want you to -- you did say just on the record that we're going to get a one pager where we can get a clear outline on the timeline for application; start time to finish. When it comes to -- when someone applies the timeline on, you know, execution of the whole projects and also how it works with the programs, you can do a one-pager just explaining all the programs you were eligible for as well as giving them a service level agreement on timelines of when they should receive the service. Is that something you can do, you said?
That detail will pretty much spell out what the process is and the time associated with the different steps. I think it's important to recognize the different steps that are taken between that six-to-nine-month process, right? We can certainly elaborate on review times, the times it takes to procure contractors, so on and so forth, the times it takes to schedule visits. initial inspections, backend inspections. But I think that we can provide an itemized timeline of what those different steps spell out over a six-month period.
Thank you. That would be really helpful. I look forward to that. And I'll save the rest of my questions for the next round.
Thank you, Dr. Phillips. Councilmember Rue Landau.
Thank you. Thank you all so much for being here. I'm going to start with some housing questions, and we'll come back to Commerce in the second round. First, I wanted to talk about a Fresh Start. One of the programs we talked about during this -- the -- it was one of the big ones we talked about during the H.O.M.E budget. It provides support for moving expenses for Philadelphians seeking housing, maybe to get out of a situation where there -- they must transition. Mark, thank you for all the work you've done on this and for talking to me through it. But my question is about the current status of that program; the expected expenditures going forward. What was ultimately spent on Fresh Start programs in FY-26? What's budgeted for 27? And how much will come from H.O.M.E program funds, and how much from other sources?
Do we have that information? I think we can give you a high-level initial answer, and we'll talk about what we can break down in writing for you to follow up.
This tight court is up here. Good morning. So in FY-27, there's $4-million budgeted for the program. All of that funding comes from the H.O.M.E budget in FY-26. The exact breakdown we can provide, but many -- the entirety of the funding in FY-26 came from, I believe, reallocated emergency rental assistance funding which is -- which is no longer available, unfortunately.
Great. That makes total sense and probably rings a bell for something you've told me in the past. I appreciate you. How many people do you think will be served -- while you're here. How many people do you think we can serve with the $4-million for this year?
That's a good question. So we do have projections and I don't have them right in front of me, but I will say that I believe the average payout is around $3,500. So I think it would be the 4 million divided by 3,500.
We got calculators for that. We got that. Thank you. Thank you for that. I wanted to --
And I just want -- it could be a little bit higher so we can follow up with more exact figures. We do have projections for that program.
Great. Thank you. Thank you. Just a little bit more about the housing repair programs too. The budget -- your budget detail says that you'll serve 8,000 households through BSRP, AMP, and the Heater Hotline. And I know you're going to come back with a timeline on that, but how many households were served last year and how many more will be served this year as the result of H.O.M.E funding?
David Thomas, President, CEO of PHDC. Councilwoman, last year, I can give you BSRP's numbers on average. So somewhere around -- with the funding that we received, and it floats over fiscal period. So this is going to be confusing for me. I want to say just under 4,500 last year for BSRP. AMP is a lot smaller because the funding is a lot lower, and that -- and my goal for AMP this year has been 500, but I think my number last year was like 350.
Heater Hotline. That's very interesting. Because we work with ECA, and a lot of that is predicated, so over a thousand, but I don't know my specific numbers right now.
What about for this year? So we have BSRP just under 4,500; AMP, 350. You said the goal this year is 500 and the Heater Hotline was over a thousand.
Yes. What your -- what your expectations are, your goals.
Well, my goal is always to get to everybody that has a need. Okay. So I think it's really going to --
So I think it's really going to be predicated on funding. Because I think I can try to get to everyone if I have the resources. But my goal will stay the same. I would love to be at 3,500 to 5,000. And that's all going to be predicated on funding, so.
But your budget testimony said that you're going to serve 8,000 households through this and that. 8,000 is much more than last year. Last year was about, it looks like, 5,800.
Those projections -- those projections are based on -- that projection in the testimony is based on a combination of all the different programs under the Home Repair days. The Whole- Home Repair.
Okay. One more? Homelessness? Excellent. Wanted to move on to -- for fear -- I need to come back with multiple. I'm going to throw in homelessness and tech real quick. I wanted to know what the administration has planned to move more chronically homeless Philadelphians into permanent housing, particularly permanent supportive housing. And while I'm at it, I also want to put my tech question out here, which is, when can we -- we want to -- I wanted to -- what effort has been made to publish the data about the funding that's been allocated to the H.O.M.E. program? What funding's been obligated? What's been spent? And when are we going to get our quarterly reports?
Angela Brooks, Chief Housing and Urban Development Officer. Thank you for that question. I'll start with the quarterly reports. Per the legislation, the quarterly reports are due when we start spending. So we will probably have our first quarterly report in probably the next three months. So that's the short one. We have been working with the Office of Homeless Services. I know these questions came up during their budget hearing. So we are working together to think about how we will allocate the 8.8 that's allocated in year one H.O.M.E. spending. Certainly, we are committed to supporting not just transitional housing, but permanent supportive housing. As you know, that's what I did before I got here. So we are working closely with both the Office of Homeless Services and Department of Behavioral Health to really think about how we work together as well with the Philadelphia Housing Authority. So stay tuned; we are working on that, but we are thinking about how they'll allocate the year one funds, and they have some ideas. So I won't say, I'll defer to Sheryl, but the priority really is utilizing PSH funding to really -- or the year one funding to support development of permanent supportive housing.
Okay. And as I've been hearing from constituents throughout the city, why can't we pay for the thousand new homeless beds through the H.O.M.E. money that we allocated versus adding a new tax on the hotel rooms?
That is a question I would have to follow up in writing because that's not a perspective that we've been thinking of. But I will say that the year one H.O.M.E. budget allocation, we are projecting to spend it as it was approved and allocated. So any shifting of that, we'd probably have to have the conversation with the committee that Council designated in the -- in the legislation on how we reallocate that. So --
Thank you, Mr. President. Blessings and morning to all. Thank you for being with us today. This past week, we passed -- this body passed a few bills. The Safe Healthy Homes Act, which modernizes our landlord- tenant laws in a number of critical ways. The Safe Healthy Homes Act is a huge step forward for our city, I believe. And the debate around it raised some very important issues that I spoke to a little bit yesterday in a previous hearing, and I'd like to discuss a little bit more today. What we learned in the many, many conversations that we had, from small landlords, is that they're struggling. End of sentence. In reality, my legislation does not contribute to that Struggling for good actors, though it was framed that way incessantly. But the legislative process did expose cracks in our current system. The primary complaint that we heard is that landlords are struggling with the sheriff's office and with the courts. We discussed that at length yesterday. However, second on their list was red tape. I am not an expert on all the steps needed to complete a repair, a new development, all the in-betweens on that. So I want to ask you, what are we doing to make it easier for responsible, equitable and affordable development and preservation to move more quickly in Philadelphia? And it should be as easy as possible, I think, for reasonable and responsible developers to build and to preserve truly affordable housing in this city. I want to start there. Was that the bell? Okay. Great. We'll start there. Yes.
So I mean, the response that I gave earlier about what we're doing to expedite the process still stands. It really is making sure that we are looking to our departmental partners to not necessarily circumvent processes. You know, we want to make sure that, you know, the process moves faster. I know L&I is pivoting in a way to be able to streamline their process a little bit faster already. We're doing the same thing at PHDC as we speak, as far as virtual inspection, so on and so forth, to move that wait list process on a little bit faster. But, you know, it's a matter of making sure that we look within our processes to move it faster. You know, we can commit the funds, we can talk about securing that money, but we also have to look into our HomeOps process. So, you know, the answer lies within that process. And looking at not just our ability to approve projects faster on the DHCD and planning and development side. You know, same thing goes with that answer earlier about being able to pivot and issue these funding opportunities much more swiftly. Not one time a year, two times a year, whatever the case may be, right? But then also making sure that aligns with the other parts that are ultimately going into capital stack. So I think it's making sure that we're aligning with the timelines to make sure that development is responding to the open opportunities for funding. But it's also, you know, doing things like not just our L&I, but also our ZBA, right? That -- the process of getting projects approved with variances. We're minimizing the intake process timeline, making sure that folks are getting something -- you know, applicants, excuse me, are getting some sort of response from our ZBA within a -- within the week of business days. But it's -- that's where it lies. And just kind of minimizing the barriers historically that have elongated the process going forward.
Another lesson that we learned is that there's a very broad concern among landlords, among tenants, community members, members of this body, with outside corporate investors purchasing and increasing share of our single-family homes and Naturally Occurring Affordable Housing, NOAH, that folks have been on my neck about. What steps is the administration planning to take to resist this particular trend, preserving affordable housing opportunities and local control of property?
Well, I'm sorry, I missed the part about the NOAH. Can you just repeat the back end of that question please?
Yeah. What steps is the administration planning to take to resist this particular trend of this particular --
Can you recapture the trend for me please? I'm sorry. I missed that.
Yeah. About these particular developers coming in and buying up a lot of the single-family homes, like big swathes of it or what have you. That is a trend. That's a thing that's often repeated. When folks say that what we were doing was somehow choking out the naturally occurring affordable housing, and that it's going to displace all these folks, and you're going to have all these corporate folks coming and buying up. So that is a thing that's a refrain we consistently heard about the entirety of the process. And we did -- we could to kind of mitigate those particular concerns. But I do want to ask from a strategic standpoint, from the administration, if we're aware of this being a trend, what is the administration particularly doing to resist that particular trend?
Thank you for making that clarification. We certainly are aware of it, and in a number of different ways that we're, you know, actively responding to it. One, for purposes of being able to position landlords to make those repairs, things like the Rental Improvement Fund are really important, right? Being able to rely on a resource, that is the alternative to just simply selling to somebody that's a predatory buyer, right? But at the same time, it's not just about the landlord, it's the small landlords. It's about the actual home buyers too -- I mean, homeowners too, right? So understanding that tangled title is increasingly important so that people who have the titles to their home, but not -- might not recognize -- might not officially have the title to their home, but are the owner occupants to a certain extent. Making sure that we are positioning the funding for programs like that; to be able to position owners to be able to take advantage of the programs that allow them to get their affairs in order so that, you know, the option or the easiest option isn't to just sell the property. The home repair programs are also important to that as well, right? Making sure that people have the access to the grants and the loans, whether it's Basic Systems Repair or even Restore, Repair, Renew, which is something that's a low-interest loan, but you have a little bit more control about what you do there, right? And you're moving -- you have options at this point.
But that kind of array of options is meant to be able to respond to predatory buying. Whereas, it's keeping people hopefully in their neighborhoods that they've lived and owned, you know, a home for the last 40, 30, whatever the case may be. But that arrangement, you know, the H.O.M.E. plan is about stabilizing. I think it falls into that stabilization effort. Being able to put all of those together as potential options to keep homeowners in their homes, whether it's owner occupants --
-- or whether it's the small Rental Improvement Fund for the landlords that have a handful of properties.
The admonition of all those programs kind of creates that stability. I got one more and then I'm off of it, Mr. President. Kind of in that same spirit. Lastly, the Safe Healthy Homes package, folks may remember this was a year-long process. So we got the last two passed this past week. The first part actually was passed last year, back in June. The bill authorized an Anti-Displacement Fund. And we talked about this, I think, before, which was included in that first year of funding for H.O.M.E. The point of this fund is very specific and particularly important to the whole package that we were trying to do over the course of the year. It creates a backstop when a cease operations order comes down and leads to a tenant actually being displaced, and then it funds their relocation, because we do not believe that renters, when they have to be displaced, should bear the cost burden of finding relocation monies. That being said, when will the Anti-Displacement Fund be operational and how will I be able to direct our constituents to it?
So I think it still merits the conversation. I can't commit to a time so to speak right now on the spot. But I think that talking about it further would be more ideal at this point. But I can't commit to --
Can I get a point of information while we're at it in terms of that line of questioning.
Do you have in front of you the list of amendments that came from Council that was added to the H.O.M.E. plan, and can you give us an update on the status of the things that we amended to the H.O.M.E. plan?
Yeah, we definitely have that list. And I'll defer to Angela to speak a little bit more, but to answer your question properly. Excuse me. I believe -- I can't remember if we have year -- year one -- does year one have Anti-Displacement Fund? FreshStart. Yeah. So, I mean -- and my inclination is to lean on FreshStart as the tool there. But I'll let Angela talk a little bit further about where --
And Jessie, a point of information to be clear, the Anti-Displacement Fund, that was a part of --
And to further clarify for everyone -- Angela Brooks. The Anti-Displacement Fund, and I'm pulling it up now, was a part of several items in one bucket. So there's about five other things that are in that. I am currently pulling that up. John, did you come up to say -- address something? So while --
I actually came up to address a different question that's already answered. So --
I think it's important to recognize how it was a part of a larger --
And so, there are several things in that bucket, and I don't even remember which one it came under. But generally, to answer your question, we are in the process of going line by line through every of -- each one of the buckets in the H.O.M.E. budget and allocating how that'll be spent and when that's done. So when we do the follow up to Councilmember Gauthier, we can provide that for you in writing and kind of do a breakdown. So we can do that. And Councilmember Phillips, I can't promise that it'll be a one-pager, because what you asked for is a lot of information, but you will get something that has all of that in a shorter version than what you are used to getting.
Mr. President had a -- the request for the -- all the H.O.M.E. amendment pieces. So I just want to buttress his request. I understand it's part of a lot --
We submitted it, it was voted on, and then just the timeline that it actually become reality, that's all.
Yeah. And a lot of the changes that Council did was just increasing budget items that we already had. So we have already started having meetings. We met with Councilmember Gilmore- Richardson about the Wheels program. So working -- we are working on operationalizing that, and we're having individual meetings with councilmembers that specifically had those, just so we can get a little bit more background for those that are not intuitive. So we do want to make sure we are taking in some of the thoughts of the councilmembers on the why and the what they wanted to see in that. So those are happening.
I'm done, Mr. President. I was just wanting to say -- I just -- I have a particular interest in the -- in the Anti-Displacement Fund. So I do look forward --
Thank you. Councilmember Quetcy Lozada, Nina Ahmad, then Mark Squilla.
Thank you, Council President. Good morning. I guess my question -- I'm going to start off with Jessie. Do you believe that the public should have a say in how we use public land?
Okay. And do you -- and do you believe that the HUD AMI is not -- or doesn't speak to the realities of many people in our community?
Do you believe that the HUD -- the way that HUD determines a person's AMI, that it doesn't respond to the realities of some in our community?
I do believe that there is a misalignment between what the metro area designates as HUD numbers or HUD AMIs, based on US federal census data, whatever the case may be.
But do you believe that they speak to the realities of people on the ground?
Okay. And do you understand or do you believe that as a government, we should protect and respond to preventing gentrification in certain neighborhoods?
I do believe that, which is why I think the public conversation is in fact important to your point earlier.
Okay. And so, if you believe that, why do districts like mine continue to receive projects that don't respect community input, don't speak to the realities of our communities' AMI and will further gentrify neighborhoods and displace people. Why is that okay?
I believe that we have a mission and commitment to improve communities where we can with the activation of publicly owned land specifically. And I believe in aligning that particular effort with the tools in the -- in the toolbox that we have when it comes to the different programs that we have uplifted over time.
But do you believe that there are -- that every program doesn't believe -- belong in every neighborhood?
I do think that is -- you can't unilaterally apply programs across the city. And I do think that on a case-by-case basis, you do have to make some determinations about what's appropriate and what is in fact not appropriate.
So why do you all continue to ignore -- if you believe that, why do you all continue to ignore neighborhoods like mine that tell you that certain parts of your H.O.M.E. initiative do not work in neighborhoods where -- that have been quickly gentrified and have vastly displaced people that cannot afford programs like Turn the Key?
I wouldn't say that we have ignored that, because if we ignored that, we would have development within the 7th District that responds to Turn the Key. And we haven't seen that yet.
We haven't seen Turn the Key development take off in your particular district. If we're talking about your neighborhood and your district, I won't co-sign the fact that we're pushing people out because we haven't developed home ownership opportunities to Turn the Key in the 7th District just yet.
And why have you all -- why do you believe that we have not responded or have allowed for Turn the Key projects to take place in the 7th?
I do know that your constituency, specifically your representation, your constituency has very specific thoughts about how to develop and what to develop and what the cost to develop is, too. So, I mean, that's why we're in active conversations with the collective in your district to talk about what exactly the resources would be needed for them to take the lead to develop the other communities. Again, I -- we are not here to gentrify. We are here to reactivate land based on the tools we have in our toolbox of housing programming. And whether it's home ownership --
And you don't think that you haven't seen Turn the Key projects in my neighborhood because developers have not been respectful enough to come and appropriately respond to the needs of that neighborhood? Would you say that?
