The Chair recognizes Councilman Nutter for a point of information.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I cannot necessarily see what's going on above me. Hopefully it's not that group of kids, but there are a group of kids from the Discovery Charter School, which is located in the 4th District, and I just wanted to recognize them for their participation in our process and make sure that everyone knows that they are here watching City Council in Session. Thank you, Madam President.
Thank you. Beginning April 1st the new company will be taking management responsibilities; is that correct?
Councilman, temporarily 1152 03/22/05 - FY '06 OPERATING BUDGET we're changing the way it operates. It was an all inclusive management agreement initially. We're taking it, I would call it, back in-house so there's a management company that runs it day to day where the Commission makes all the decisions. It's temporary for one, maybe two seasons. At the same time we're having a study done because we recognize, as you mentioned in your opening statement, that there are a number of capital improvement issues that need to be done at the golf courses to bring them to a standard where we will be competitive in a very competitive industry. Of our courses, we have one course that from design and layout is probably world class and another five that are very good neighborhood courses. So what we need to do over these next few months is come up with a plan of action on what improvements should be made, how we should change our inventory to get the best experience in our courses.
So there's a 1153 03/22/05 - FY '06 OPERATING BUDGET possibility that some of the capital will be the responsibility of the Fairmount Park Commission, even though there's a new management company?
One of the ways we're looking at is perhaps doing, for instance -- we haven't decided anything -- is a surcharge. So maybe on every round of golf you pay an additional cents which would go in the 11 Capital Fund. Before we can figure out how to 12 raise the money we have to know exactly how 13 much it would take. 14 For instance, if you take Cobbs 15 Creek, which is probably our answer to Beth 16 Page Black (ph) in New York, if we were to 17 make some substantial improvements to Cobbs 18 Creek, the course would then be on par with a 19 lot of private clubs in the area. 20 There are corresponding 21 difficulties. If you put those improvements 22 in, your cost of play for the consumer rises 23 as well. So we're trying to balance the play 24 with the interest of the players, and that's 25 difficult and that's why we need some 1154 03/22/05 - FY '06 OPERATING BUDGET expertise, if you would.
Under the lease agreement are there restrictions on the fees -- or who sets the fees?
The fees are set by the Commission. The way it was originally agreed to was, there's a pool of similar courses, and our rates had to fall with some percentage rates of those courses and historically have fallen lower. Our rates are maybe set here, but if you look at the discounts and permits and everything we did, they were always lower. I'm not sure about the service, but for the players, I think they had a pretty good value to play. In the future I think the rates will be pretty close to being tied on a level until we target where we're going over the next few years.
The discount rates for seniors, is that something that is in the contract or is that at the discretion of the operators?
It's originally in the 1155 03/22/05 - FY '06 OPERATING BUDGET contract. Every year they come back and they may say, if last year the discount for the seniors was $100, they might come back and say, we recommend a 5 percent increase, and the Commission either approves or disproves that request.
Again, FDR Park in Council President Verna's district, the neighborhood around it, immediately adjacent to it, is repopulating. There's a significant number of housing and condo units that are being built on the other side where the former Passyunk homes will be a huge housing complex. Most of these people are people who are moving back to the City from Jersey and the surrounding areas, which is a good thing, and many of these people are golf advocates as well and they are choosing to move there, in addition to a lot of other reasons, but for the fact that the golf courses are literally a block away from where they will be living, which is kind of why people move to the suburbs and South Jersey for years ago. So we have an opportunity here, I think, to benefit 1156 03/22/05 - FY '06 OPERATING BUDGET as a City as a whole.
Well, we would say, I think we're pretty proud of FDR Park. Thanks to Council the tennis courts are redone. I think those tennis courts are as good as any. I thank the Council President in particular, with Council in general, because baseball fields are there. We think that park can be made to be one of our revenue zones. I think we're on the same page.
I agree. Anything ever been discussed with the boat house there? I know years ago when we started the non-profit Friends of FDR Park, I think it was, there was some discussion that there were some restauranteur entrepreneurs that were looking at that. Any further discussions, anything new coming up on that?
