Thank you for coming in to testify. 115 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 Our next witness?
Hello. My name is Farah Jiminez, and I'm the executive director of Mt. Airy USA, which is a community-based development corporation. Before I begin my remarks, I also wanted to comment that you've heard from a number of community-based development corporations already, and I think as we move forward in terms of analyzing the Neighborhood Transformation Initiative and what it can do for the City of Philadelphia, we should recognize that community-based Development Corporations have been working as neighborhood transformers for the last years in Philadelphia. 16 So they're an important partner in this initiative. 17 Mt. Airy USA's mission is to improve the 18 quality of life for Mt. Airy residents through what 19 we call "responsive community development," and over 20 the years, we've carried out our mission by 21 providing housing counseling to first-time home 22 buyers and now to older homeowners as well, 23 providing high school students with summer jobs that 24 are career-oriented, and teaming up with the 25 business associations to deliver supportive services 116 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 to our area merchants. We've also developed business recruitment strategies, and most importantly, we've acquired and rehabbed commercial properties along Germantown Avenue, which is our primary commercial corridor. Recently, Mt. Airy USA broke ground on an 18,000 square foot office and retail complex that will deliver new businesses and services to our community. It includes a branch of the Philadelphia Federal Credit Union and offices for Nationwide Insurance. Our work over the past five years has also brought new businesses to Germantown Avenue. The Trolley Car Diner and North By Northwest are just two examples of new businesses that are claiming citywide media attention. And more entrepreneurs are considering Mt. Airy as a viable location for their businesses. With respect to the residential market, we're finding that housing prices are rising and Realtors are frustrated buyers who are encountering limited supply. But does this evidence of a rebounding business climate and rising housing prices suggest 117 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 that people have stopped leaving Mt. Airy and that they've been leaving it, really, for lower Montgomery County, which is our adjacent neighbor. Unfortunately, the answer to that question is no. 6 And the reasons for our continued population loss are many. They're the same ones you've heard earlier today, which include inadequate public schools, quality-of-life crimes, which in Mt. Airy are auto theft, burglary, and muggings, and high taxes. And they are the same issues that plague all of Philadelphia's neighborhoods. However, in Mt. Airy, that is not the full story. Because people live in our community for second reasons: It's a historic neighborhood that's been recognized nationally for its significant and successful racial and socioeconomic integration. It is a community of acceptance and activism, and it's a middle-income neighborhood that is very attractive as it's defined by trolley tracks (inaudible). But the rest are willing to put up with the public schools. They get involved in terms of trying to support it through parent-teacher organizations, or they serve on the Mt. Airy Schools Committee. There are cooperative schools and 118 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 home-teaching associations. We have superb parochial and private schools, so we offer lots of options for our homeowners. In addition, they adjust to repeated burglaries and car thefts, and they just seem to shake off the nuisances. But one of the things that's having an impact is the cumulative effect, and people are beginning to pack and leave. The post office, for example, our community post office, is expected to close in May, and there is no discussion of another site for that.
The poorly maintained supermarket is threatening not only to leave, but they're saying they're going to put a restrictive covenant on the land so that we won't have another supermarket in our community. For every high-quality establishment that we seem to open up, there's another nuisance business that opens its doors. And the blight along our commercial corridor is infecting our houses in our housing community by creating abandonment within the unit blocks. Mt. Airy residents are getting used to 119 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 leaving the City for their shopping and their entertainment work and sometimes even for school, choosing school choice in the informal manner of fake addresses. And eventually, it just makes sense to leave the City altogether for some of them. So what can we do to stem the tide of out-migration from one of Philadelphia's stable neighborhoods? We need the City's help, we need to be a partner with the City. With respect to the Neighborhood Transformation Initiative, we're excited about some of the aspects it offers. For example, it offers government reform, which, for in terms of a community-based development corporation, if we can have the City reform some of its operations -- for example, we spoke about some of the challenges with acquisition; there's problems with the Department of Records in terms of being speedy and in terms of delivering property that's owned by the City of Philadelphia. For example, it took us 12 months as part of our development project to finally settle title on City-owned real estate. And then after that, we're still dealing with some of the $20,000 in back taxes that the City hasn't 120 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 cleared from this real estate, which threatens our development project. So those are some of the things in terms of the promise of government reform that's one of the ideals of the Neighborhood Transformation Initiative. It also promises renewed investment in all neighborhoods, including middle-income neighborhoods like Mt. Airy. We need this investment in order to keep our residents from leaving Philadelphia and crossing the county line. And it also promises a spirit of cooperation between government, the private sector, and community-based organizations like Mt. Airy. I welcome questions at this point if there are any.