I would say that I know that developers have met with your constituency to talk about what they would like to do in your district.
But -- and you think that the -- that they have responded to the needs of that community through the program or the projects that they have offered my community? Is that what you're saying?
I think that it is responding to different elements of your community. Again, we are talking about a very large geography that has many, many different blocks in many, many different specifics that pertain to, you know, a case-by-case basis. I don't -- I respectfully push back on us unilaterally trying to develop the same type of housing throughout your entire district.
I would respectfully push back on you saying that you allow for my community to have a say in what they want to see in their neighborhood. Because every project that has come into the neighborhood, my community has been willing to sit down with the project person, and they have not been able to deliver what they need in their community. If there are reports that say that residents in my community make under 35,000, and you have a project that starts at a minimum of 45,000, then obviously you're not responding to the need of my community. And when you have developers or you send developers our way that feel that it is okay to lie to my community and come back four times without making a change in their proposal, it is a problem. And the public should be able to determine what they want to see in their neighborhood. And so, I'm trying to figure out how do we come to a place that is fiscally responsible, responds to the needs of the community and does not displace people that have generationally called neighborhoods home.
So to your point earlier, you asked if there was a connection between the census data that specifies what the HUD AMI is for the area, based on numbers that come from Washington versus what your average Philadelphian is. And if we point to Turn the Key in the work that it has done, it has served households at or below around 60 percent of AMI, which is where your average Philadelphian comes in. Even to dive down a little bit more deeper, at least 150 of the Turn the Key homes have been sold to those between 31 percent of AMI and 50 percent of AMI. So again, I think that it is unfair to generalize that we aren't taking consideration about where Turn the Key opportunities are coming, because those are all RFPs, those are all very specific locations in which there have been conversations with Council about where those RFPs are coming out. So under --
We can't even get to the point of having a conversation with -- about RFPs, because you all don't respect neighborhood. You don't respect what public -- you don't respect what the public wants to see and how we use public land. You all have to be willing to come to the table and have an honest conversation.
And that's not what has happened with your -- I'm going to say department division. It is not what has happened, right? The community consistently says, this is what we're looking for. This is what we need in order for us to stay in our neighborhoods. And you all continue to push back on it. You all continue to send people to meet with them that don't want to negotiate.
Then we're going to continue to be here because at the end of the day, I was sent here to protect my community.
I was sent here to not allow -- we have a responsibility not to allow people to be displaced in their neighborhoods.
We have a responsibility to keep people in their homes. We have a responsibility to make sure that people are not house broke.
Listen, we are actually talking about the same thing. We all -- we are all committed to the same exact thing. And I --
Yeah. But you all talk to us about, and what actually happens, what actually comes to the table are two different things. And that I think is my frustration. And I believe that that is my community's frustration as well. When you meet with the community and when you meet with us, you say, we understand, Councilmember. Yes, community, we understand you need affordable housing. Yes, we understand you live under -- with an income of under $45,000 a year. Yes, we understand you need affordable rentals, but when you all put proposals on the table, they speak completely the opposite. And so how are we supposed to take you serious?
There are very specific ways that we do business. There is the unsolicited route and there is the solicited route. The solicited route is the RFP process. The unsolicited route is just not RFP process. So again, we will not -- we will continue to work with you about that unsolicited process -- and both the RFP and the unsolicited process. But again, contrary to what you're providing here, I do want to just express that we have a billion -- nearly billion-dollar H.O.M.E. plan that is -- that is committed to providing housing for folks of all different income vans and all different neighborhoods. And even, you know, whether Turn the Key is something that's not prevalent in your particular district, there are tax credit projects that are prevalent in your district. So again, I just don't want to understate the commitment that this department has to promoting affordable housing throughout the entire city.
I would appreciate it if you were to show -- I'm willing to continue to work together, right?
I'm willing to continue to work together. But it has to be -- it has to be in a way that protects neighborhoods like mine.
I have more than one neighborhood that is being gentrified, and that is not going to --
Here's what I would like to do. And Jessie, I know you have to work with the Councilmember. And when this plan was brought to us for us to be supportive of us, to us to give up our Councilman prerogative, right? It was made; a commitment upfront that we would work lockstep together with the district council person, right? Not pushing stuff in front of the Land Bank, grabbing up support and opposition to the member. Because that's contrary to working with the member in good faith. That's just my personal opinion from being here, right? And I've always seen that even happen depending on where you're from and who you are, to just being quite frank. I think she's just saying, it was asked of us to give up our rights over a certain land -- I'm not even going to say our rights, but our ability to hold off on the disposition of land to work in partnership with the administration. And so -- and that's a good faith thing. Because we could have went the other way and just said, no, under no circumstances shall we not give up their right to dispose of land. And I think -- not I think, but I know for a fact with Member Lozada just saying through this process, she's looking for a level of good faith in trying to figure out a home that we may do for Turn the Key at this AMI, it may not be best for her immediate community. And I've been around Philadelphia long enough to know certain neighborhoods probably won't even be having a conversation.
So she's saying, don't treat me no 17 different than we are in Bella Vista, than we are in Northeast, but we ain't Rittenhouse Square, afford me that same level of respect. And it may be agreements to disagreements, but the reality is that bill is not going anywhere.
So that doesn't get anything accomplished. And then the response will say, well, we're just doing what we supposed to do. No. So we all will make this process successful if we figure out some medium for us to work together. And councilmembers, specifically district councilmembers, deserve the right to chart the path for their own community, because they're the ones that's responsible to that community. And so, hopefully we can continue that dialogue and I'll be more active --
-- seeing how me and my team could be supportive of making sure what she wants to accomplish gets done.
Chair recognizes Councilmember Nina Ahmad, Squilla, Young and Brooks.
Thank you, Council President. Good morning still to all of you. My first question is to the Commerce Department. Thank you so much for being here. I want to really address the issue of very small businesses, the pop-up businesses, the ones that start up in a street corner to do proof of concept, right? And many big companies actually do a lot of pop-ups to test their products as well. But I'm talking about the really small, sort of cottage industry folks who are entrepreneurs trying to do this. They face significant hurdles, primarily navigating complex multi- agency permitting, sometimes 40 steps high -- and in addition to their high cost of so many things going on, I wanted to know in this money that was allocated for the BIRT exemption impact, the 38 to 43 million, is there a way to use some of that to support this permitting process and this -- all this barriers that these pop-up businesses experience to drive our economy? They can -- they can be significant in our economy. So if you would address that, please.
Sure. Thanks, Councilmember. Totally agree with you first of all, that we need to -- and Commerce is very committed to supporting businesses at every size and stage. And you're right, our local entrepreneurs are often, you know, tomorrow's employers. And so, we really want to support that; their creativity and their grit and determination to build a business. We are using some of the -- what we're calling -- under that Jumpstart investment, small business investment, to support very small businesses. We are working on making what -- the Catalyst Fund more -- it's currently -- small businesses are applying and are being awarded. We are working on sort of a new and improved version, a 2.0, if you will, that is going to make it even easier. What one of the -- some of the feedback we got was that the application asked the same of a bigger business and a small business. And it's like we need to make it a little easier and streamlined for the smaller businesses. And so, we are working on that. And you'll see that this summer. We also are just -- are in the process right now of doing a round of grants towards vending markets so that the markets can support their vendors. Understanding that that's -- you know, vending is one of those low barrier to entry type of businesses. And we want to support entrepreneurs that want to do that. And we are also looking to hire a -- one of our next hires in Commerce is going to be somebody really focused on vending markets and vendors. Also, our Open for Business initiative has tackled a few of the challenges around licenses and permits that are required to sort of streamline that process. And we actually just did -- this is somewhat related, so bear with me. We did a -- just did a project with ULI on the vending market technical assistance panel, where they bring in ULI's models. You know, they bring in experts from all over. And we looked at how can we do more, how can we support more of those opportunities. So there should be a report coming soon that we will be working with all of you on.
I look forward to that report. And more importantly, to convene these folks, these local small entrepreneurs who seem to be lost in the sauce basically. And so, I would have to -- happy to partner with you to amplify that, but we -- they don't hear about it. They don't know. So streamlining that, not just for them, for everybody is important, but particularly them. So I thank you for that.
Jessie -- sorry, Jessie. I was calling you Jessie. Just wanted an update on the Market East revival status. What is going on? How well are people being included? I know you have a committee, and I know we have a member on that, but we have no information, because at one point they were going to break everything down and then they reversed it. And it seems -- I know this is -- these are private entities. I just wanted to know how much oversight you have outside of zoning approvals. What else do we have in terms of watching what exactly is happening there?
So -- and thank you. I appreciate that question, Councilmember. So right now, we are -- as you alluded to, there is a committee that meets on, at this point, a kind of bimonthly basis, right? And much of the year has really been spent on just understanding what folks see when they look at Market East, what stands out to them as far as opportunities, things and assets that can be anchored. We -- it's really been a lot of foundational stage setting with a lot -- a lot of different information. Kind of how we got to where we are today, right? What we're at the process of doing right now is we're shifting into a big public engagement push right now, right? So there have been subcommittees broken up amongst those different committee members, things along the side -- along the lines of activation of land use, you know, also public safety being a critical thing there. But ultimately what this has all been kind of surmounting to is a very informed conversation about what economic development incentives would be needed to move something forward, right? So our target for the end of the year is to produce a report that packages such a thing. But what we're doing between now and then, the summer will be really dedicated toward engagement, round tables, bringing, you know, we -- outside of that committee -- outside of that advisory group, is what it's called. Outside of that advisory group, there have been a lot of different one-on-one stakeholder conversations with folks that aren't on that group. Property owners, civic representatives, so on and so forth, right? But as we're kind of pivoting at, literally as we speak, we are getting into the public engagement component, right? So we are making plans to have some sort of engagement hub on the corridor for folks to be able to see things like development scenarios, things that basically have stood out in the conversations and the subcommittees and round tables and focus groups. All of that information is being packaged as we speak, to be able to be presented in an engagement hub. And all that information is going to ultimately solidify a couple of different things. Well, prior to that we'll have the development scenarios, but we want that to funnel into a market study. So we're taking a temperature on what the market could sustain right now. And the real kind of stand by this that -- I stand by the fact that, you know, there have been iterations of a Market East, so to speak, a study, a report, so on and so forth. But the time that we're taking out is really to bring all this information in a post pandemic world, thinking about how people recreate differently, and thinking about how people shop differently. You know, it's a main street, but what's on this main street, right? Where's the opportunity for housing? How does this coincide with not just our comprehensive planning update but also the H.O.M.E. plan, right? It's all coming together as we speak. The community feedback, public engagement phase is where we're entering right now. The fall will be where it's all packaged up as we speak. So what -- we can have some sort of report by the end of the year.
Thank you. I just want to make sure economic diversity is something that's kept in mind when we are planning what sorts of economic enterprises will go there. The small, the big, including how housing is done to have mixed use.
80/20 works in New York. It works. So let's see Philadelphia do that. So thank you so much.
Thank you. Councilmember Mark Squilla, then Councilmember Young and Councilmember, Minority leader, Kendra Brooks.
Thank you, Mr. President. Real quick, I have a couple -- well, I got many questions that I'll ask in a second. Where -- real quick, where do you stand with the citywide survey for the historic properties that was going to be looked at and done that we could do for as far as preservation and part of the task force -- historic task force recommendations. The city was proposing a survey. Do you know if that had started or if it's going to start?
I believe that has begun. I'm looking at a couple of deputies that might know, but we -- I don't know that it has started, but we can get back to you on a specific status update specifically for that effort.
Okay. Thank you. And also, that Neighborhood Economic Development, the NED, we understand that, you know, since the cost of the properties have increased, we're looking to see, would we be able to support an increase in grant level funding to support the work, given the challenges of increasing values of properties for this year?
Hi, Councilmember. So I'm sorry. Is the question -- is are we in -- how are we dealing with rising costs?
Yeah. Given Yvonne and I had to come up here, but yes, we have -- we have reallocated and we have increased the amount. I think we still advertise our grants as up to $500,000 for neighborhood economic development. But we do make a -- that's a -- that's a guideline, not a rule. And we make exceptions as needed. Again, the bigger our grants, the fewer we can do. And so, we are always trying to balance that issue.
And the answer would be -- so the question would also be, yes, can we give more? But then also are we looking to add more into the pot so that we can make it viable?
Thank you, Councilman Squilla. Yvonne Boye, Deputy Commerce Director. I'm glad you brought it up. I think we had -- most of the funding that we have that is available for the Neighborhood Economic Development grant is the CDBG federal funds, with its accompanying hurdles. I think we had a reduction in hard funds this year. And so, we do not have a resource to increase it by much. However, because of the Jumpstart, we are able to reallocate the funding a little bit so that other programs that were solely funded through CDBG can now be funded through the Jumpstart, right? And so, that has released a little bit more funding for us to use for this year. We also had the Neighborhood Preservation Initiative funding, which kind of supported it, but that is gone. And so, we've been able to increase the CDBG funding allocated this year to 3.3 million, which -- and it was usually just about 1.2 million.
However, it is federal funding and it comes with these accompanying hurdles.
Through this to increase the amount of the grants to do this?
Yes, we are able to do that. But basically, just because, you know, of the Jumpstart funding that we have, the allocations worked this year.
Okay. Thank you so much. And I'm going to go back to Adaptive Modification Program. Do we know if there's a current waiting list for the grants for Adapt Mod?
There is a current waiting list. Give me a minute and I can tell you specifically how much. And as he pulls it up, Councilmember, just clarification. We will still follow up with the Historical Commission survey, but I think what you're referring to is Treasure Philly, which was originally Broad and Erie, it has now moved to Frankford. It's a pilot phase right now, but we'll get you the clarity to get you the status update on that for sure.
It's not citywide at the moment, but we will -- we will break that down for you.
Current wait list for Adaptive Modification is just under 2000.
2000. And do we know how many of them are for handicap accessibility, of those 2000 to --
Physical accessibility to their -- to homes, to be able to access their homes?
If we could ask that for the -- if we could find out what that is and get that for the Chair. Because I think that's something too that we really need to look at. If people need to have access to their homes or access in their homes, how we can make sure that happens.
Yeah, I have to see whether or not even have that data. I can certainly tell you the numbers of folks that we are working with and the ones that we've completed. But some of the folks that have applied may not be answering that question because I don't know that we have a question that speaks to that.
Well, you would -- you know who's on the waiting list, right? The -- but you --
Thank you very much. Just want to spin the block real quick. Back to Jessie. I just was thinking about this process as well. The highest population of public land is in the 7th Councilmanic District and the 5th Councilmanic District. And I know we support our Mayor's H.O.M.E. Plan, that's why the majority of members voted the bill out, right? With some additions, but for the most part, the bill out. And I know she has a goal to rehab and produce 30,000 units. And so, it's really imperative that there's a good relationship between those two district members in order for our mayor to be successful throughout her term. And so, I was just sitting there thinking about how we establish that stronger partnership, but ultimately her success lies within those two district councilmembers, because ultimately if there are no partnerships, the bills just sit. If there is no input from the community, there's no way to progress to move forward. And we would like for her to be successful. First woman Mayor, large, big city of America. And so, we want to be supportive of that. And so that's something I just want to say. It's imperative that we figure that part out, particularly with those two members. I have significant development. Jamie has significant development. Them two have the largest, and I think yours as well. Point of information. I mean, you have? Point of information.
I've been thinking a lot about this too. And I'm sensitive to what Councilmember Lozada brought up. And it seems to me that the issue is that we are very skilled in one type of housing typology with our public land. We know how to do Turn the Key. We're comfortable with the developers that apply again and again. And so, it feels like we've gotten into the mode of that's what we are doing with our public land. And I talked to you all about this last year when you came to my office, we were talking about putting up the thousand parcels, and kind of giving you guys pre-approval, but even at that time I was asking you questions about what other housing typologies can we do, right? I don't -- I love Turn the Key. I'm doing a significant amount of them in my district, but I also don't think it's fair that that is the only product that we can reliably turn out. And that there's this public pressure for district councilmembers to move on Turn the Key with frankly the same developers that apply again and again and again. And they're just going across the city shopping. They're shopping at this point for where there's vacant land that they can continually do this model, whether they know our neighborhoods or not. So the charge I would put to you all is let's continue to do Turn the Key. It's awesome, but there needs to be more than one housing typology that we know how to fund and to deliver and that are tailored to the needs of our communities. And so, I kind of have talked to you guys about this before, but I truly think that that's the issue. Absolutely.