We're looking at two or three opportunities in that park because we think some of the buildings and sites are natural locations for a restaurant concession, given the neighborhood movement, plus the stadiums. I will take some of the blame 1157 03/22/05 - FY '06 OPERATING BUDGET because we've been a little slow by pushing through the Water Works contract. Once that's done I think we'll focus much more down there.
Again, I just think if you can do something and bring that golf course up to a better standard conditions -- and I know that's a challenge because of the flood plane. Every time the lake fills up the water runs off into the golf course and it's literally underwater pretty much all of the year. But there's an opportunity if you can do some improvements there. And if you get a restaurant at the boat house, there's a connection there where it's almost like a country club environment at a lot less expense. So I think you'll have a captive audience, if you will, using the golf course who literally would walk across the road to a restaurant.
Thank you. Thank you, Madam President. 1158 03/22/05 - FY '06 OPERATING BUDGET
Thank you very much. As long as we're on FDR Park, the Friends of the Park led me to believe that whenever there was an event at the stadiums and if parking occurred in the park, that the Friends of FDR Park would receive some portion of the revenues that were generated from the parking. Has that taken place?
I had a slightly different understanding, Council President. What we do is revenues generated in FDR Park stay in FDR Park. We didn't really make a further connection to anything proceeding to a friend's group.
So I assume you communicate with the Friends of FDR Park to share with them what you're doing, what they propose to be done? Do you work together with them?
Yes. With our last meeting, and I think your office actually helped to facilitate it, there was a great discussion about lighting issues. Currently 1159 03/22/05 - FY '06 OPERATING BUDGET as we sit major re-lighting is going on in FDR. We used proceeds from parking revenues in order to facilitate that project. So we used the City-wide contractor, but we also used proceeds from FDR.
The Chair recognizes Councilman Kenney for a point of information.
Thank you, Madam President. I was one of the original members of the Friends of FDR Park a long time ago. Karen's understanding of the relationship is, in fact, correct. The group itself didn't get the dollars to use, but consulted with and tried to help direct the Fairmount Park Commission for improvements to the park. All the money that was generated in revenue, for the Eagles games especially, was spent inside the park. But it's still spent by the Fairmount Park Commission, not the Friends group.
I don't know whether you were here when we were 1160 03/22/05 - FY '06 OPERATING BUDGET talking about the golf course at FDR Park. For as long as I can remember, as a matter of fact, one of the commissioners on the Fairmount Park Commission used to go there to golf and he would always complain that after a rain, he said you were knee deep in mud. I don't know how much it would cost to correct that situation.
I played there since I was a kid and my son plays there now. It's better than it was because they reconfigured the holes.
I know several people that go there and they do complain. They love it, but they said after a rain it's just impossible.
I'm sorry. The stenographer would like you to identify 1161 03/22/05 - FY '06 OPERATING BUDGET yourself, please.
I'm Robert Nicks. I'm President of the Fairmount Park Commission. I'm sorry. Of our six properties, FDR, speaking specifically as a revenue source, is probably the best revenue generator. It's in our best interest over this 18-month period to find a way to make the course play as enjoyable as possible. If we were to rank the courses, FDR, it's probably two. There have been systems put in to have the water run-off system and pumping system. I think what we're doing is trying to improve that system to make the play even better. I'm pretty confident we'll get there.
I know that Councilman DiCicco was asking about the senior citizen discount. I was distracted at the time. Would you mind repeating that for me?
The senior citizen discount, it's set by the Commission ultimately. Back then Meadow Brook would come 1162 03/22/05 - FY '06 OPERATING BUDGET to us and have a rates sheet for all types of play, including daily play. The Commission would approve it every year based on -- they come back with percentage increases. They might say, we want percent, and they'd show 7 us a list of comparable courses and what 8 they're charging. Then we would negotiate 9 back and forth at times, saying it shouldn't 10 be 10. Maybe it should be 3 percent. Maybe this permit the seniors shouldn't be touched and the youth golf should. So ultimately the Commission approves the rate schedule.
