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.