So I just -- if I may, everything you said, it still stands. There is absolutely a commitment to figure out other typologies that work, which is why we've made things like zoning changes to account for, or accept, or at least allow for things like duplexes in certain parts of the city, right? So we recognize that we need to set the stage to allow for different types of housing as well. Philadelphia, as you know, as everyone in here knows, is a predominantly row house city. And that is the predominant typology, which is why we are leveraging that. We also, in terms of public inventory, we don't have a lot of assemblages either, which is why the sheriff's sale process is so important, and jump starting that a year ago was really pivotal to making sure that we can in fact pivot to everything you've just described. So I don't want to dispute the fact that that is something that is still on the table. As we find these assemblages that are a little bit more opportune to diversify the housing type, that continues. And when it comes to the -- you know, the commitment to working with the -- this particular body on that -- the thousand properties, that still stands. That has not gone anywhere. We just haven't gotten to the point of briefing you all yet. Angela can talk a little bit more if we need to about the FUSE Fellow that has really dedicated the time and effort. To your point earlier about those applications that came in and were kind of discussed, and you know, the developers coming in, to be honest with you, that is a process that predates where we are when it comes to this special 1000-unit list, right? Excuse me, 1000 property list, right? We intend every -- we've recognized where the majority of those properties are on. It's the 3rd, it's the 5th and it's the 7th. And we know that even with this specialized process, there's still a part of the process that you still -- I mean, again, we call it repositioning the approvals process on the front end. There's still a tool or a step that we have to come to you to work with. So we certainly aren't trying to circumvent the process. We recognize that we're just repositioning it, and we know that can't happen without the conversations. We just want to make that very clear.
Can I have a point of information? Councilmember Quetcy Lozada.
I appreciate your words. I think that for many people, for some reason, this has become about a number. This has become about delivering a number, and we are forgetting that we are impacting people's lives. That we are -- that we -- that if we don't do this right, we are going to have an impact, a negative impact on neighborhoods, on communities. And so, can we stop -- let us move away from the number. If we get 30,000, if we get 50,000, if we get 100,000, great. Amen. But if we don't, then we all should be able to look back and say that we delivered housing for Philadelphia for people, safe, affordable, real, affordable houses for people. We can't say that we want people to choose Philadelphia if we are making it unaffordable for them to choose Philadelphia. And so, I just ask us to move away from looking at the number and the timeframe in which we all have to deliver this number. Let us think about the people and the children and the families that we will impact negatively if we don't do this right.
And I just actually want to also put on record that there is a component -- there's an important partner, just has not been mentioned just yet. PHA has that ability to dive into that deeper affordability that -- where we have to think a little bit more strategically or deeper about, right? So I just -- you know, I know -- I recognize what you just said about the numbers not being the guiding factor here, but I just want to recognize that they're in this just like the administration is in this, right? So when we talk about diversifying the housing types, we have a partner in PHA to think about that and the tools that they have at their, you know, disposal, things that we don't have. But I mean, just know that it's a coordinating effort. Again, we are leveraging in-fill opportunities because that is the predominance of our inventory. But I agree with you, it should not limit and it will not limit where we look at and how we consider housing going forward. Again, home ownership is key, but everyone is not supposed -- everyone is not supposed to be a homeowner. Everyone wants to be -- you know, everyone is not wanting to be a homeowner, excuse me, to get my word correct.
Point of information. Councilmember Cindy Bass.
Thank you, Mr. President. You know, I just wanted to say -- and I know that you all do great work and you're working really hard at this. But the idea that we should sort of look to PHA to do this particular component, you know, like if you're low to very low income, that somehow we should shift this over to PHA. But when we voted on these bills, we weren't told that -- yeah, you know what -- but you know what I'm saying.
When we -- when we were presented with these options through planning and through the city of Philadelphia, it was not, you know, we're going to do X, Y, and Z and PHA is going to do, you know, X, Y, and Z, we're going to focus on, you know, Turn the Key and they're going to focus on low income. It wasn't presented to us at all that way. So I just want to just be careful that that's not what we're suggesting, because right now it looks like Turn the Key is very much a one size fit all outfit. And if you ever get a one size fit all, it doesn't fit anybody. And so, the idea that we're doing one size fit all in North Philly, it doesn't work. So we have to go back to the drawing board and find a new tool that's going to work.
And I just -- I completely agree with you. I just want to make sure that we are on the same page about PHA not being pigeonholed into just low-income opportunities because that's not all that they do. And we recognize that. I just wanted to make sure that we were recognizing that there was another partner in play.
I grew up in public housing, and the new -- the new PHA is not the old PHA.
No. Not no three stories with a deck. You're looking outside the back. No, I didn't grow up like that. No. 6
Thank you. Angela Brooks again. And I just want to make sure we haven't talked about -- and I think to Councilmember Gauthier's point and the other councilmembers, particularly you Councilmember Lozada, we are in the process of going through the vacant land strategy, that will be finalized soon. And that's where we will get a better idea of how we should be using our public land and having a real strategy. We will be having individual meetings with each district Councilmember, certainly with starting the ones that have the most vacant land, the legislation specifically for the special disposition process, which is not removing prerogative; it's just putting it on the front end. And to your point, Councilmember Lozada might make more sense because then the councilmanic decision is made before it comes to the Land Bank. But we are going to start having those meetings. We've briefed the Council technical staff, we're starting with you, Council President Johnson, and you will start seeing those. But the goal is within the H.O.M.E. plan to really address the full housing continuum from zero to a hundred, and to make sure -- well, really to any income level. And we do want to work with each of you as partners, the Office of Homeless Services, PHA, we want to be a partner and we want to look at how the H.O.M.E. funds are icing to really supplement all of the housing needs that we need in Philadelphia and not exclude anyone. And so, we look forward to working with all of you. Certainly, we have a lot of work to do in District 7. We recognize that and we look forward to working with you and continuing figuring out some of the hard work. This is not going to be easy. We're here for hard. We're easy to have -- we're here to have the hard conversations, and we look forward to working with you to come up with an equitable solution on what works. But that does mean things might have to look different, and we recognize that. But Turn the Key is not the only solution we're thinking of, but as far as the special disposition, we're limited to 1500 square feet. So that kind of really is either Turn the Key or a two-family type development.
Like, I know we have the modular proposal, right? Let's say the modular proposal goes through. How is those units going to be different than the typical Turn the Key unit?
That's actually one of the things that are -- you know, this -- that's a question that needs to be answered, right? We put this RFI out to understand, like, what folks that are on the operating side can match with the opportunity as they understand it here in Philadelphia, right? I think that we -- by nature, we defer to an infill opportunity, because again, that is what the prevalence of our inventory is. However, we know that there are several projects in the city that have been built on a multifamily basis on modular housing. So it is intended to be a flexible opportunity -- a flexible tool for building not just single- family opportunities, but for also some multifamily stuff. But I think that we want to understand if in fact, one, there's a competitive advantage that we can tap into for modular housing, whether that is, you know, building a site that -- or excuse me, building a facility that allows us to crank these modules out. What the reception for something like that would be in the market. How that is differentiated from grabbing these boxes and modules from, you know, rural PA or South Jersey, whatever the case may be. But there is a level of flexibility that comes with modular housing in terms of development, housing type -- housing development types.
Before I call our next member, I do remember when I was in Member Phillip's district, it was the 9th District, they called it middle neighborhood, right? And we had a town hall up there. And I remember constituents coming up and saying, can we also build -- can we consider building the one floor flat buildings? Because it was an older woman, she had seniors. She said, I don't have no children, right? And I don't need a two story or a three-story home. And could we take that in consideration as being a senior, I guess it's called a flat. I guess that's what it is. For us to maybe look at another different type of model for that type of individual who don't want to go -- our issue was going up and down the steps, I remember. And so, just having a one level unit was also beneficial for her. Just something to think about if we're talking about diversifying on what options are available.
Yeah. And also, one other thing that I want to make it clear is that, you know, as we understand those, the need for diversity types, I mean, we're talking -- we're home to a Center City that has probably one of the largest residential populations in anywhere else in the country, right? So, you know, the prevalence of housing in Center City is not the row house, right? So we certainly need to position ourselves. If we're talking about trying to get housing on the Market East, we have to figure out what that looks like, right? We have to be able to diversify that. We also talked about zoning earlier. You know, one thing that we have is, again, the duplex zoning, but we're also trying to push out the transit-oriented communities as well, right? Being able to incentivize the development of multifamily opportunities around transit centers. And, you know, that speaks to the elders who may not, you know, enter on the first floor, but could certainly enter through a lobby, get on the elevator and be in their flat. You know what I mean? So I think that, you know, we're trying to package this and kind of situate ourselves to be able to take advantage of several different options. By nature, again, it's a single-family opportunity that comes, that rises to the top, because it's the easiest. And if we're talking about expediency, we're going to the low hanging fruit, but we're also setting the stage and paving the way for things to be a little bit more different, diverse and responsive to -- if we're talking about a recruitment tool, everyone that moves to Philadelphia doesn't live side by side with people, everybody doesn't want to live or own a home. Some people do want apartments. So being able to allow for some zoning changes that allow for that to happen and incentivize that kind of development aspect on the developer instinct is important to us.
Thank you very much. I want to acknowledge the presence of Majority Leader, Katherine Gilmore- Richardson. And so, Member Young, Brooks, Richardson, then we get into our second round.
Thank you, Mr. President. My colleagues, kind of, you know, touched on many of the questions that I've had, but I have a direct question for the Housing and Planning Department. Do you support increasing the Turn the Key subsidy to $100,000?
So there is some thoughts that has been presented to us. I'd like to call up Angel Rodriguez to talk about the timeline associated with the thought process there. Right now, Turn the Key is --
It's okay, I don't need to hear from Angela on that, right? Because you just answered my question, right? Because if we got to have a timeline to think about it, the answer is no 4 to me. So we're going to go to my next question, because my time is limited.
Right? So my colleagues are talking about the Turn the Key and the different types of housing products that we could offer to our communities. And we have to think about the market for the people, right? And so, in Councilmember Lozada's district and parts of my district, Turn the Key products actually cause -- can create gentrification because of the number. And so, what we're asking for is to invest in the people, right? When I look through around my district and I see all these home ownership opportunities that were subsidized for the homeowner, I look at Yorktown, I look at the area that is near Tenth Memorial Church, through the all-home ownership opportunities that were subsidized for the people that were there, right? Nehemiah Homes, right? There were opportunities for home ownership that were subsidized for the people there. And so, we're asking like, if the market doesn't work, right, then it's up to government to create that subsidy, to push that subsidy in place so the people there can afford it, and the developer is still going to get their number at the end of the day, right? But if we invest in the people, we provide the people with that higher subsidy, that $100,000 subsidy, that can give them that opportunity to afford these houses. You won't get so much pushback from the community when we're trying to put these products out there. So we're -- we have $800-million, right? That's what the -- that's what the number that the community, the public hears when we talk about housing in the city of Philadelphia. They hear 800-million, right? And so --
Point of information, sir. They hear a billion --
Actually, 2-billion of the investment of the land --
Thank you. They hear that we're leveraging up to $2-billion, right? So I'm just curious on why we can't put that number, right? Why we got to have a meeting to have a meeting, to have a meeting to think about it, right? I mean, it is either, do we do or we don't. And I think that for investing in people in the city of Philadelphia and some of the neighborhoods that Councilmember Lozada represents, that I represent, that Councilmember Gauthier represents, having that higher number for the subsidy is that partnership we're asking for. It makes a huge difference in these projects. And at the end of the day, the developers who people like are going to get their number. They're going to meet their spread. They're going to meet their mark. So if we're -- if Council is asking for this, you know, this help, and this to be that -- our partnership, I don't think we need to have a meeting to have a meeting, to have a meeting to talk about it, right? It's like, all right, let's just increase it. We got a billion -- $2-billion, excuse me, right? Let's just -- let's just do it. Let's just do it. Let's stop the pushback. Let's stop organizing opposition against councilmembers, right? Because they're fighting for their communities, and let's just get it done and work together. I think that that's just -- that's a no-brainer if we want to be able to provide housing opportunities. Because you've already acknowledged that the AMIs don't work for real Philadelphians, right? You've acknowledged that. So let's increase that subsidy for real Philadelphians to have home ownership opportunities. Because, again, I'm -- I look around my district -- and you mentioned PHA. PHA Turn the Key houses actually cost more than the city's, right? So that don't really -- that's not -- that's not really a real option, right, when it comes to their home ownership stuff. So -- and you ask people in my district, they say PHA is the biggest slumlord too. So that's a different -- that's a different conversation, right? So I think that we, as the city, as Councilmember Bass alluded to, we shouldn't have to rely on other entities. We should just be able to do the work ourselves. We vote as a support, $2-billion worth of -- worth of work. And I think that the city -- if the administration wants to be a partner with us as councilmembers who represent individuals in our specific districts, who have specific living conditions that are only unique to them and their neighborhoods, then we should be -- we should work together to figure out how we can help those people living in their specific conditions, in their individual unique neighborhoods in the city. And that, you know, that's it, Mr. President.
Thank you very much. Chair recognizes Councilmember Kendra Brooks and Councilmember Katherine Gilmore-Richardson.
Thank you. This is for Commerce. I've asked this question directly to your office, and I have not received an answer, so I want to put this on record. One of the pieces of legislation that makes up an important protection for uncategorized workers in our city is Fair Workweek Bill. My understanding is that there has been ongoing discussions within Commerce and the administration about potential changes. I want to be clear; I'm not in favor of changing this law. Can you give me any updates on where we are in this process and what potential changes are being considered for Fair Workweek Law? I understand that there has been outreach to a number of labor unions about this law as well, and I would like to know what unions and worker advocacy organizations have you been consulting with on this potential change, and what is the state of the outreach?
Okay. Thank you, Councilmember Brooks. We have been having conversations. Commerce has been contacted for the past two -- probably going on two years now from some businesses, specific businesses, and some industries around challenges they have with the Fair Workweek laws. There's questions about -- you know, there's some -- there's things they would like to be made more clear. There are -- that -- there are changes that they want. Nothing has been promised or offered to them. Our team at Commerce has been meeting with them to gather information. This bill has been in -- it's been law for five years now, or is now -- are we now past five years? I think -- around that, right? So we see this as a good time, as good government, to, like, go and just revisit. Are there things that need to be tightened up? Are there things that need to be better explained? Are there things to be -- need to be cleared up? There are conversations, you are right, going on. The administration is having conversations both with the businesses and industries, as well as with labor groups. I don't have the names. I can't tell you right now, but I -- and I'm sorry if you said you've asked this and haven't gotten information. I think we can follow up and get you specifics of who has been talked to and what the current status is. No, bill has been drafted. There's -- this is all conversations at this point.
Yeah. I would like for my staff to be considered as part of that conversation. Just like we've been working with eviction diversion program and the concerns that we had about another contentious piece of legislation that we passed. We've been working through those concerns directly with the landlords, big and small, to build a relationship, to make sure that we get on the -- what we get on the outside, or on the other side, is equitable for both parts of this conversation. So I would love to be a party of that conversation. My team would like to know what's going on, so we don't have to, you know, play this back-and-forth game around something that, you know, we fought very hard to get in the city. You know, people are benefiting from it. And I just want to make sure that we are working together to make sure we have the best possible outcome.
My next question is for Planning and Development. Did they -- when can we expect to hear more on this 20-year abatement and how it intersects with the H.O.M.E plan? And last year, as part of the discussion around the H.O.M.E initiatives, City Council authorized a revolving loan fund. And this fund would provide low-cost construction loans to build houses. I want to understand what are the barriers for implementation and what the administration's stance on implementation is.
So I would like to call up John Mondlak, who can give you the status of where we are on the tax abatement. We certainly announced it, I believe, at the end of last year. But what we also recognize is that there are some things that, you know, we're following the boundaries of the enabling legislation at the state level, trying to figure out how it can speak to Philadelphia specifically for development, but also just kind of within those guidelines. So, John, you want to provide some insight?
Sure. John Mondlak. I'm first deputy and chief of staff in the Department of Planning and Development. The -- we are hoping to share an ordinance 19 with Council very, very soon. I think conversations might already be in the works to be scheduled to have those. And at that point, we're going to have probably a more robust conversation. I might be able to answer some questions right now. I don't think that I can answer the revolving loan fund question.
Could you clarify on that? I'm sorry. Or maybe restate your question.
Yeah. I want to understand what are the barriers for the implementation, but -- and what is the stance on the -- on the implementation for -- yeah, just the barriers. What are the barriers to implementation around a revolving loan fund? Is it moving forward?