Wonderful. Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman Nutter.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Commissioner, I'd like to go back to where I was and then move to a couple other areas. A couple years ago, a part of the big discussion with regard to this strategic plan was an effort to get at the question of 1163 03/22/05 - FY '06 OPERATING BUDGET what is the proper funding level for a well operated and maintained park system. Now that we have the strategic plan, what is the answer to that question? What does the plan tell us about funding levels? Or what is the appropriate funding level for a 9,200 acre park and the variety of the services and buildings that we have?
If we could have an actual figure that would be helpful.
After all is said and done I don't think the plan ever quoted figures and a dollar amount. They do comparisons to other cities and things like that. And they told us that going forward, typically park systems across the country, would need to generate 30, 40 percent of their own operating cost and revenue. So currently we are at a $13 million budget walking in here today, generating about 11 percent, I think, of our revenue.
I understand 1164 03/22/05 - FY '06 OPERATING BUDGET that. But that's based on the budget that you have today. My question is a slightly different question, which is, when you look at the size of our park system and what we provide, whatever the measurement is -- quite honestly I think if we checked the testimony from a couple years ago when this strategic plan idea came up, what ultimately was done through the strategic plan might be a different issue. What was discussed here when we were talking about it was one of the goals was to get to the point of a recommendation from an independent party looking at our park system, comparing to others and giving us some better sense of what is the appropriate and needed funding level, putting aside what we actually have or what we appropriate. What is the number that experts would say in consultation with yourself and the Commission, what would it take financially to run and operate a superior park system. I thought that was one of the questions from a couple years ago.
Our consultant on this 1165 03/22/05 - FY '06 OPERATING BUDGET project, Leon Younger, would say three to four times our current budget.
An example, Councilman Nutter, is if we go to other jurisdictions like Chicago, Chicago is cut up into four or five districts. Each of their districts, the revenues or funding is about what ours is for the whole park. Their districts are about a quarter to our size. So I think if I remember from the consultant when he came in, his base number was about $30 million funding.
His base funding that a park this size should have from funding from municipal government would be about $30 million, with the Commission's responsibility of raising an additional percent. So the 21 three to four times isn't all funding from the 22 City. The Commission would have some 23 responsibility raising 25 percent of that 24 total budget. 25
So with all that 1166 03/22/05 - FY '06 OPERATING BUDGET information in mind, what steps or what plans are being formulated to move in that direction? Or has the Commission even decided to try to move in that direction?
The Commission can control what it controls. We have worked diligently on the revenue zones. In other words, we want to make sure that we raise on an annual basis somewhere around $5 million. It would be recurring income. In a number of ways we're working through how you would do it.
We currently generate outside of City dollars about $2 million a year. We're trying to generate an additional $3 million a year of new dollars. That can be done in a number of ways. For instance, every time there's a new concession, we have, I would say, a tacit agreement with the City that the new revenues were coming in at 50/50. If there's a Starbuck's somewhere in 1167 03/22/05 - FY '06 OPERATING BUDGET the park and it generates a million dollars a year, in concept right now the park would retain $500,000, and $500,000 would go to General Fund.
That revenue stream hasn't been created yet. So it's my belief that 50 percent of all new revenues would go directly to park.
Is there an agreement with someone that that's the way it works?
There's an understanding with the Managing Director, who is, as you know, soon to be an ex-Managing Director. We're working it through the new Managing Director, but I don't have the same understanding level yet. I'm not saying I won't get it. I just don't have it yet.
Thank you very much. 1168 03/22/05 - FY '06 OPERATING BUDGET Let me ask one question. We have a community organization that is talking about historic trees. They're saying that in the 5800 block of Willows they've been requesting tree trimming over the years, but have been told these are very old historic trees and so they can't get it treated. Would you check on that for us and let the President know?
Yes. Willows Avenue. There are three trees there that they have been complaining about for years. We've got historic districts and now we have historic trees, so it goes. Councilwoman Brown, please.
Thank you, Madam Chair. My next question goes to the issue of park safety. We know regrettably last year our City had to endure the jogger rape and the circumstances around that. I know that there have been a few cameras put up in the park. What else has been done in that particular 1169 03/22/05 - FY '06 OPERATING BUDGET area and what has been done to improve cell phone reception, particularly in the Wissahickon Valley, which can provide an additional means to provide safety in the park?