Well, I think what we've moved forward with is specifically funding the Accelerator Fund in that particular funding source for pre-development costs. That is something that has been a tool for a while now. Something that specifically is getting some funding from H.O.M.E. It is meant to do some bridge -- some gap financing, and bridging for the financing of development projects, specifically around pre-development costs. But, I mean, everything as far as loans, I mean, we're in the process of putting something like that together. I think we're still crafting what that could look like in terms of an actual loan fund.
Okay. And one other, is there currently a waiting list for adaptive modification programs grant? If so, how many households that included -- that include a person with a disability are on the waiting list to make their homes more accessible?
David Thomas, president, CEO, PHDC. I don't have those specific information, but I believe Councilmember Squilla asked, and I'm supposed to get that to you, so I'll make sure that you get a copy as well.
Thank you very much, Member Brooks. Chair recognizes Member Katherine Gilmore-Richardson.
Thank you. Thank you very much, Mr. President, and thank you, colleagues. I'll start with Commerce, since you all are still there. First, thank you so very much to your teams. Let me start with our thank yous. Karen Fegley, Heloise Jettison, Anna Breece, Justine Bolkus, Ariana Ford, Michelle Gumbs. Thank you, Michelle Gumbs, Michelle Price, and Dawn Summerville. Thank you very much. And to everyone at the Commerce team, we appreciate each and every one of you. We know that the CTE Teacher Certification program lives and rests in Commerce's budget. And we know this is the first year I was able to receive a midyear report from the School District of Philadelphia relative to the impact of the program. And during the fall session, you know, we have only two schools; Temple University and Point Park University. Twenty-eight teachers have been assisted to receive their CTE certification. And also, we have 50 additional teachers for the spring. And we anticipate another 35 classes for coverage for this summer. And so I bring that up because I was able to be in the great Northeast in the 10th Council District this morning for a labor breakfast/union experience fair with our young people for National Apprenticeship Week. And I had so many teachers at Swenson come up to me to say thank you from the bottom of their hearts for the grant assistance -- teacher tuition assistance program that we've instituted. I know that in this proposed budget, that program is cut. And I wanted to put that on the record because, like I stated, so many teachers came up to me this morning. One teacher who he said he is almost 30. This is his 5th year with the district. He has three children under the age of five. And the program was of great help to him and to his family. So I wanted to put that on the record. If I can get a very brief response, because I must proceed to my questions for Planning and Housing.
Yes, Councilwoman. I mean, I -- we are all glad to hear the -- of those results. We all understand the importance of CTE teachers, especially as, again, we're building our, you know, our talent and our pipeline of students and ensuring that they're trained for the jobs that we have to offer in Philadelphia. So I'm glad to hear it's going well.
Thank you. Thank you very much. So I am going to be pushing for that. I'm saying that on the record to Council President and amongst my colleagues, as well as to Commerce and the administration. And that is a very important program for a pipeline for our young people in our CTE programs to get them trained for the jobs of the future. And so that'll be exceedingly important to me that we continue supporting that program, which, in turn, supports our teachers. I know that we have a focus on education in particular this year. And obviously, based on all of the proposals that we have received in this body, we know that education is our number one priority. And so, if that's the case, we must invest in our CTE teachers. Council President, I hear the bell. If you'll allow, may I just get questions on the record for Planning.
Thank you. Thank you very, very much. Hold on one moment. Thank you. I was having a quick senior moment, but I saw you, Mr. Wilson, in the corner next to Helloise. So thank you so much for all you do on our behalf. I really appreciate you and especially being in the community. We were up in your end last night as well for the town hall. So thank you. Very quickly, I wanted to proceed to Planning. And I just wanted to get these questions on the record. I was reviewing your budget detail, and I know you think I'm going to tangle title, but I'm not going there today, Mark. Okay? I'm not going there today. I'm going to start with the thank yous, okay? Angela, let's start with those thank yous again. So thank you, Jessie Lawrence, Mark Dodds, Angela Brooks, Ami Patel, Michelle, and the entire team. We appreciate each of you. So I wanted to know what your vacancy rate is, how many positions you have budgeted versus filled, and your vacancy rate allowance. And in -- and I've been asking every department that, okay? And in addition to that, I need you to walk me through this, because I was going through your budget detail, and section 56 in particular. And I need you all to tell me who is who for these positions and what's being eliminated or replaced, or if it's just a title change. Section 56, , Department of Planning and Development Executive Administration -- and this is not a -- this is just a true question of who is who and what is what. Deputy mayor under executive administration, who is that?
The Deputy Mayor under the executive administration will probably be me.
Received. Okay. So -- okay, I see what's happening here. So is it that the title deputy mayor is now going to the title director? Is it -- is it title changes that are happening? I don't understand.
I can get in the weeds for you on -- in form of writing, but what I do know is that my predecessor had the same title as me, but the designation was deputy mayor.
Walk me through, because I -- okay. I -- okay. I receive what's happening here. So the director role is technically the former deputy mayor role, and then it's -- right? Because I see an increase and a decrease here. So the new title technically for director is director? And that would be you?
Okay. Hold on. Let me just write this down. And first deputy director, which was formerly the first deputy commissioner, who is that individual?
That's John Mondlak. Okay. Hold on one second. Okay. And who is the deputy director?
We have several. That would include Mark Dodds -- I mean, I don't know which line you're looking at specifically, but there's Mark Dodds, who is deputy director of house -- DHCD. Emily Persico is the deputy director for Development Services.
No, no, no, because in the -- under this tab, this -- I'm on -- I'm on section 56, , schedule 100. This is under general fund, so it's not a grant funded position. It's only one deputy director budgeted here.
So I'm sorry, Councilmember, Kathleen just tapped me. That's Kathleen, our deputy director for Executive Administration and Strategic Initiatives.
Okay. And tell me your name again, I'm sorry.
Kathleen Grady, deputy director for Strategic Initiatives and Executive Administration.
Okay. Hold on one second. All right. And then you have a deputy chief information officer?
Okay. And then you have executive administrative assistant?
Okay. And then you have transfer from other funds $125,000. It does not say a title or who or what that is?
That is the transfer between -- it's a labor allocation that assists in the funding of our executive admin team is related to some -- our deputy director for communications.
Okay. So is the comms, deputy director of comms?
It's -- she's reflected in a different budget line, but it is a transfer of funds between CDBG and our general fund.
Received. Okay. So you're -- so you're taking it from grants funds and putting it into the general fund?
We can provide more explicit detail in writing. It's a -- we have to allocate our time and effort to the grant. And then when other time and effort is outside of the CDBG eligible, we then transfer it to general fund.
Received. Okay. I received that based on the work that has to be done with the grant programs. So let me ask this question, where is Angela reflected here?
Okay. So one of the new or the -- one of the 51 plus new positions?
I believe that's the mayor's office number, but yes, she will be reflected under that budget.
Okay. So you're not here. Okay. I'm only asking because when you initially look at this page, one through seven, those lines, it is -- that's considerable. I'm just going to leave it at that. I'm not going to put the numbers on the record out of respect for all of you sitting here. But when you're looking at it, it is considerable. For one, you know, executive administration. But I see what you're saying is that there's an increase and a decrease in the first four, so that's technically the two. And then it's in addition of the one. And then the other is a transfer from grants to class 100, correct? Okay. All right. Thank you very much for that explanation. I just -- reading the detail -- when you read the detail, it is -- sometime you have to get an explainer about exactly how you all are moving the money, okay? All right. I appreciate the explanation. Thank you.
Majority Leader, you good? I just got here, you are all right?
All right. We're officially in the second-round. Chair of Neighborhood Services and the Homeless, Councilmember, Jamie Gauthier.
Thank you so much, Council President. This is also for Planning and Development. Now that the AMI eligibility levels have been increased for basic systems repair and adaptive modifications, can you explain to us operationally how staff are tracking new applications that come in to make sure that homeowners at 60 percent AMI or below are receiving 90 percent of the funding? We spent a lot of time and a lot of debate on that during the H.O.M.E spending plan process, and I just want to make sure that we're actually putting those systems in place?
So I'll let Dave Thomas speak to that, but I just want to get on the record and make -- for point of clarity that that was expanded, but only dedicated to 10 percent of the funds for funding. So again, we can't spend anything beyond 10 percent of annual funds for anything other -- outside -- beyond the current income limit right now.
Ten percent of funding for BSRP and AMP, I believe, can only be spent above 60 percent of AMI for applicants at or above 60 -- above 60 percent of AMI.
Yes. We're saying the same thing kind of flipped. I'm saying that 90 percent has to go to 60 percent AMI or below. And yes, you are saying that the flip side of that is 10 percent.
How are we tracking that, however way you look at it?
Thank you, Councilwoman. David Thomas, president, CEO. I'm tracking it on a weekly basis right now. I've segregated the money because I need to make sure that I have the right buckets for the right folks. I currently have 60 applications for people 60 percent and above, at the moment, and that's as of March 1st. So I'm not -- I don't have a large number of folks applying. So I'll be monitoring it on a monthly basis with my staff, as I do with everything. And as I get closer, I will raise the red flag and let you know that I'm having some challenges meeting some of these objectives. But I'm not there yet.
Okay. I do think it behooves us to have these processes on paper. I know you all are going to follow up with --
-- the sort of H.O.M.E. spending by program. What sources beyond H.O.M.E, like the Housing Trust Fund and CDBG, are funding each program in total so that we have a sense of how much we really need to, you know, put in this budget. And we do need that operation plan from, like, a process perspective, how we're getting money on the street, but also, like, from a staffing perspective, we need to understand what's going to change. And so I would add to that information request a documented process around how we're tracking to ensure that we meet the amendments that Council put forward. And the -- I have one more question, my last question. Now that monies through the mixed income housing density program are going straight to the Housing Trust Fund, as opposed to just going to the general fund, and that's thanks to a charter change effort that I led with the support of my colleagues. Now that we have, you know, that in place, can you let us know how much money is in the FY-27 Housing Trust Fund from the density bonus payment specifically, and which council districts the money will be spent in?
So we are tracking that in a couple of different places. One, I believe DHCD can speak to that, but also our director of Development Services can speak to the trajectory of the housing bonus.
Mark Dodds as well. Mark can start off with the rundown for HDF.
Sure. In total, the estimates we got from the city's Department of Finance or Office of Finance is a slight reduction, I believe, in recording fee and a slight increase in general funds from the -- from the two different sub funds. And they -- it's pretty much a wash. It's almost exactly the same level in FY-27.
Okay. And what districts will that -- you know, the part of the charter change was we will allocate like the last year's funding for the density bonus program straight to the housing trust fund. The other change that we did through an ordinance was that those monies will be allocated to the council districts where they were generated. Do we have a sense of that?
I think we would have to run some analyses to figure out exactly where the funding is going, yeah.
Okay. I would request maybe a meeting with you guys offline. As we know, the legislative part is sort of the first part and then the next part is implementation. And so I really would want to see how we're tracking that, and staying on top of it.
And what I can say -- so we just released a biannual Housing Trust Fund report. It doesn't -- you know, it's -- there -- it's geographic based in the sense that there are maps in the report to show where we're investing certain services. We also have figures through FY -- the first two quarters of FY-26. So we'll be able to let you know where we're investing currently, and then that will help us to project where we're going, going forward.
Sure. Yeah. Good afternoon. Emily Persico, deputy director for Development Services. We do track spending and kind of receive -- payments received under the Mixed-Income Housing Bonus Program. In fiscal year 26, we received two payments totaling $285,000. Just about -- we've been seeing fewer payments under the mixed income housing program since that change in the cost of the -- of the payment in lieu -- program back in 2021.
So that number has been going down. We are working right now on our mixed income housing report which we hope to be getting out in the coming months. And we're happy to provide, kind of, that trajectory of this funding that we have been receiving through that program.
Thank you. Look forward to continuing working with you all on these initiatives.
Thank you. Second round officially. Councilmember Dr. Anthony Phillips, then Councilmember Rue Landau, then Squilla.
Thank you, Council President. You know, I too have been analyzing this operating budget around the Executive Administration, which is why, you know, this whole responsive government idea that I've been talking about is really, really essential for me. There's no reason why the city of Philadelphia, we should not have service level agreements and a clear understanding for neighbors and to be able to provide a resident with a timeline from application of service, start, to the delivery of the progress. And what I -- I've been asking for this since last budget, and I was hoping that you all would have it together by now, and it's still not together. And I'm looking at -- we have all of these chiefs, essentially, who are being well, well funded by city taxpayer funds, and there should -- you should be working day and night to make sure residents have a clear understanding of a timeline on when they're going to get their service. I just can't accept that. That's important for my support, you know. So I just want to ask again, what should a resident expect in terms of timeline from application to service delivery under H.O.M.E. programs?
Well, again, I think President Thomas spoke to what PHDC is committed to at the moment. And looking at how he can pivot for purposes of getting services out the door quicker. I do think that the consistent funding stream for services will play a big role in consistently being able to roll that out. But again, we are taking the stance of making sure that we can be as transparent in our processes as possible. We are taking that deeper dive on the Land Bank side, on the application side. As that begins to map out on the customer -- CRM perspective, we'll be able to mirror that in a way however possible with PHDC's attempt to make that process a little bit faster. But I do think that we are, you know -- you know, I think we remain committed to making sure that we stay in touch with PHDC's applicants in terms of their services. But --
If it's six to nine months, what I'm asking, which I was trying to ask from him, is that could he provide us with -- residents should know in month one, this is what's happening in month two, this is happening in month three. There should be a sense of, if it's going to be six to nine months, what is transpiring, as opposed to just wait six to nine months. They should have a clear understanding of what all the processes are going to -- how they're being reviewed, how they're being -- it's just transparency, right? We have a chief information officer, what is the role of the chief information officer?
She is our chief information officer for our department. She's --
So that's their role. That person should be solely dedicated to making sure that residents are getting this information in real time, similar to when they're ordering Amazon and DoorDash. And I talk to Melissa Scott all the time about this. I was like, I don't understand why. And she -- you know, her hands are tied in some ways, but why does every department have, like, an information technology person dedicated to this work, and then they're not delivering in a way that they should be when it comes to interfacing with residents?
I just want to be clear about the steps that we have taken toward that, which is One Front Door. It's being able to consolidate, you know, one website that gives people the opportunity to know what they qualify for. So that does ease operations, or begin to ease operations, for us to be able to, you know, compartmentalize and collate what people want is -- or what people -- what services certain people or certain constituencies are entitled to. But we recognize that, you know, we've committed to getting you this one pager that's going to itemize what the steps are in that six to nine-month process. We are obviously committed to -
We want to get to that six and not to the nine. But we're definitely, you know, we're committed to this one pager. If it could be more than one page. I think we alluded to you, we want to get you that information.
Do you think you can give me a timeline on where we can get the multiple pager, one pager, whatever. I just want to walk to neighborhoods and say, this city has an efficient process with this.
I don't want to have to call you Jessie. Like last night, there was a neighbor who was saying that they need home services. I want to be able to say to you, Hey, ma'am, if you apply by this date, here's the process. Here is how you all are going to get updated. And I'm not getting that. I can't guarantee that from her. And I'm looking at this -- the Executive Administration's salaries. I mean, you guys are doing well, you know, for the most part. And I feel like there's no reason why this shouldn't be the most, most, most, most, most, most important thing out of all the things, like, being clear with people and being fair, because a Councilmember shouldn't have to call and ask to jump a line because there's -- we're inefficient, you know what I mean? Like, I just -- you're not proving to me again, Jessie and I -- and I respect you. I do. But I just -- I just want us to do -- I just want you to prove me -- prove to me, that you can -- you can -- that you can be -- you can provide residents with that clarity, you know, that's all.
I'm just going to jump in and let you know, one of the technological assessments that we're, or improvements we're working on as part of H.O.M.E. is having a dashboard where you will have application tracking, similar to what you're referencing from some of the other kind of companies that do that. I don't have a timeline on that, but we are constantly working on that, as well as an app that will allow all of that. So I believe the app is to debut in the fall. So OIT is working with us on that. So it is coming. I know it's probably not in the timeline you want, but there's a lot of nuanced things that go with the applications, and we want to make sure it's functioning, and we're not just rolling out with something just to roll it out. So --
-- we are working on having an app-based website and app that can sync those in a better way.
Thank you. I appreciate it. But that -- but that makes me feel like, until everything is ready, you shouldn't be taking -- you shouldn't be taking new applications, you know what I mean? Like, it's like -- it -- you're creating a wait list and a process. You're going to be taking applications, causing confusion. I don't know. I just -- it's not ready yet. And I feel like you have to have this ready to go in.
Well, the app and the readiness of the dashboard isn't ready, but the programs are implemented and they are flowing. So two different kinds of tracks.
Yeah. The programs are ready, but I'm saying the transparency of the -- is that -- is that ready? Like the transparency --
The transparency of the process, because we are going to -- we are producing on Philly STAT 360 where we at on completions, but you want more transparency from application through actual work being done.
That is what we're working on. So it is coming and the app for sure is scheduled to be done by the end of Q -- calendar year Q3.
Okay. All right. Thank you. And I just wanted to, just for the record. I want to thank the Commerce Department for working for our district, Salim Wilson, and Karen Fegely. Thank you so much. I -- you know, I trust the fact that, you know, when we provide questions, that you all will always respond, so we appreciate. No further questions, Council President.
Okay. Great. Thank you again. One last quick housing question, and I -- sorry if this was already asked and answered, but one of the conversations we were having about the H.O.M.E bond was ensuring that these resources were reserved in part for low-income households, even as the eligibility for these programs were expanded to moderate- income households as a result of the H.O.M.E funds. Of the funds dispersed last year, how many were for households under 30 percent, and how many under 80 percent of AMI?
I believe we do have that information for you, Councilmember. Mark is going to come up here to --
Good afternoon, Mark Dodds, deputy director of DHCD. So of the -- of the programs that we have available through Q2 --
60 -- about two thirds went to zero to 30 percent AMI. And about percent went to 14 30 to 50 percent AMI. 15
Looks -- 13 percent, 30 -- or 50 to 80 percent AMI and then a small portion, it looks like percent or maybe percent for -- from 80 percent AMI and above.
Thank you very much for that. Ready to move to Commerce. I don't want to get cut off. Commerce, first follow-up question on -- you talked a lot about what you did for the businesses that were faced with the BIRT tax for the first time this year, but what we never got was how many businesses do you believe were affected; total number of businesses affected? You told us the businesses that you reached out to and who have responded.
But -- so out of 50,000 businesses, you told us many things, but it seems like you've touched about 4,000.
Yeah, I actually -- I have the updated. The number -- our number is 12,395 through the first three quarters. So -- and I can get you the breakdown to show how I kind of get those.
But those are businesses that you've reached out to offer just free tax prep or?
They've gotten an assistance in some way, whether it's right, one-on-one assistance or -- and/or funding. And you know, we did have a -- we did have a slow start as we were staffing up. We had to RFP some new partners, we had to put some technology in place. So we feel like those numbers are even picking up at this point. But --
These businesses, we've heard from so many of them. They are hurting so badly. And I just, you know, things like free tax prep just doesn't do it for them. It's just -- we've only touched a fraction of them. And then they're hurting really, really badly from the changes. I wanted to ask some outdoor dining, and I also want to touch on the ports real quick. So with outdoor dining, thank you so much for all of the help that you've given us in the expansion of outdoor dining. And you said we're going to get the outdoor dining guidebook, make sure it's up to date.
How are we doing with the outdoor dining book? The guidebook?
Good. It is -- it's -- the draft is in place. It's going to create -- the encouragement is right. We want people to look not just at streeteries, but at sidewalk cafes, at all the different types of outdoor dining. And again, I thank you for your leadership and in creating the sidewalk cafe extensions or for -- and as well as, you know, more areas that don't need variances for -- in order to do sidewalk cafes. So the book is coming along. I don't -- I'm not sure where we can get you a draft, or we'll definitely share it soon. We're doing the book to encourage outdoor dining -- or to encourage sidewalk cafes. And then we're also doing, as you know, the -- we're partnering with Streets and MDO, and we have a experienced design-build firm working on a kit of parts right now that will help with both streeteries and sidewalk cafes.
Great. And can we -- can we -- can you proactively get that to BIDs and other business partners? So we proactively are sending this out to the restaurant community and all of our key partners so that they don't have to come to you?
Yes. Yes, absolutely. We'll rely on all our partners for that.
So a couple quick questions about the ports, which I've introduced a resolution. We're going to have a hearing just to see how we're doing down at the ports. Can we increase the work that we're doing? I took a tour with the maritime pilots, and it was really -- very eye-opening to see what's happening down there, but I saw so much potential of what we could do. I think that ports are such an important asset, and what is currently being done to modernize our ports? And also, would love to know -- that's a good start, and I'm going to come up with a second one. Thank you. What do we -- what is the city doing to modernize our ports right now? And is Commerce invested and involved in this?
We are not directly involved. I mean, we partner with the ports, as they're a huge part of our, you know, economic growth. And we are -- so we sort of work side by side, but we are not directly involved in their -- in -- yeah, in their upgrades and activities.
What -- I know that PhilaPort is a partner on -- it's on your website. It says that you can connect local businesses to international businesses, and I think for the -- us is this is important for everything from, like, groceries to, you know, laptops to get goods off of the ports. It's just a --
Yeah, I mean, we are -- we are uniquely positioned, like, literally geographically positioned right within a day's drive of 40 percent of the U.S. population. The Philadelphia ports just -- we -- are our main destination for food and for other goods. And then we're also seeing all this growth with all the other industries along, sort of, all the maritime industries. And so I think there is a lot of opportunity there. And we are -- we are convening, we are, you know, sort of facilitating things to ensure that that growth continues.
Will you -- I believe our hearing will be in the fall. Will you come to our hearing? I really think --
-- this is a moment. The things that we need in Philadelphia are coming off of ships in the port, and I think it's such a great opportunity for Commerce.
And there is a lot -- you're right, that there's a lot of spin off businesses that happen because we have the ports here as well as all of the manufacturing that's related, yeah.
Thank you. Thank you very much, Councilmember Landau. Thank you for your work on -- we're all so excited that cruising has returned.
I'm so excited. And thank you so much to the longshoreman.
Councilmember Gilmore-Richardson, can I just circle back to a question Councilmember Landau asked earlier --
Sure. Very briefly as we have a few members in the crew. Okay. Thank you.
It is very quickly, and it was about your hotel tax question you asked in the first round. And the short answer is just simply that while the home dollars that we allocated for homeless prevention were specifically for prevention dollars, not necessarily operational costs. So the taxes was really to support the thousand bed shelter initiative. We don't generally borrow funds to pay for operating costs and things like maintenance and staffing. So that's kind of the distinction there. So we do -- we will be working with the Office of Homeless Services around some of the other things, but that's the specific delineation of why we're not using home bonds for some of those specific costs that the hotel tax will be paying for.
Thank you. Thank you very much. The Chair now recognizes Councilmember Bass.
Thank you very much, Madam Chair. So I just had a quick question for planning retaining walls.
When are we getting them done? So -- and I say that because maybe you missed it. There was an article in the Inquirer on Sunday, your name wasn't in it, I don't think.
My name was, but you're responsible. So when are we going to get some movement on some of these retaining walls?
So my understanding is that the last $50 million in NPI is for infrastructure and those retaining walls. I don't know the status of the conversation, specifically around that one. I do know there have been some -- and I'm talking to you as if you don't know this, but, like, there are some complexities specifically with that wall. And I also recognize that that article came out a week before you and I sat next to each other to have the opportunity to talk about it. I would love to dive in deeper with you about that specific wall. But my understanding is that we are committed -- or NPI's last $50 million has been committed to addressing the current roster in queue of retaining walls.
Okay. I appreciate that. Thank you very much. But we've been talking about this wall for years now. The same, same wall. It's only gotten worse. To be honest, I don't want to talk about it anymore. You know, with the administration, I just want to go ahead and get it done. Because we have -- you know, the administration has, I won't say we, the administration has said that they were going to tackle this project, that this was going to get done. It's been years. It's a massive project, I understand that, but it has to be done. It just has to be done.
I think there -- we recognize the commitment, and we're still committed to it. I also know that there've just been some curve balls, if you will, that really have --
There have been some curve balls, but on the -- looking at the other side of it, you know, people are losing the access to homeowner's insurance. People can't use the rear of their homes. You know, like, it's also a tight block. You know, you can't -- people can't park like they have, you know, driveways and all. They can't use any of that. And so we've really diminished what the value of their house is -- their homes are because we haven't done or addressed this wall. Years ago, the city came out and did some preliminary work and went away and never came back. And that was before I was in Council. So that's how long this story is. You know, I would just like a resolution to this, and the resolution being that the wall is fixed, that we have a date for it. We just cannot allow this to continue on. And God forbid if somebody gets hurt, if something begins to crumble, it's very unsteady. And we all know this. This is information that the administration has. We've had engineer after engineer, after engineer. And so the project has to be completed. So, David, I know -- I'm sorry?
I don't know that I have that one, but I certainly can put eyes on it and get back to you in terms of what can be done. I tried to send an engineer out recently for your other wall, Janice Street, I believe it is.
But I can't get to -- I can't -- he can't access the area to assess. So if you can help me get that area cleared --
And then I can give you some answers on that wall and I'll work on your Glen Echo wall.
Okay. We will -- it has to be done sooner rather than later. It's been delay after delay after delay. It cannot wait really a second longer. It has to be done. Because if something happens to someone or someone's property, ultimately the City of Philadelphia bears the brunt of that responsibility because we know that it's in really bad shape. So thank you very much.
Thank you. Thank you so much Councilwoman Bass and we support your efforts relative to the retaining wall. We have very many as well in the 4th, so we thank you.
Thank you. I appreciate that. And I hope that it's picked up by the press that ran the first article in terms of saying that I was the responsible party for preparing this retaining wall. So thank you.
Received, and duly noted. Thank you. Thank you very much. The Chair now recognizes Councilmember O'Rourke.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I'm sorry, I failed to ask a question earlier that I meant to raise. I know that there had at one point been a partnership that had been formulating between the Building Trades and, I think, PHA to acquire Brith Sholom. And I just wanted to kind of get an update on the status of that particular project and how things are coming along with that.
I Believe we're navigating through the MOU. John Mondlak has been managing that process specifically with PHC -- PHA, excuse me. John, can give you the latest update on that.
Thank you, Councilman. John Mondlak, deputy in Planning and Development. We are still continuing to work with PHA. The Trades have offered to lend money to do the -- probably the first mortgage. I'm not a 100 percent sure the position, but I believe it's critical money that they need. We're working through the terms of that agreement. And in addition to that, we also have $8 million of our money to put into that deal to make sure that it happens. And so, as soon as we reach agreement on the terms, we, the City, would be guaranteeing that loan, which is enticing the Trades to do it at a very reasonable rate that allows it to be affordable for PHA to make the project work. I believe they have a GM -- a guaranteed maximum price contract, and it's just a matter of working out the financing.
Got it. So it's -- this is still a deal in the works; this is not a thing that was set?
I see. Okay. Understood. You get the sense that it will happen, it's going to come to pass, or, you know, any -- barring any crazy things taking place, you feel like that will be something that will be completed?
Yeah. Assuming that markets don't go off the rails, the -- this is just a matter of reaching an agreement on terms.
Thank you. Thank you, Councilmember O'Rourke. And to your question, you know that Brith Sholom is in my ward, in the 52nd Ward. And so I wanted to put on the record and thank PHA for answering the call relative to some of the concerns of the neighbors that live in the adjacent property regarding ensuring that that building stays secure, particularly in the rear. So in the front -- you know, you can see that it's all boarded up in the front, but in the rear, we had folks breaking in there. I know we had one unfortunate incident relative to someone passing away, but even after that, we had individuals entering the rear of the property. And so I happened to be out on a Sunday morning walking over there, and I was stopped by two residents in the housing complex, which is directly next door. And they spoke to me about that issue. And so I want to uplift and appreciate PHA for responding to that call and for sending their security officers to the site to ensure that the building was secure. And I just wanted to repeat what you were saying and help me. Did I understand this correctly, the city is guaranteeing the loan?
Okay. So the city guarantees the loan. So then I guess the terms; will Council approve those terms? Will everything come back to us for a review?
I honestly don't know if that guarantee comes back to city council, but we could find out.
-- and just let us know. Okay. I would be interested to find out. Are there --
Yeah. And I know if Councilmember Jones were here, he would say the same thing on behalf of the entire 4th Council District. Now, is this included in the H.O.M.E. dollars?
This is an investment from the Trades, the Trades pension -- pensions for the Trades community.
But meaning -- but we're guaranteeing the loan on the city side? That's what I'm talking about.
Yeah. The guarantee of the loan, if all goes well, it doesn't cost us anything. So we're essentially putting our credit into that loan. And so the goal is not to spend a penny on that guarantee. It's a risk that the Finance Department will have to manage, but it's not a cash infusion.
One, you know, I'm Chair of Finance, but also, two, we just did our line of credit that we probably won't use, right? But we had to still approve it through Council. So that's why I'm asking that question. It still had to come through Council; we still had to have a hearing. It was, you know, brought before the full Council for consideration, and we approved it. The chances of us utilizing the line of credit is very slim; I'm talking about the DNC line of credit. But the approval still had to come through Council. So that is why I'm asking, particularly, because this is an unprecedented financing package relative to a housing complex in the city. So typically, that would come back to us. So I just need you all to work with Finance and with Law to help us understand how that process will work. Okay?
All right. Thank you very much. The Chair now recognizes Councilmember Gauthier. Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't even see that you were going. I'm like, I know she came back. Okay. We'll give Councilmember Gauthier an opportunity to return. Councilmember Jones. Councilmember Jones, do you have any questions?
And you were talking about Brith Sholom, which is one of my favorite most important examples of what should not happen and what should happen. And you can -- two things can be true at the same time. What should not happen is that most of -- a lot of the properties now are underwater. They have exceeded their agreements on their rents. Their agreements with the federal government are coming to a closure. The values of the property went up. They have not invested in them, and they're ready to transition them and take whatever profits they can out of it. We, as a city, are going to see more of this, and I see it in the 3rd. I see it in the 4th. Germantown is going to be ripe for that because of the magnificent structures. And I don't know what our plan is. Okay.
I guess, I missed the actual question. Is it that you're just trying to figure out what the plan for preserving opportunities like this going forward?
No. 24 My plan is preventing -- so what saved Brith Sholom was PHA and $23 million. They don't have that to continuously build out. So we have to develop, either at the federal level or at the local level, some type of fund that rescues properties like that. Because at the end of the day what you always point out to us is that we can either preserve or we create a new group of homeless that we have to support anyway. So six in one hand and half dozen in the other, out of one pocket to another. We need to jump in front of this and create a fund and, kind of, identify properties that fit that category. At Brith Sholom, they took a -- a $35 19 million equity loan out and never 20 put any investments in --
Excuse me, Councilmember Jones, the Chair now recognizes Councilmember Gauthier for a point of information.
Quick point of information. You're absolutely right. We have to get ahead of this. We already have the tools in place; many of them, and we just have to move. So after this situation with the University City Townhomes, I created a law that not only says that owners wanting to opt out of their affordability contracts have to wait a year before they put it on the market. It also gives the city, affordable housing companies, and tenant groups first right of refusal. We came behind that with H.O.M.E, and we put $50 million, almost, into an acquisition fund, which can be used to purchase these properties, right? Or to help other responsible owners to purchase these properties. And in return for our loan money, they have to keep these properties affordable, I think, for, like, 42 years or something. So I just wanted to point out that we have a lot of tools in place. $50 million is not enough because this is a big problem, but it's a good amount for year one. The other thing that we developed, that also came out of that same law, is a directory. So we now are putting in place -- I think it's about to go live, a directory of every multifamily low-income unit funded with LIHTC or other sort of expiring funds. And we know when they're going to expire. We know where they are in the city. We have a lot of tools at our disposal. If we want to attack this problem, we just have to decide to use them, right?
So I appreciate the law that you created, and it is at least a vessel that we can put resources in. However, $53 million is half of -- is one -- one half of that went to Brith Sholom. The other half will go to another identifiable spot in my district. And that fund will be, just like a lot of other funds; exhausted. So We have to have, just like with the school district, a predictable funding plan. It cannot just be one-time rescue dollars. We will run out of that quickly. So what is the plan that we can develop so that we have a recurring, revolving amount of money? Whether it is to take that loan program and to actually have it come into a refundable fund that can be replenished and then reloaned. We have to figure that plan out. And right now, we are -- we are creating donut tires that will only get us to the next gas station.
So, yeah. And just to kind of -- I think there are two different things being talked about here. Councilmember is actually -- absolutely right, there is almost $50 million set aside for preserving affordable opportunities that might be coming out of compliance along those lines. But what also I think you're talking about is a little bit more about the kind of bad actor tracking and being preventative about that. And John can talk about that, how that has been kind of coordinating with development services.