Public Property actually was pursuing the idea of cell phone reception. The study has been done. The RFP is on the street right now, I believe. I don't know that they've got responses back from that, but they have addressed that issue. That process has been moving forward.
Is Public Property handling the installation of the cameras as well?
The Police Department put up those cameras as part of a grant program. Actually, it's interesting you mention that. I don't think we've gotten our first report back yet from that.
The pilot program, it's about maybe six months since it started. 1170 03/22/05 - FY '06 OPERATING BUDGET
I'd like to follow-up on that cell phone issue. Director Borski, one of the things I hear from the Police Department is the fact that there must be some confusion or communication issue. If an incident occurs in the park, like on Kelly or Lincoln Drive, I believe years ago there were numbers put on the light poles for police radio to come with some reference. If you call 911 when there's an auto accident on Lincoln Drive, they want to know what hundred block of Lincoln Drive. What hundred block. It's very difficult for them to point out locations along, I believe, Forbidden Drive. Years ago there were numbers 1171 03/22/05 - FY '06 OPERATING BUDGET installed on the light poles for a person to be able to report. I asked Police radio about that and they said they didn't know anything about the number system, where if a person was in trouble they'd say, I'm at marker number 18. There's apparently no reference to what those numbers mean to the police, at least in the communications division. Excuse me for going longer than I should -- but I just wanted -- talking about the cell phones and the lots -- the way the police respond to crime in the park.
We can investigate it further. I know that, for instance, our parking lots are all numbered and identified. For this previous system, I personally cannot speak to it. There are numbers on the poles, so we could investigate why it's maybe not sort of up and running right now. I'll definitely look into that.
On Forbidden Drive there's numbers and they were put there by the park to reference various locations along Forbidden Drive. 1172 03/22/05 - FY '06 OPERATING BUDGET Cell phones, I know Cingular does not work down on Forbidden Drive at Bells Mill.
Forbidden Drive Bells Mill is definitely a drop point. There's one small one in the Northeast as well. The locations where there is not cell phone reception have all been identified. Now trying to figure out a way to rectify that situation, since the world is such cell phone world, is step two. But there is a whole segment that would say exactly that.
Going to testimony on . I'm actually trying to understand the performance measurements regarding grass cutting. The frequency is not projected to be reduced between FY '05 and FY '06, but the targeted acreage to be cut is almost 10,000 acres less. Can you explain that for me?
For one thing we have talked about this idea of non-duplication of 1173 03/22/05 - FY '06 OPERATING BUDGET services with the Recreation Department. We assumed their acreage for a year. We introduced them to our contracting policies and practices and now have handed back that idea to Rec, so that explains some of the acreage. We picked it up and then we gave it back to Rec to manage their contractual acreage based on our system. Also I think we just, based on pure numbers, are probably trying to eliminate one cut in the coming season.
So this can be viewed as one by-product or outcome of the consolidation of tasks between the two departments, which is a good thing?
Was there some discussion already on Growing the Neighborhood from your testimony on ? Did one of my colleagues already ask about that, because we don't need to be redundant?
No. But that's a great program. We're really thrilled with the results. 1174 03/22/05 - FY '06 OPERATING BUDGET
Could you tell us about that? One thing I'm particularly concerned about is that funding is scheduled to end in FY '07, right?
Right. Because it is foundation and private enterprise driven. But it is a very successful program and we remain hopeful that Growing the Neighborhood will continue into the future. Current funding standards take us through FY '07. That's all private.
So I would imagine discussions are underway and what collectively can be done with the Administration, Council or not, to bring the companies back into the --
Bring the companies back to the table. Our conservancy is the fundraising arm that's been sort of spearheading the effort to get funding for that project. It's worked very well.
Thank you for your testimony. Thank you, Madam Chair. 1175 03/22/05 - FY '06 OPERATING BUDGET
Thank you, Madam Chair. A couple quick questions about either leases or potential leases. Can you give me the status of the Audubon proposed East Park Reservoir development, and also I'd like to get the status of the East Park Driving Range?