Yeah. And actually, credit to Councilmember O'Rourke, who brought it up earlier, prior to you arriving. It's a very serious problem, and it's a very difficult problem to solve. And it's not a Philadelphia problem; it's a nationwide problem. And the reason it's a problem is because there are laws that allow people to buy property. And so you can't stop them. Everybody would love to just stop them. The President of the United States is talking about a plan to do that. Now, we'll see if anything ever comes of that, but it's recognized as a national problem. But you can't stop them from buying. Then the bad action is what you have to try to stop. And so what we are trying to do -- there's a number of departments that are coordinating an effort. Philly Stat 360 is probably the focus of it, to try to collect as much data as you can. Because generally, Brith Sholom is a little bit of a unique situation where it was a out-of-town developer. I don't know -- I don't know that they bought very many properties, but they did exactly what you said; they -- they overextended, borrowed money, didn't -- collected rents, put nothing back, didn't pay the mortgage back, didn't do repairs, didn't do anything. They just kept all the cash. It was criminal. They went to jail. I don't know if they went to jail for that particular property, but I think they went to jail for a different property where they did the same exact thing. So the situation where it's a coordinated -- what -- the goal for these investors is to buy up and corner the market in an area. If they just bought uniformly across the city, they would not be able to exert market forces. They would just be one other landlord, and they would collect whatever the market rents is. But when they cluster and they buy in an area, now they create a monopoly; an illegal monopoly. But it's really hard to prove because they use different names. And you have to really pierce the corporate shell and figure out who they are. And we are using AI; we're using as much technology as we can to try to get to that. But the answer is, it's a little bit of everything. It's -- it's the money to fix the problem, but it's also the enforcement before it gets to that point.
Now, that is exactly -- so Member Gauthier did a good thing by creating the vessel that needs to go into it is L&I, that we should have known that Brith Sholom was on the brink well before the time it did. So when they stop putting in fire suppression systems, when they stop having elevators that worked, that should have set off a flag that we need to watch this building, and that is in distress. And so there are things that we should have as indicators that we know that we're going to pay attention to these future distressed properties. So I like what my colleague did. I want some of that, but also the end, what we need to do is have a strategy that says L&I is involved in this. Because what they really wanted to do, which was diabolical, was not make the repairs and make us make them evacuate that property. That would have solved their problem. They would have been -- those 300 people would have been our problem, your problem, homeless shelter problem. So we got to come up with a game plan that doesn't enrich them and doesn't impoverish us.
Thank you. And thank you very much for your great work, Councilmember Jones. Not just on Brith Sholom, but going all the way back to The Dane, which is the new name --
The chair will now recognize Councilmember Gauthier for the last three minutes of this hearing. Thank you.
Thank you, Madam Chair. The remainder of my questions are for Commerce. Director Fegely, I know that you know, because I've known you since I started out in community development when I was 25, right? At least. I know that you know how critical community development corporations are. And I was really excited that we were able to, last budget year, secure $3.5 million to support those organizations with operating support. And so my question for you is, is that operating support funding for our community development corporations that we secured last budget in your budget for FY-27? And why or why not?
Thank you. The additional funding you secured last year is not in this year's budget. That was a one-time budget addition in FY-26. As you know, we do have numerous other programs that support the operations of CDCs as our -- as our partners. We -- we very much rely on them to help us get the work done, yes.
I look forward to continuing to work with you guys. I also have a bill 9 that I'm hoping to move through Finance. This was -- we took the one-year sort of appropriation. We're grateful for it, but we all know that our CDCs need more support than they're currently able to get, and that philanthropic funding has dried up in this area. So I look forward to continuing to work together.
And then, lastly, we are seeing increased demand for multiple Commerce programs, as well as existing dollars just not getting to small business owners as much as they used to. So my questions are, how much funding would Commerce need to fully fund all eligible applications for the Neighborhood Economic Development Program and the Targeted Corridor Management Program? And will the city commit to increasing the per-project allowance for storefront improvement grants to small business owners from $15,000 to $30,000 per project? Because we all know inflation, construction costs have gone up significantly, while those program allocations have not.
Okay. I'll start backwards because I forgot your first question already.
-- all eligible applications for neighborhood economic development and the targeted corridor --
And you were getting to -- yeah, and I did just want to -- I'm glad Yvonne is joining, but give some context. I mean, you're absolutely right. I mean, it's a really challenging time for our neighborhood groups, as well as for small businesses. And that is why, like, as far as the small business programs go, that's why this has been super important to have these jumpstart dollars this year, because there are lots of challenges on the -- you know, with federal support. SCORE has gone away. The SBDCs are struggling. Our CDFIs are struggling. And then the small businesses are struggling because of tariffs and inflation and immigration enforcement and all of those things. So to Jumpstart programs, we are ready to, like -- we're really hitting the ground running, and we'll be doling out those dollars. But you're talking about dollars for the community organizations through corridor management, Neighborhood Economic Development Programs, which are also important. And the costs, as you said, are also going up. We have increased corridor management this year using some jumpstart dollars because we rely so much on those corridor managers to help serve the small business community. I want to let Yvonne talk about thank you NED grants again.
Thank you so much for your work with us. And thank you for the question. We just finished our NED RFPs, and we had requests that totaled $11 million.
And we have about $3.3 million, as I said earlier. Which is what we can do. So I hope that answers the question for that. We did not have an RFP for the TCMP right now, and so I cannot tell you who else is on the radar. We do have another half a million dollars that we kind of use also as general operating dollars that mirrors the tax credit program. And we do have the tax credit program that also supports the CDCs and their work.
Thank you. Quickly, would you consider going from 15 to 30,000 for neighborhood storefront improvement?
I was going to say we are - we are talking about it, but I heard earlier that's not a good answer, so I'm just going to say yes.
I love that answer, but I will follow up. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you. Thank you very much, Councilmember Gauthier, and thank you to our Planning and Development and Commerce teams for your work this morning and throughout the year. This committee will stand in recess until 2:30 p.m. Have a great day. (Recess.)
Good afternoon. Councilmembers: Good afternoon.
Just state your name for the record and please begin your testimony.
Sure. Good afternoon, Council President Johnson and members of City Council. , and I'm the chief assessment officer for the Office of Property Assessment. Joining me today here at the desk is Monica Williams, our deputy chief assessment officer. Also in attendance is chief deputy city solicitor, Drew Aldinger, as well as members of OPA's senior staff. I'm pleased to provide testimony for the Office of Property Assessment's Fiscal Year 2027 operating budget. For Tax Year 2027, OPA has completed a revaluation of the entire city. OPA expects to mail the notices of proposed valuation and publish the values online next month. As part of the 2027 revaluation process, OPA will retain an outside firm to evaluate how the Tax Year '27 revaluation of properties in Philadelphia measures against industry standards for key mass appraisal statistics. Specifically, OPA will be evaluated using the coefficient of dispersion, or COD, which measures the uniformity of assessments; the price-related differential, or PRD, which measures equity between high and low-valued properties; and the median ratio, which measures how closely assessments compare to sale prices. In addition to the OPA ratio study that I just mentioned, the Office of the Director of Finance will retain an external firm to conduct an independent, comprehensive evaluation of OPA's mass appraisal practices, procedures, and overall operations. The evaluation will include an analysis to assess whether modifications to the current valuation model could reduce disparate impacts without compromising accuracy or equity. For the last revaluation, which was conducted in Tax Year 2025, OPA also retained an external consulting firm to conduct a ratio study. That report on the Tax Year '25 revaluation of properties in the city found that OPA continues to meet industry standards for each of the three previously mentioned mass appraisal statistics and that the performance improved across each of these metrics compared to the Tax Year '23 revaluation. Additionally, for Tax Year '27 -- I'm sorry, for Fiscal Year '27, OPA will focus on addressing the first-level reviews that result from the reevaluation as efficiently and accurately as possible. Additionally, OPA will continue implementing recommendations from the 2022 International Association of Assessing Officers audit and continue working towards achieving the IAAO's Certificate of Excellence in Assessment Administration. In April of 2024, Mayor Parker announced a partnership with the OPA, Community Legal Services, and the Reinvestment Fund to create the Philadelphia Residential Property Assessment Task Force. The task force, which also includes subject matter experts and representatives from City Council, convened monthly meetings to identify best practices, develop recommendations, and create implementation frameworks. A report containing these recommendations is currently being finalized. OPA will continue to collaborate with CLS and the Reinvestment Fund to lead Mayor Parker's Philadelphia Residential Property Assessment Task Force and to implement OPA-related recommendations from that report. OPA is committed to implementing the recommendations from the task force report, which include regular reassessments; expanding and improving specific property-level data, such as property condition; and enhancing transparency, as well as increased public outreach and education regarding the assessment process. For Fiscal Year '27, OPA's budget includes funding to implement customer relations management software, which will streamline the public's ability to electronically obtain and submit OPA documentation; increased funding for the reassessment service call center, which handles inquiries related to reassessments, as well as calls for real estate tax relief programs and exemptions; and also additional funding for mailing services, all of which strengthen the public outreach and enhance customer experience.
For Fiscal Year '27, OPA will continue to maintain staffing levels in accordance with industry recommendations and fill vacancies for evaluators and clerical staff with qualified applicants at both the entry and experienced levels as needed and will work to fill the current and pending vacancies in senior staff positions caused by attrition in the department. As part of this effort, OPA will continue to work with the Office of Human Resources to ensure a large and diverse candidate pool for evaluation positions and will work with OHR on recruitment for specialized positions. OPA will continue to offer training and professional development opportunities for employees to ensure that the department can develop future leaders in our industry. And finally, during Fiscal Year '27, OPA will continue to collaborate with several other large jurisdictions across the United States in requesting access to data contained in the federal government's Uniform Appraisal Database. S. homes that were appraised for mortgages. Currently, most of this data is inaccessible to assessment offices. Access to this data would allow the OPA to verify existing data and potentially add additional data points that OPA does not have direct access to, such as whether a basement has been finished. The remainder of my testimony has been submitted for the record. I thank you for the opportunity to testify before this body, and I'm here to answer any questions that you may have.
Thank you very much. Thank you for your testimony. Just brief question before I turn it over to my members. You're still interim director? Are we going to close it out and just make you the guy? Because this started since I first became Council President, which was two years ago. Any update from the administration? My good friend Rob Dubow, so we can make this thing official.
Good to see you. I think we did send over the nomination probably two years ago; nothing happened, and we would be happy to send it again.
Okay. All right. So there is still a conversation that needs to be had with members of Council to close it out?
Okay. All right. Majority, let's make sure we have that discussion as we decide to move forward or not. All right. Just want to get an update on that process. All right. Thank you very much. You went -- you talked about this year being a year we are going to be doing reassessments, correct?
Do we have an idea what those assessments going to look like across the city of Philadelphia?
So we're in the process of compiling all the data to give a thorough briefing to Council and have information by Council District, so that will be coming in short order. As I said, we're on schedule to mail around the end of May. So Council will be briefed before those mailings go out so that way each Councilmember knows what the potential impact is in the district. So at this point, while I won't speak to specific numbers until we have those briefings, the level of change -- we still do see an increase in the overall value of property in the city, but it is significantly lower than either of the last two reassessments we have undergone in Tax Year '23 and Tax Year '25.
Okay. I am going to call on Majority Leader Katherine Gilmore- Richardson.
Yes. Thank you very much, Council President. And thank you very much to OPA, in particular to Drew Aldinger, who has always been very, very helpful going back many years. I wanted to just get all of my questions on the record for this hearing. And I will say to your point, Council President, that I, too, look forward to those continued conversations regarding Mr. Aros. And you're still here, Rob? Okay. Great. I look forward to the continued conversation because you all know that I have continued consternation as it relates to OPA. So I'm going to put additional questions on the record. First, your testimony mentions investment in technology and using more data-driven efficiencies. Developers have indicated that there are significant delays with OPA finalizing lot consolidation and subdivisions. When there is a delay in OPA finalizing lot consolidation and subdivisions, which we've heard can sometimes take years, is the city only collecting taxes on the vacant unimproved lots rather than the subdivided and improved lots? And as a result of this, is the city missing out on collecting the full taxes due to these delays? Second question, is there a large difference in taxes that would be collected by the city if a vacant, unimproved lot was actually being taxed as if it was subdivided into individual lots? And as an example, would a 20-acre unimproved and vacant lot have a lower assessed value than if that property was subdivided and improved into 100 -- 150 individual home lots? Third question, developers and homeowners have complained about the timeline to update ownership records in the OPA system after a change in ownership occurs. Does a delay in updating ownership information prevent a property owner from filing zoning or building permit applications or obtain rental or high-rise licenses? And does this result in lost revenue to the city in the form of application and licensure fees? Fourth question, does the failure to timely update ownership records result in new owners not receiving their real estate tax bills and prior owners mistakenly receiving the tax bills? Is it difficult to collect a property tax payment from an individual who no 21 longer owns the property? Are new owners ultimately charged interest and penalties for tax bills they have not received because of the failure of OPA to timely update the ownership records? And is it fair for new owners to have to pay interest and penalties for tax bills they have not received? My fifth question is, in the property owner -- in -- if the property owner does not pay the full tax bill because they are waiting for their account to correctly reflect the abatement, will Revenue send the property's account to collections and liens threatened? And I know that's a dual question, so I know you're still here, Rob. The sixth question is, what is the process for a property owner who paid the full tax amount due to the threats of collections and liens to receive a refund of their overpayment? And then what is the current time that it takes from a day a deed is recorded to when OPA updates its records? And then finally, and this one is important: How many commercial appeals were filed in FY '24 and FY '25? On average, how many commercial appeals led to a lower assessed value for the said property? Can you provide data to the Chair that shows all commercial properties per year for the last five fiscal years that were appealed? What was the outcome of the appeal, including the change in valuation? And may you also include the comparables that were utilized to make the determination? And how do we assume commercial appeals will change the amount of property tax revenue the city receives? And I'll submit the balance of my questions, of which I have 1, 2 -- seven more, for a written response.
Okay. So some of that is Revenue; some of that is us. Let me start with the very last question you mentioned. So you had mentioned fiscal years. If we say -- for our purposes, we say tax year, because a tax year encompasses two fiscal years. Is that -- is that okay?
Got it. Okay. All right. So we will take that commercial -- that request for the commercial data and compile that. We don't estimate loss, so that would be a Finance Director question.
Yeah. That's why I said Rob is still here.
He's -- he'll be here -- he'll be here as long as we're here. So going back to the start on developers finalizing. So there had been a backup a while ago. We met several times with the BIA and talked through -- in -- you know, in their mind they want stuff done as quickly as possible. We have not been able to meet what -- as quickly as they were hoping for, partially because some of the developments are quite complex and have hundreds of units that have multiple amendments recorded, which has to be done in a very particular process. So that way, the chain of the accounts is not lost with Revenue and being billed for something that they shouldn't and all that. So obviously that's part of their strategic plan as far as when they do developments like that, but it does complicate things on our end because we can't just say, we'll delete this one and create these 400.
If there's three pieces in between, we have to follow that chain on the -- on the deeds.
And I think my concern with this is, we are losing millions and millions and millions of dollars of revenue for the city.
And so as -- just pardon me one moment.
As we are looking for additional revenue, as we are seeking to ensure that we're doing all that we can being fiscally responsible as a city, we have a situation here where we are losing millions and millions and millions of dollars, and no process improvement has occurred in order to update this process to ensure that we are able to get those dollars in more quickly to the city. And then you have folks turning around asking us to check the couch cushions for change, and you're talking about a millions and millions and millions of dollar issue that is a result of this process not being fixed by OPA.
Sure. So let me respond to the last part of that first question. When you mentioned the taxes for lots versus improved, so from our end, you know, we're just looking at assessment on actual taxes. But what I can tell you is that once a building is on there, if it's new construction, they're going to have the abatement. It's no 4 longer vacant land. The land value for properties with the buildings and residential is 20 percent of the overall value. That's an industry- standard measure. That could actually, depending on what the value of the lot was, that could result in a decrease in taxes owed. So it's not necessarily a city missing money if that building is not on, because the abatement and the percent could -- we can't 16 value it as vacant land because it's 17 no longer vacant; it's part of that. 18 So the taxable amount could go up or 19 down. It's not one way or the other 20 --
And I agree, not every case is the same. But what I'm saying is, you can agree that there have been a number of cases on these commercial property developments where we have lost millions and millions of dollars as a city. You -- can you agree that that is correct?
Okay. Okay. I receive that. However, I'm going to respectfully disagree with you, because it is a process improvement that needs to take place in order for us to collect these dollars. And I know not every time, you know, it's a situation where we are losing dollars, but it's too many times.
Okay. Understood. And we do have some process improvements that we are intending to implement once we have a new batch of hires that will be coming in. So we have some ideas on the table for new hires to sort of learn the process and assist with stuff across the city with new accounts that we think will give them a valuable learning tool, as well as assist with getting these on the books. Because one other important thing to remember is, in residential, our assignments are done geographically. Once a neighborhood becomes the hot neighborhood, or -- you could get hundreds upon hundreds, if not more accounts dumped on one evaluator. So we try to help out and distribute as much as possible, but where there's -- our development spikes in the city, it's obviously not uniform across the city. Some evaluators, we won't have any, you know, consolidations or subdivisions or court all have one or two, and those get turned around pretty quickly.
So we're constantly changing assignments to make sure no one is overloaded, but when developers pick a neighborhood that they're going after, it piles up.
For your second question, vacant unimproved. So that scenario, again, similar to my first response, it would be more -- it needs more factors such as location, zoning, and all that. So it could be possible that the hundred lots in aggregate could have a higher total value than the larger lot. It could stay the same; it could go down. There's other elements that would be part of that, but for the value to go up in aggregate is certainly plausible. It's absolutely possible.
Ownership with Revenue. So Revenue maintains ownership separately from OPA. So they're billing -- they're billing the owner they have on record.
Which in some cases is slightly ahead of OPA. So in most cases, the delay in ownership on OPA is not impacting the Revenue bill going to the right person, because they have their own data set, and they're sending stuff out to who they have on record, not pulling directly from us. And then property owner in general. So one improvement we have made recently is that most deed changes come through to us, no 5 problem. There were review measures put in place with the Office of Innovation and Technology, where if -- and for instance, if a deed comes over where the grantor does not match the grantee on the previous deed, it gets flagged for review.
It was a very strict protocol that we've worked on loosening up. So if there's a slight -- so for instance, if somebody's last name is Mc Uhugh, M-C space U-H-U-G-H, and then on the next deed, it's one word --
So we've kind of gone through growing pains on that, and we've worked to loosen those restrictions so that that will come through easier, but that was getting flagged to make sure there wasn't a missing deed in between or some sort of fraud being committed potentially that somebody didn't have a chance to flag. And then the other one was about paid in full ahead and then receiving a refund. So I would defer to Rob on that.
Yeah. I think that there were a couple of non-OPA questions. One, I remember the one I would ask you to repeat, please.
It was earlier this year, remember? It was the first or second day. I said I was going to come back to this.
Yeah. Yeah. One was about commercial appeals, and I think it was for the last five years?
Tax years and how much they were and what that meant in terms of revenue change. So we'll have to get back to you on that. I don't have it off the top of my head, but we'll get back to you. And then what was the other question? Sorry.
No. And for Revenue, what is the process for a property owner who paid the full tax amount due to the threats of collections and liens to receive a refund if it's an overpayment?
Got it. Okay. So let me talk to Revenue. We'll get you that in writing.
Okay. And I'll submit all of the questions in writing, but I wanted to get this on the record because we received very many complaints. And when I heard specifically about this issue relative to these lot consolidation and subdivisions, but also this challenge around these commercial appraisals, you know, I was very concerned because I feel like we are -- are leaving millions and millions of dollars on the table. And I get not every case is an issue, but it's enough of a challenge where we have to put some process improvements in place to ensure that we are condensing the process, so that we're not losing as much money as a city. And like I said, I know not every case we lose, but it's enough of them where it's millions of dollars, and it's piling up. Particularly, because of the type of development that we know is going on in certain sections, in certain pockets of the city. And I just respectfully request that all of those -- that we receive those answers, as well as the ones that I brought up two years ago before we go down this process. And I want -- I would like to be a part of those meetings; I would like to meet with you. You know, the challenges that I had even brought to you all relative to the deed changes, and, you know, how quickly it goes to Revenue, and then you still have to wait months and months for OPA. Like, you can't handle business that way. You can't even handle business that way because then you have to try to go back and get a rental license; it's just a big mess.
And I went through it personally, so I'm not speaking -- you know, I'm speaking from experience. Okay? Because in '21, I bought two houses on one day from my parents' estate. So I'm not speaking from a place of no 18 knowledge, okay, on this. Okay?
Okay. So we will -- and I heard you say that we should meet, so we will set up a meeting within the next week or two to discuss that.
Please. Okay. Thank you. I'll submit the balance of my questions for the record. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Madam Leader. The Chair recognizes Council Member Harrity, followed by Council Member O'Rourke.
Let's get right into it. In 2026, you budgeted for 226 full-time positions. As of November of '25, you only had 183 of those positions were filled. Your 2027 request remains at positions. Can you 20 explain how you plan to fill these 21 positions and what types of 22 positions make up these vacancies? 23 And when the -- when the 24 district, the School District, closes a school building, the vacancy can suppress surrounding property values and affect OPA's assessment in that neighborhood. Has the OPA tracked the assessment impact in corridors where school closures have occurred or plan to occur? And is the data informing 2027 assessment priorities?
Okay. So for your first question around the positions, so we'll be -- we have positions -- those vacancies are at each level of the department. So we currently have one promotional test that was scored, another it's in the process of being scored, so we're going to be making internal promotions. So that overall number will stay the same, but the vacancy will shift to more entry-level positions as we fill the higher-level positions that can only be filled through promotion within the department. And then at the entry level, we have an active list that we've requested from OHR to be able to start conducting interviews. There's going to be another -- that's for entry-level Evaluator 1 positions. So we have, I believe, 11 names on that list that passed that we are -- have requested the permission from OHR to start that interview process. There will be another test coming. We get the -- OHR gives that test about twice a year. So we get anywhere from five to 15 new positions typically from that list. And then other vacancies, we have struggled a little bit because our clerical and our management trainee positions are from the citywide lists. So depending on when we go to that list, if there's not an active list or the test has -- is -- hasn't been given yet, and other departments have exhausted that, it does hinder us from getting those numbers up as quickly as we would like. But those are the other two classes that we're going to be looking to fill. But those tests come for the citywide purpose, and we're also competing with other departments for those potential candidates. So that makes it a little more, I don't want to say difficult, but I mean there -- it's more of a competition because, especially for say, management trainee where somebody's coming in like, "I want to work in city government, but I don't know what department is right for me." And so those folks that come in that we interview typically don't have real estate experience, which is a prerequisite for some of the other entry-level positions. So we spend that first year training them up and teaching them everything. Some folks come in and love it; some folks get an offer from another department as well, and they say, you know what? This is more in line of what I'm thinking. So thank you, but no thank you. So when you're competing within the city for positions that could fill a number of departments, you know, that -- it's not as easy as people coming directly to you.
I get it. But what -- what's the actual number of positions that you have vacant right now that make it easy?
Right now? Let me -- let me get that back to you in writing. We just did our --
We just did our Quarter 3 numbers, which might be slightly different than what was submitted previously. And then for the school closures, it's not a specific data point that we have done any analysis on. And the recent announcements would have been made after the evaluation process was already pretty much through. What I will say is, you know, there are -- there are things that we look at that at a block-to- block level, we can intuitively say this might have an impact, but we can't automatically make an adjustment until we actually see data that says, Okay, this area, these properties in this sector here are selling for less. When we see that data, for instance, come in and say, okay. This isn't -- they're not transacting for the same prices that they were before, that's when we use that data to make informed decisions and adjustments on our estimates of value. So it certainly makes sense to say, Well, if a school is closing down the street, that might make my property value lower, depending on, you know, the school. We can't blanketly make that until we get the actual data that supports that. So the study -- the announcements that were just made, it's too fresh for that to have any -- there's no data that we would have yet that would have impacted this current round of assessments, but stuff like that are things that would be part of the consideration moving forward in any future assessments.
Okay. Yeah, it goes back to, again, us being reactionary instead of, you know, taking actions to deal with it ahead of time.
And so -- and to go back, my excellent Deputy Chief just informed me it's 46 vacancies.
46 vacancies. Okay. All right. Thank you, Councilman.
Thank you, Councilman. We appreciate you, sir. The Chair recognizes Council Member O'Rourke, followed by Council Member Gauthier.
Good afternoon. Thank you for being here with us today. I have a couple of questions. First one jumping in, it's clear that property tax increases are a huge burden for working families in Philadelphia. While they're tough for homeowners, we also have a great tax relief program -- several of them, actually, like the Homestead Exemption, we have LOOP, the senior tax relief programs that exist, but we have zero tax relief for renters. And I think that that's important to note because they pay the burden of increased taxes through their higher rents. One of the things that we have been pointing out to folks in my office's effort to address questions of affordability here in the city is that the Commonwealth, apparently for at least the last 18 years, has affirmed that about 20 19 percent of property taxes by some 20 property managers or landlords are being passed down to the tenant. That's part of the reason why their rents are so freaking high. So as -- and so with -- part of that is that we actually want to address some things by providing like some mirror legislation at the city level to provide like a senior tax refund that the Commonwealth kind of already does and make it some -- make it sort of automatic to the city. That's less the point. The question I actually have is, as the taxes continue to increase, what is the administration doing to provide property tax relief directly to renters in particular?
I was looking for Mr. Dubow. OPA does not deal with property taxes, so I could not speak on behalf of the administration as far as that goes. We're just handling the assessment, so the assessment could result in an increase/decrease based on other measures. So we do not -- we do not handle the relief measures, so I will defer to --
Somebody else that can answer that question, because that's not under our umbrella.
No, we do assessments, which are part of the equation that generates property taxes, but we don't -- we don't bill, collect, or tell somebody what their taxes are going to be, and Mr. Dubow is now here.
I'll come back to you in a second. Thank you. Did -- Mr. Dubow is here. Hello, sir.
Hello. So the question is about relief programs. Those relief programs are run out of the --
So relief programs are run out of the Revenue Department. And as you said, those are all for homeowners. On the renter side, I mean, really, it's hard to get at property tax relief for renters because they don't pay the tax directly, which is why we kind of have rent relief programs, and that is kind of the way we get at that.
Okay. I -- yeah. More of those would be great, some rent -- I just think that -- yeah, half the city rents, and that's a bit of an overestimation, but it's not that far over. So --
I said half the city rents, and that's a bit of an overestimation, but that's not that far over. And I think given that mass of people, it might be worth our time to find out ways that we can provide more relief programs for them, whatever that's worth --
Yeah. Thank you, Mr. Dubow. This kind of -- the second question I had is with OPA, and I apologize for assuming that you did the same things.
It's been raised -- it's been brought to my attention by a couple of different groups, namely, the National Coalition of 100 Black Women recently shared with me that they have had some concern. I know that they're not the only ones around a disparity in assessments. That it does seem to be the case that when assessments happen, oftentimes there's like an over- assessment generally around, you know, not cheaper properties, but properties that are possessed by left -- less affluent people who tend to be black or brown or otherwise. And oftentimes in the pockets of the city that might have more focus on like West Philly or North Philly. And so I think the question is how -- you know, folks are tracking that. Are you tracking that? And what can we be doing at the local level to assure -- to, you know, mitigate any disparity in how assessments are happening? This was also brought up several times last night in Dr. Phillips's town hall by folks up there Uptown in the 9th Councilmanic District. So this is a thing that is top of mind for a lot of people. I'm curious what your thoughts are on this matter.
Sure. So just as a general concept, the highest and lowest ends of your property ranges in any jurisdiction tend to be the most difficult to get as perfect as you would like. On the low end, because if a property is, let's say, $100,000 and you have a couple of properties and there's a $5,000 or $7,000 purchase price difference, and people are using that for points of comparison, that's a huge percentage of the overall property. That amount of money could be down to negotiating skills, or it could be given in givebacks that we're not privy to. A $5,000 difference on a $500,000 sale is very minimal. So when we run these statistical measures that I was speaking about earlier and you're looking at percentages, when it's on the lower end, because the small dollar amounts make up a larger percentage of that, you will see some numbers that come up a little more out of line than you will see for most of the properties in that like 80 percent range in the middle. As far as what we're aware of, as I mentioned earlier, the Mayor created the task force two years ago that we've been active participants in, along with the member -- the folks that I mentioned. And then there is the Revenue Department's -- I'm sorry, the Finance Department's audit that I mentioned that Mr. Dubow can speak to.
So in the proposed '27 budget for Finance, there is funding for a study to look exactly at this issue. It's something that's been brought up in prior hearings and something that we're concerned about. So we're bringing in a consultant to look at OPA's overall processes and to look at whether there are any processes that unintentionally create biases and whether there are things we can do about that.
This report or the task force that was convened to address this, there's a report coming out sometime soon that you all are expecting --
Do you have a general idea about when that is? And are there other -- or do you anticipate actionable items to this?
Yes, it is. It will have recommendations, and we will look to -- look at the recommendations and, you know, implement the recommendations that we can.
I'm done, but anytime soon is when this is happening? Like, you have --
Later this spring. Okay. Thank you so much, Mr. Chair, for the time. Thank you.
Thank you, Member. The Chair recognizes Council Member Gauthier, followed by Council Member Landau, and then we'll close out with Council Member Lozada.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I want to follow up on my colleague's line of questioning. And yes, the Coalition of 100 Black Women did bring this up, but this is not just a feeling, right, or something that we're seeing at the high and low ends of property values. There was an actual report that came out two years ago that quantifiably proved that our property assessment methodology is racially biased. And so I think we have to acknowledge that. And I wanted to ask a bit more specifically about the task force that was created to kind of -- to look into that and to see what we would do differently. So you all said that you expect the task force's report to come out in late spring?
Okay. So we should receive that report before we vote on the budget, yes?
It's not OPA's task force. My assumption is yes, but I can't put my hand on the Bible and tell you because we're not the ones writing it.
Absolutely. We're involved in the process. We are not the ones writing the report, but we have every indication that the report will be out before the end of the spring.
Okay. Of the task force recommendations, and I know we're still waiting on the final report, but it sounds like it's almost completed. Are there any sort of initial findings that are implemented in the FY-27 budget? And also, are there any initial findings that you can talk about that will require future budget or legislative action?
Future it would be -- it would be improper for me to speak on the report itself until it's actually out there, I would just say. Because I would not want to speak on behalf of anybody else that is compiling the report or the Reinvestment Fund. So I will defer regrettably to a later date to provide some answers to those questions, once the report is out.
Thank you. I look forward to receiving that information. Tax Year 2027 notices will go out in May of 2026, essentially now. And the Five-Year Plan references a 4.2 percent citywide increase in residential value. My constituents in West and Southwest Philadelphia have historically seen sharper increases than the citywide averages during reassessment cycles. And I want to be prepared to support them when the time comes again for the reassessments. So could you share how the anticipated change in reassessment breaks down by Council District, income level, and neighborhood? And is OPA in a position to provide those breakdowns to Council before the notices are mailed so that we have time to prepare constituent communications and identify residents who may need relief? And I'll just kind of remind us; I'm sure my colleagues remember every time this happens, it is traumatic. Particularly, if you're in an area like the Third District or the Eighth District, or areas where we see increases that are higher than any other part of the city. So we're asking for your partnership in allowing us to communicate with our constituents ahead of time.
Yep. So, absolutely. So as I mentioned speaking earlier to the Council President, so we're in the process of compiling all those reports. We're going to have a district-by- district breakout for every Councilperson and for the At-Large members. So you'll get information at a citywide and a district-by- district level. Those -- we'll work to schedule those briefings as quickly as possible, but certainly, in advance of the notices going out so that the offices have the ability to kind of know where the changes are coming. What you will see in the analysis and in some mapping is what we call our geographic market areas within a district. So those are the markets that we create ourselves from. So it can be compiled into a larger neighborhood if you want to look at it that way for your constituents or -- but we have almost 600 of them across the city, so we get very granular as far as that goes. So the analysis as far as percentage of change, amount of overall market value, of taxable market value, that will all be included in the information that is given to the councilmembers. We do not keep income data, so we would not provide a breakdown by income levels, but we can -- we'll provide the income based on location and existing market value and the rates of change, both as a percentage of median and an actual taxable dollar amount.
Thank you, colleague. The Chair recognizes Council Member Landau, and we will close out with Council Member Lozada.
Hi, how are you? Thank you for being with us. I wanted to talk a little about timeline of mailings and notices, which I usually ask about. I asked about this in 2024, to say that the notices are mailed late. They were mailed in August, leaving taxpayers fewer than 60 days to file 2 appeals before the October BRT deadline. Then I asked when they would be mailed and published online for 2025. So when were the -- I'm looking for the results of this. When were notices actually mailed and posted online last year? Did homeowners get more than 60 days to appeal? Will -- and when will OPA complete mail notices this year, 2026? I think I'm saying this right. What's the target mailing date, and when will they be posted -- will they be posted online before the mailing goes out? Last question for that is, will you commit to a May 31st deadline for mailing and online posting? Is that something you would consider?