The Audubon Center, which was before us almost two years ago, now has resurrected itself. A tremendous amount of work was done on that project with the potential for Audubon to have a long-term lease of East Park Reservoir. It's our understanding from discussions with National Audubon just in the past month or so that they have put in place a new director for their Pennsylvania operation and that they are committed to that project and it will go forward. I haven't had that meeting yet. Certainly your office will be 1176 03/22/05 - FY '06 OPERATING BUDGET brought into play when that happens.
Will we have to replicate the process that we had before or do we just pick up where we left off?
No. I think we pick up where we left off. Even beyond memorandum of understanding there is now a lease written and in place that the parties agreed to.
Everybody signed off, the Park Commission, the two District Councilpeople, the Mayor?
Yes. I think the remaining details were some insurance issues and I think they might still be outstanding. But certainly the quantum leap has been done. What needs to be done is that Audubon needs to commit the dollars, and they needed a Pennsylvania director in order to do that.
Because it was two years ago, what about the terms and conditions as it relates to the dollar amount? Would we want to readjust those?
We probably will want to look at that. I think that we're still 1177 03/22/05 - FY '06 OPERATING BUDGET talking tweaking rather than reinventing.
East Park Driving Range, just at our last Commission meeting the designs plans were reviewed and approved. They are working with staff on filing design documents. We hope to have no break in service. The driving range will remain open while improvements are going on. The improvements are really quite extensive and quite nice, so that will be a new revenue generator for the park as well.
It will remain open while we're renovating? How can that happen?
Since it took us longer than we anticipated to actually sign the contract, we may not have the improvements that we'd hoped. There's improvements scheduled that we can get to you from the 1178 03/22/05 - FY '06 OPERATING BUDGET contractor on what's going to happen in stages. There should be all new stalls and new turf laid in the range with a temporary trailer for the opening of the season, with everything else being converted at the end of this season. So this time next year the whole million dollars or so in improvements will be in place.
But we can't start any of that until we finalize the lease?
Right. But we've approved the design. My understanding is we're pretty close in the details. So as I'm speaking I don't anticipate any snags in the negotiations.
I've pushed the Law Department that we want to have a new operator in before the weather turns. So sometime before the end of April we want to have the 1179 03/22/05 - FY '06 OPERATING BUDGET lease signed and the operator in, because you know as well as we do how important it is for the community to see change. We talk a lot and very little happens. So it's another example of having something new happen right there.
Is the community organization still involved in the process? Does the new operator understand the relationship that the community group had?
I talked to Anthony Langford. I know he's been involved. My assumption is that he's relaying it back to the community. That's what my understanding is. My understanding is yes.
There was, I guess, a formal relationship with the prior operator. Do we have that type of relationship with the Friends of East Park and the new operator?
I believe that kind of relationship is in the documentation as well. I can make sure. I can get back to you. But I'm fairly certain that relationship carries 1180 03/22/05 - FY '06 OPERATING BUDGET through to the next operator.
Is anybody here that knows, that can answer that question?
Dennis Waller might want to speak to the community. This was a Request for Proposal that was put out. The community responded along at least in the first go round for this RFP as the potential operators. The second time around they did not respond.
No. That's not the community group that I'm talking about. There was a different community group.
Good morning, Councilman. Dennis Waller, Fairmount Park Commission. I think you're speaking of the relationship that was established in the RFP between the potential operator and the community organization itself. Yes, the potential awardee is aware of those conditions. East Park is aware of those conditions and they are formalized in the contract itself. They will be formalized in 1181 03/22/05 - FY '06 OPERATING BUDGET the contract itself. It is in the RFP that they will have a say with regard to employment opportunities, minority/female participation, and the general overall operation and how it impacts on the community. That is part of the agreement.
With the Friends of East Park. And that is in the RFP, the Friends of East Park, not a community organization.
Okay. I know my bell rang. With respect to the Friends of the Audubon Society, the relationship as it relates to their lease, is that also with the Friends of East Park or does there need to be a new organization formed that has more people participating?
I don't recall the exact language for the community involvement in that, but we certainly know it was extensive in the Audubon piece. But I don't 1182 03/22/05 - FY '06 OPERATING BUDGET know that any particular group was mentioned by name.
Mark Focht, Fairmount Park Commission. Councilman, the Friends of East Park are mentioned in the terms of the lease as far as establishing the advisory committee to advise the Audubon staff on the development of the center and the curriculum, so they're specifically listed in there as part of the advisory group.
My understanding is there's going to be a board established to oversee the ongoing operation. There is community participation on that board, I'm assuming?
Correct. There's representation on what would be the stewardship board, which is the interim board that helps establish the center, correct.
I know there was some concerns about the number of participants from the community versus the number of --
That was all resolved with your input and they're represented there. 1183 03/22/05 - FY '06 OPERATING BUDGET
Thank you, Madam President. I'll be quick. I just wanted to take an opportunity to thank you for the way in which you approach your jobs. This is one of the City-related departments that really look at things innovatively, take suggestions and come back. You have dialog and try to really work with elected officials and the community. You've had some tough stuff lately. The great job you guys did with Microsoft, Please Touch and the very difficult deal you had to do in dealing with the community and everybody else on Fox Chase, those are the big profile issues. But the day-to-day stuff and the responsiveness of the Fairmount Park Commission, the Commissioner's involvement, the staff's involvement, it's one of the few pleasurable aspects that I have left to deal with on a day-to-day basis. It's really just 1184 03/22/05 - FY '06 OPERATING BUDGET interesting and fun. I know you guys really are committed to your mission, and that is preserving that park and making it the best it can. So I just want to take the opportunity to thank you.
Thank you, Madam Chair. My last question in the area where we were before is, given the present funding level and the components of the strategic plan, is there a schedule or a time line that lays out which task will be completed when? Secondly, is there a document that lays out a plan and its implementation.
A scheduled time line for completion, no, not at this time. But it's something we can work on.
Is there something preventing that? Why isn't there a schedule? 1185 03/22/05 - FY '06 OPERATING BUDGET
The time line was really based more on things that were considered high priorities, moderate priorities, long-term priorities. The decisions were based on several different factors. One was actually ability to complete them. One of the pieces of it was about the appointment of commissioners in that process and whether it was open enough. We've pursued as a Commission sending a letter to the President Judge about advertising openings and things like that. That had high priority. It was something that was important to the strategic plan and something that we could also act on right away. There are some longer term infrastructure issues --
I would agree that making sure that process is open is important. But quite honestly, in the context of where we are, in the very large scheme of things, I cannot imagine that for most of the park users, in a 9,200 acre system, one of the largest, if not in the country, possibly in the world, that the appointment process for 1186 03/22/05 - FY '06 OPERATING BUDGET Fairmount Park Commissioners would really rise to the level of what is on many of the users' minds when they think about what's going on with this system and what some of its needs are. Now, I understand if you can do something you can hit it quickly and get it done. But there were numerous recommendations in the report. So what I'm trying to understand is, given your funding level, of the things you think you can do, what the President testified as to what the real number should be, whether it's City support or additional fund-raising, do you have the funding in place to implement the recommendations of this long awaited strategic plan?
An example would be that we have, through foundation dollars, done a significant signage study through the park. Along Forbidden Drive those signs would be in 1187 03/22/05 - FY '06 OPERATING BUDGET place. We would love to implement that process throughout the park.
Why don't we do this? Could you forward to the Chair the list of the various recommendations, what the priority order is and when you expect to complete those tasks? It will be helpful to try to understand how this is all going to happen, because I'm not hearing anything at the table other than possibly a conceptual agreement about things to happen in the future, about sharing of funds from new revenue sources. Although I'm not hearing that there's an actual agreement and I don't know what our role is in that process if the dollars -- 50 percent are going to disappear into the park's budget off the balance sheet. But that will be a different argument for a different day. Someone gave us a lot of money. There was a lot of discussion in this Council, there are a lot of users and interested parties in the strategic plan, and I want to 1188 03/22/05 - FY '06 OPERATING BUDGET know how is it going to be implemented given your present funding and what the time line is and the completion schedule for those items that you think are important. That's what I'd like to know.