So going back to -- so for last year, Tax Year '26, those were -- I don't have the exact date they were posted online, but they were posted in the spring. There was no citywide revaluation, so they -- for last year they had -- taxpayers would have had well in advance of -- you said 68 days or whatever it was.
Yeah. So it was -- it was three or four months at the very least, I believe. As far as back to '25, in conjunction with the Mayor's Office, that mailing was slightly delayed because the Mayor wanted to make sure there was a robust outreach program coming from her office and from Revenue around the tax relief measures. So that did push our intended mailing back a little bit. We don't have any indication that that's going to be the case this time around. So as I sit here today, barring any factors that are beyond our control as a department, we are very much geared toward getting these out before the end of May.
So we're -- you know, if there's a problem on the vendor side like we had a couple years ago, that could always delay things. But our internal calendar for OPA is to get it out before the end of May.
Excellent. So you -- we've also -- I've also talked to you about how confusing the letter is for people, that we talk about a First-Level Review and an appeal in the same letter. I see some really easy fixes there that I would love to talk to you about either fully distinguishing them or making just one deadline. Give everybody a First-Level Review, for example, before there's an appeal, because some people miss their appeal deadlines because they think they're filing an appeal and they're actually only filing for a First- Level Review.
Yeah, we're happy to take any recommendations into consideration. We've tried to distinguish as hopefully as clear as possible, but there's always a chance it could be done more clearly. There are two separate things that you can file both, but you just need to meet the respective deadlines. And so I do think that a couple years ago when our deadline was closer to the BRT's, there was some confusion around that. The other thing I know in talking with the BRT, the earlier we can have an FLR deadline, it allows people to get results from that without having to worry about the BRT. So we don't want to necessarily be -- we're open to any suggestion because, unlike the BRT, their filing deadline is set by the state. Ours is -- the state has no 12 regulations around an informal first-level review. So we can sort of accommodate -- we've accommodated Council a few times in the last few evaluations about moving that date to allow for more outreach on the Council part. So yeah, we are -- we're open to any and all suggestions, and there are benefits and negatives to either scenario, but, you know, we're certainly open to whatever's going to work best for the tax payers.
So here's a good suggestion. Your letter gives people an estimated property increase. Would you give people an estimated property tax bill in the letter? Years ago, the City Controller's Office did this. You could plug into their system and say, "Here's what my property taxes projected at. This is how much I'll have to pay in taxes." People are getting this letter; they don't know what their projected tax increase would be. They might not even know that they should appeal.
I mean, does -- so where I would -- so from OPA's perspective, that we're not -- I think the confusion of taxes versus assessment; they're related, but they're separate. So we're not telling anybody what their taxes are, especially in consideration of when we're mailing. Ideally, it's before any relief measures or tax rate changes, if they're ever under consideration, are being finalized on the budget. I will say that the level of conversation that you just mentioned, I've had dozens of times at the workshops that we've done around the city in conjunction with the Mayor's Office and with the Council offices, where people basically come in and say, "This is what this is saying. Are my taxes going up?" My response to those people is, if you think the value is wrong, no matter what the tax burden is, we want to know. So don't let a tax decrease even preclude you from challenging it if you think it should be more of a tax decrease. Or if in some cases with the last Homestead, if people were at $80,000 and they went up to $95,000, percentage-wise that's, you know, percent. But then when the Homestead goes to $100,000, they're like -- and, you know, say, Well, the Homestead will cover this assessment, but if you think the 95 is wrong, please let us know, because that's how we get better data. Then they say, "Well, if the Homestead covers it, I'm good. Thank you." Let me --
Got 13 you. Would you -- let me ask 14 another question. Would you 15 consider giving people a plain- 16 language, simple explanation as to 17 why you believe their property taxes 18 went up? 19
We would not 20 speak to anything specific about property taxes.
I'm sorry. Would you give people a plain-language, simple statement as to why you believe their property valuation went up?
So it would -- so to have a blanket, not everybody property's valuation goes up. Some remains the same and some goes down.
I'm asking you a specific question. Here's hypothetical person A, a hypothetical person A's is about --
I understand. Hypothetically, no, we would not have two types of letters for increases, decreases, or anything with an explanation --
Would you add to your letter of the increase, "Your property value was $100,000. We now believe it is $200,000. Here's three sentences as to why we believe it went from $100,000 to $200,000?"
We -- I think -- I don't want to -- I want to understand better exactly what those sentences -- what you would expect those sentences to contain, so we can -- we can have that.
Here I am living in my house for many, many years. My house was valued at $100,000; you're now telling me it's $200,000, and you want to know what I think when I open the letter, why? I also would like to know how much will this increase my taxes. It is a very simple thought. It is a very, very --
So the taxes thing is outside of my scope. I can't speak to that. I understand it completely.
Our letter does -- our -- the general letter does give reasons why a property value may change. In most cases, it's the market for similar properties in that area. But --
That does not help the individual person who is opening -- who is opening up their letter to find out their taxes. Last one.
Hold on. I know we have a -- we have a short window --
-- needs to go. No, no. So what Council Member Landau is asking, right, because we were all together last night. The woman comes up to us, she says, "I haven't done any repairs to my house in the last 10 years, but my property taxes --" What did she say? Double, triple, something like that. The woman said, "I don't understand why my property taxes has doubled -- tripled. Yeah, doubled.
And she said, "I don't know why it has if I haven't done any repairs to my house." So she asked 11 members of City Council, "Can you help me understand why my house went up?" Now, all of us looked at each other because we didn't have an answer. Council Member Landau is doing what the constituents of the City of Philadelphia literally asked us to do last night. Can you just do me a favor so we can move on?
Can you just give her a better answer than that? There are a lot of people that's watching, and there's a chance that this clip make it -- make -- this conversation make it clip and go on social media. Can we just represent Philadelphia a little bit better than the response you gave to Council Member Landau, and then we'll move on to Council Member Lozada.
So the response that I gave to Council Member Landau, I guess let me expound upon that. In the case of that, without knowing the specifics of that property. And it's a conversation that my staff, the department, I personally have with folks at these meetings, and they're kind of asking how this can happen. Property values are -- you know, we estimate property values based on what properties are selling for in the market. What a willing buyer and a willing seller are able to pay for a specific type of property. Somebody not making improvements to their home doesn't mean that the value does not increase, decrease, or if they don't do improvements, it may stay the same. So in the case of this individual as a hypothetical property, the most likely reason for a valuation change is that properties similar to theirs have been selling for certain prices, and our estimate is that their property is comparable to those, and that price might be going up or it might be going down.
So we can move on. You can't put that in writing like the Council Member said and give that to people when it happens? That's not realistic?
I mean, I think that's -- I think that's contained somewhere, but we will -- I -- we will -- we can revisit that, yes. So we can absolutely -- we can absolutely do -- we can absolutely revisit that.
For the purpose of time, and I'm not the Council President, but I know that the Majority Leader is here, and I'm sure that the Council President is hearing this, I'm going to ask the Council President -- I'm not officially making a request, I'm going to ask the Council President to listen to this dialogue and to see if you guys should be called back at another time, so we can have a much deeper conversation, so that the constituents in the City of Philadelphia can understand what's happening with their property and their property taxes.
And so let me -- let me -- I can't do that. I'm going to have that conversation with the Council President, and that may be an option. Colleagues, I don't want to lose a quorum. I know Council Member Lozada has her time, but Council Member Harrity, I hear you. Can you go quickly, Council Member Harrity? Go ahead quickly, Councilmember.
Hold on, Council Member Harrity. The Chair recognizes Council Member Harrity.
I'm sorry. The other part of that question for that lady was she appealed and then had to appeal the appeal and was charged $300 for that.
And couldn't get the money back. That was the other part of that. Thank you.
Yeah. And so that sounds like that would have been a decision made by the Board of Revision of Taxes, which is separate from us. So anybody has a right to appeal that, but that's not an OPA fee.
So maybe what we should do is talk to the Council President about bringing both back together, so we could do a deep dive for the constituents in the City of Philadelphia, because we can't just brush this stuff under the rug. People cannot afford. People cannot afford the cost of living right now in the city, and we have to examine everything we can to make Philadelphia more affordable for our constituents that we all work for and represent. The Chair recognizes --
The Chair recognizes Council Member Landau, then we can get ready to adjourn for the day.
Oh, I'm so sorry. The Chair recognizes Council Member Lozada.
I think we have to add this conversation here, and that is that it is called gentrification. Can we be honest and say that that is gentrification? That's exactly what it is. I mean, in order for us to fix what is happening in our city, we have to have an honest conversation. There is no reason why we should not be able to tell people why and how we got to whatever the number assessed value was, or how they -- we came about their assessment. My questions were along the same lines as Council Member Landau, because consistently in the southern part of my district, I get asked the same question: "I've done absolutely nothing. I've lived in my house for 40-something years, and I have all of these new houses around me, and now I'm paying -- I went from paying $1,300 of a property tax to $6,000 of a property tax. How and why?" And then I ask the city to explain it to me, and there's no 23 response. It's-- it's not fair. And again, we can't keep telling people that we want them to choose Philadelphia as their place to raise their families if we can't keep it affordable. And okay, maybe we're building houses that for some people they call it affordable. They call Turn the Key affordable to some people. In my neighborhood in the southern part of the district, Turn the Key doesn't work because it's no 12 longer affordable. And it's not because of the cost of the house; it's the taxes. They can't pay the taxes, and they can't pay to maintain the property. And we as a government are doing absolutely nothing to help explain that. And then you ask for an appeal. Your appeal -- the woman yesterday said to us, "My appeal -- I appealed it in 2025, I just got a date, and it's at the end of the year." How does that happen? Are we behind? Are we -- are we not sure what the response is? How is the appeal process? How do we -- can you explain the appeal process to us?
So that specific appeal process you're referring to is the Board of Revision of Taxes, so I would not speak on their behalf, as they're an independent department.
They schedule -- they schedule hearings as they're able to, but we don't schedule hearings for them --
What is the equation? What is -- how do you come up with how a property is assessed?
And there's this thing apparently called a certification process, the assessed value certification process.
So the certification process is when we close the rolls on the tax -- on assessment rolls for one year and roll into the next year. So that's the conclusion. So with the state, that's March 31st, and then we roll into the next tax year after that. For how the properties are valued, we publish data after every reevaluation. We have a report that goes -- the Council is published publicly after every reevaluation that includes the information on all of the data points and how the values are formulated as a general process. But obviously, just to hit some of the quick points, it's location, it's type of property, it's the condition of the property, it's the size of the property. Those are the biggest factors, typically. So what properties that are similar to your subject property, whatever you want that to be in terms of location, size, condition, age. Those are the value -- those sales are used in to help estimate the value of any one given subject property that matches up with that. And we have -- how many sales do we have? We have tens of thousands of sales throughout the city that are broken into specific neighborhoods and specific areas to come up with those values. So it's not one sale making a market in any case; it's multiple observations, multiple transactions, and data from those transactions.
So development drives is a driver, or part of the driver in your assessment process?
Development in a neighborhood also is taken into consideration when you are coming up to that assessed value?
Well, it's what -- it's what properties are selling for. So development in terms of we would not take a sale of a brand-new home that is across the street from a home that's half as large and twice -- I'm sorry that's twice as old; 100-plus years old and say, "Well, this sold for this; we're going to apply a factor of this, and that's how we get your value." It's what the house across the street, what those properties are transacting for, whatever the drivers are for that, that we use to estimate that value. So whatever factors, whether it's catchment area, whether it's wanting to be in a specific part of the city, any -- whatever buyers and sellers are taking into consideration when they purchase a property in an arm's- length transaction, that all goes into what --
So development is taken into consideration when you guys are coming up with these assessment values?
I mean, we don't have a variable for development. If people want to buy a property somewhere because they see development, that's in their internal process of --
So it could be -- it could be a potential factor, just like if somebody wanted to live in the Penn Alexander catchment area, that's going to be a factor of what they're willing to pay for a property.
We absolutely need a hearing on how OPA comes up with assessment evaluations of properties.
It is crazy, and it is unacceptable for us not to be honest in this chamber. Development has a lot to do with how people's properties are evaluated in neighborhoods. It's called gentrification. It's called gentrification.
So I'll say, you know, we're obligated to value based on what the market is saying. If the market is including development, we can't take development out --
But you've got to develop it in order for you to sell it, don't you?
You have to develop in order for you to sell. And it say -- based on that sales price is how you're going to determine whether the values of other houses in the area.
Well, when you talk about development specifically, if it's new construction, those sales will only be used to value new construction. There is a distinct difference in our process. And I'll say this, you know, we -- whether it's a hearing or an informal session with Council, we can sit and give a two-hour presentation on everything we do. Council Member Gauthier's office took advantage of that. I sit here every year and offer it. We will always offer it. We -- you know, there's nothing we're trying to hide here. We will walk through that whole process from soup to nuts. And we have -- we have some of the best people in -- literally the world that work on this stuff. They speak all over the world. They are active in this industry; they are active in their communities in Philadelphia. They are boots on the ground, not only in the assessment process, but in the real-life actions that Philadelphians are living day to day. So I understand there could still be confusion. We will walk through that whole process with any Council office that wants to have that presentation.
So I would say -- and I'm going to let Council Member -- so let me do -- so let me just say this real quick. I think that the concern is not necessarily understanding the process, I think the concern is partly understanding the process, but it's making it transparent to the public, right? That's the biggest concern. So a briefing to make sure staff and councilmembers understand what's going on is always great, and we appreciate you making yourself available for that. But I don't think that that will answer some of the transparency issues that we have, that we need to get on the record so the public can hear that. Let me -- let me let Council Member Gauthier go, then Majority Leader Gilmore-Richardson, and then we can get ready to close out.
Councilwoman. Remember we got a short window, you-all. We don't want to lose our quorum.
Thank you. Very quickly. We thank you for the -- on the session with my staff. We appreciated that. But I think what we're looking for is transparency, but ultimately change. And I also think a recognition that you as a head of OPA understand, even though you don't control every piece of this directly, that you understand what a big issue this is, particularly for those of us who represent Black and Brown communities, poor communities. That it has been -- it's on record that our process is biased, and we have not done anything meaningful to change that dynamic. And so I think it also is unhelpful to -- we don't expect you to know everything about every department, but we do expect you to recognize what a big issue this is, not just for Council and our constituents. And we expect OPA to come together with BRT and Revenue and whoever else needs to be at the table towards change, right? So we look forward to the report, your study that you're doing, but we have to see something concrete that allows us to recognize that you recognize what a strain this is on our constituents. Thank you.
Thank you, colleague. Council Member Young, please, we got to go quickly; we got to close out.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Very, very quickly. What type of marketing does OPA do to, I guess, proactively market that not -- that the abatements are not just for developers but for anyone who's like kind of rehabbing their house substantially? Like, what do you do to let people know that?
Quickly respond because we have to get ready to adjourn.
So we publish the information about the abatement on our websites, we take the forms out to community meetings, we don't run commercials or anything like that. I mean, if there's additional outreach that we're not hitting to, we're happy to help out with that, because if it's available to anyone and, you know, we are open to any ideas that will help get that word out there. It hasn't been -- it hasn't been on the OPA's side. We manage it, but the marketing for that for the city was -- has not been directed towards us specifically.
Council Member Young, we're going to be calling OPA back. So today, it won't be your only bite at the apple. With that being said, the Chair recognizes Councilmember Gilmore-Richardson for a motion that the public hearing and meeting on the bills and resolutions before the committee today stands in recess until Monday, May 4th, 2026, at 10:00 a.m. in Room 400, City Hall.
Mr. Chairman, prior to the motion, I'm respectfully requesting on the record that we have a callback for OPA for this budget season. And to that point, I move that this committee stand in recess until Monday, May 4th, 2026, at 10:00 a.m. in Room 400, City Hall.
It's been moved and properly seconded that the public hearing and meeting on the bills and resolutions before the committee today stands at recess until Monday, May 4th, 2026, at 10:00 a.m. in Room 400, City Hall. All those in favor of the motion will signify by saying aye. COUNCILMEMBERS: Aye.
Those opposed? The ayes have it, and the motion carries. The committee will stand in recess until Monday, May 4th, 2026, at 10:00 a.m, in which we will reconvene in Room 400, City Hall. Thank you, everybody. (Committee of the Whole public hearing concluded at 3:40 p.m.) C E R T I F I C A T I O N I hereby certify that the proceedings and evidence are contained fully and accurately in the notes taken by me of the above case, and this copy is a correct transcript of the same. _______________ Samanda J. Rios