Okay. Second, I don't know when it stopped, but it did some time ago. The Commission meeting schedules and the committees and what items are on the agenda, I don't get them anymore. But when I do, it might be the day before the meeting. A little hard to respond. Is there something going on with the notification process?
It's our understanding that it was e-mailed to all the Council folks probably a week to 10 days before the Commission meeting. If you're not getting them it's an oversight.
That would be 1189 03/22/05 - FY '06 OPERATING BUDGET very nice. I'd like to see the paper. I love trees. I'm not trying to kill anymore. That's why I'm a big supporter of trees. But if I can have a hard copy a week to days 6 out to the office that would be very helpful. 7
Lastly for the 9 moment, in that regard, in terms of the 10 Commission and its meetings and things that come up -- I was informed just a little while ago -- and I'd like to better understand the Commission's process with regard to the proposed relocation of a circus out on Parkside Avenue. Does the Commission approve this?
This is an unusual case, which seems to be less and less unusual. We had a request. The Madam Director had a request from the Mayor's Office to consider locations for the circus. I'm not really well versed on the reasons why the request came over. So the request came over and the park staff looked at two or three locations --
When did the 1190 03/22/05 - FY '06 OPERATING BUDGET request come over?
This past Friday evening, just last week. And fortunately for us, Universal Circus has been on one or two sites in the park before. They're not unknown to us. So in the current case we were able to facilitate the request. The staff looked at locations and determined a location over where the county fair actually used to be. The timing of the event was such that it didn't interfere with the Mann's schedule or any of the real construction that will be beginning in that area pretty soon. Having said that, it's a facilitation and something that we would prefer not to have to do in the future. But on the other hand, when you get a request from the Mayor to put a pretty large venue in the City, at least it's my feeling that that's something we try to facilitate. That's pretty much what happened.
Was there any thought given to the fact that there are a fair number of people who live across the 1191 03/22/05 - FY '06 OPERATING BUDGET street and I just learned about this last night with additional information this morning? This is the only place in the park that's available?
Right. We looked in the park system, and we have an events division that looked long and hard at it, as the chairman mentioned. This is the site of the previous county fair. It was a large enough footprint, as they say, to handle the event. That was why we chose that site. That was all done late on Sunday and early yesterday morning. The first request came in on Friday. There was a lot of thought given to it over the weekend and decisions were made late Sunday night and early Monday morning.
Let's go to the community notice and process issue. Do they have a voice in any of this discussion to have something just summarily thrust on them with no discussion or notification, coordination or anything else? What is the urgency here?
In the normal course it would have come up in a Commission meeting. 1192 03/22/05 - FY '06 OPERATING BUDGET
So the answer is it's not been approved by the Commission?
It hasn't been approved by the Commission. I have sent out a request that everybody allow us to do it. Because the circus opens near the end of this week and it's just about over by the next Commission meeting.
Tomorrow? It's over by the next Commission meeting. In a normal process --
There's no other date? There's no other time that this can happen? This is something that is of such a critical nature that it has to start tomorrow, over the holiday?
As I understand it the circus travels and they're slotted for scheduling. This was obviously scheduled.
No. But outside of the 1193 03/22/05 - FY '06 OPERATING BUDGET Commission's purview it was scheduled sometime ago to be in the City on that date.
All I know is the request that we got from the Mayor's Office.
I don't know. The request was for us to try to find a site to house the event.
Excuse me, Councilman. Would this be Circus Soleil?
It's been at a different location every year it's been in town.
Thank you, Madam President. 1194 03/22/05 - FY '06 OPERATING BUDGET It's my understanding that a site, if not the site, that was being looked at was at Broad and Washington, the Holt sight, where Cirque de Soleil has been performing, but for some reason Mr. Holt never followed up with the operators of this Universal Circus. My understanding is they were actually on the road coming into town last week -- and I could be incorrect in this -- but someone came to my office to talk to me about it. So they were not able to locate it at Broad and Washington Avenue because the owner of that parcel of land never followed up on the request.
Councilman, I appreciate that. My understanding is that there were discussions with the owner and the issue was insurance. The operator was not able to meet the insurance requirements at that particular site. So all of a sudden because of a problem at Broad and Washington, it now ends up the day before out in Parkside.
It could be. I 1195 03/22/05 - FY '06 OPERATING BUDGET was not a party to any of those discussions. It was just dropped on my desk. The guy said, you've got to help us. They're on their way into Philly. I said, well, I don't own the site. The City doesn't own it
I appreciate it. So there's been no discussion with the community organizations out there, the business associations out there. I get the first whiff of it last night. I get slightly more information this morning. All of the decisions have been made and you're just going to go and do it. Is that basically where we are?
We facilitated a request. I'm not trying to dodge your question. The same time frame you got, Councilman, is what I got.
Let me ask this question. Was there any discussion about 1196 03/22/05 - FY '06 OPERATING BUDGET possibly rescheduling it? Is the town going to fall apart if we don't have this particular event at that particular location at this particular time?
The Chair recognizes Councilman Rizzo for a point of information.
I would assume a circus requires L&I inspection. I would assume that they have rides. There's going electrical inspections, I hope.
There's not going to be any carnival rides or anything like that?
So we're assuming some liability here? What kind of contract do you have? What if someone gets hurt at the circus? Is the City on the hook here?
They did a license agreement. It has to be approved by Risk Management, which I assume has already been done. I haven't seen it yet, but the license should be done.
Councilman Nutter, I know you were engaged in conversation. I asked about what liabilities that we may be assuming here on City property. What kind of revenue are we getting for this? What kind of money? What's in it for us, other than having a carnival on Good Friday.
The license agreement will reflect abatement of City services and a donation to the park.
Honestly, Councilman, I don't know right this minute. But it will be based on our special event policy, and that's 1198 03/22/05 - FY '06 OPERATING BUDGET what we would put forward in order to accommodate it.
The issue that I wanted Councilman Nutter to be sure he heard was the fact that there is consideration for liability that Risk Management has already approved. Risk Management already approved and has signed off on this and we assume no 10 liability at all?
We were only asked for a site. The license agreement would certainly address those issues.
Aren't you concerned that you might be buying into liability here? If I were in your shoes I would. Are you aware? Are you or not?
It sounds like an awful fast deal. I'll tell you, if you reacted this quickly on a lot of issues we'd 1199 03/22/05 - FY '06 OPERATING BUDGET be really impressed. Thank you.
Thank you, Councilman. Let me make sure that my position is very clear. I've been to this particular circus. They provide a wonderful entertainment opportunity. My issue is solely with the process by which this has come along. The complete lack of consideration to the affected neighborhood and the commensurate disrespect that is shown to the community that would be affected by something like this. I understand that things happen. But I think it's also incumbent upon the government to lay out to people, you were looking to do something at location X. For whatever reason it didn't work. We may be able to accommodate you at location Y, but not on your timetable. Because you had a problem. There was no problem with the City of Philadelphia. As best I can tell it doesn't sound like we were involved in the transaction. 1200 03/22/05 - FY '06 OPERATING BUDGET Obviously we should try to be as accommodating to people as possible. It's a wonderful event. People will have a good time, et cetera, et cetera. As I've mentioned, I've attended in the past. The issue here is, how we conduct our business and how we treat our neighbors who are very good to the park, who I believe just deserve much more consideration under the circumstances. If the issue here is in an effort to accommodate someone and generate a few dollars, we will then just disrespect and ignore good community neighbors who we've tried to develop a longstanding relationship over time, then we should just say it, that the money is more important than the relationship. That we take whatever we can get from whomever we can get it, whenever we can get it and we really don't care what the impact is on you as community people during one of the significant religious times in this City. I disagree with it. I'm not particularly in support of it. I think it's 1201 03/22/05 - FY '06 OPERATING BUDGET inappropriate and badly handled under the circumstances and something else could have been done or a different location could have been found even under the tight time frame without disrupting a neighborhood under these set of circumstances. So I want to make sure that my views are pretty clear on this issue.