Thank you. I don't see anyone with any questions.
I just want to applaud all of you for just the wonderful work that you do. I think that the hearings have been very informative. And, again, I want to thank you for coming in. Thank you so much. I believe we have one more witness. 121 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562
No. We're going to spend -- this committee will stand in recess until 2 o'clock this afternoon. Yes, sir? UNIDENTIFIED PERSON: We want to speak now before recess because of all the people that are waiting to go.
Are you scheduled to testify this afternoon at 2 o'clock? UNIDENTIFIED PERSON: Yes.
I'm Nancy Salandra, with the Philadelphia Affordable Housing Coalition.
We are a collaborative of organizations, including Congresso de Latinos, Dignity Housing, Disabled in Action, Kensington 122 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 Welfare Rights Union, Liberty Resources, and Women's Community of Revitalization Project. We are committed to increasing resources for affordable housing in the City of Philadelphia. Affordable housing for us means housing that is decent and accessible and for which families earning less than $18,000 a year do not have to pay more than 30 percent of their income. We are invited here today to address the question of what we see as the most pressing question facing our city. For us, the issue is affordable housing. We as organizations work every day with people who work hard at low-wage jobs, often two jobs seldom less than 40 hours a week and who commonly spend well over half of their income on housing, housing that is frequently deplorable. Anyone who drives around this city is visually assaulted by the conditions of the City's housing. It literally takes your breath away. A lot of what is called "blight" in Philadelphia is actually housing, places where people live and try to raise their children -- delapidated, vermin-infested, coated by harmful lead dust, freezing in the winter, leaking when it rains, 123 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 vulnerable to fire or outright collapse, often very crowded, but seldom cheap. In the past months, we've been hearing a lot from elected officials, policy-makers, and planners and academics about the Mayor's Neighborhood Transformation Initiative, an ambitious proposal that promises to do much that needs to be done. It also is certain to transform radically Philadelphia's neighborhoods. One expert's perspective missing from the debate so far, however, is the people in the neighborhoods who will be affected most by this massive program, families stretched to the limit to keep a roof, any kind of roof over their heads. These families know what the lack of affordable smells like, tastes like, feels like. They know the difference decent, affordable, accessible, and permanent housing can make in Philadelphia's neighborhoods. Will the Mayor's plan mean more of this kind of housing? This is one of the questions low-income Philadelphians might want to ask the planners, City Councilmembers, and the Mayor. There are other questions: Which houses 124 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 will be demolished? Will my family be able to stay in my neighborhood? Will my mother's property taxes go up? Will new housing be created that my daughter can afford? Can my son get a job keeping the lots clean? Do I, who have lived in the community my whole life, have a say in what happens in my neighborhood? The Neighborhood Transformation Initiative will be unlike any other neighborhood initiative undertaken in recent memory. The stated intent of the plan, again, is radical transformation, a complete overhaul from top to bottom for the City's most depressed neighborhoods. Given the enormity of the impact of the transformation initiative will have on the residents of these neighborhoods, it is essential that every effort be made to involve them as partners in the initiative planning process. A necessary first step in accomplishing this is the District Councilmembers to hold hearings in their districts. This is especially important for districts likely to be primary targets of the initiative. Hearings here in City Hall are not enough because the central location is actually a 125 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 barrier in a far-flung city, and because City Hall hearings take place during the day, preventing working people, especially the working poor, from attending. We at the Philadelphia Affordable Housing Coalition believe that holding hearings, public hearings, in the districts is an essential first step that City Council can take towards making sure that NTI meets the needs of all Philadelphians.
A fair and just approach to the neighborhood transformation will make every effort to include the voice and priorities of current Philadelphians, not just the theoretical voice of the possible future residents whose incomes allow them the flexibility to move to revitalized upscale neighborhoods where blight has been eliminated. Thank you for this chance to speak.
Good afternoon. Kindly identify yourself for the record, please.
My name is Jimmy Shrode, and I am with Disabled in Action of Pennsylvania. 126 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 Disabled in Action is a grassroots agency group by and for people with disabilities. We have been in existence for 28 issues and address the issues facing us in education, employment access, attendant services, health care, and most importantly, housing. We serve all people with disabilities no, matter what their age or their disability, and we have members in all of the areas of the City of Philadelphia as well as some in outlying Pennsylvania. There's a dire housing crisis in the City of Philadelphia for people with disabilities. Housing is a basic necessity for everyone and especially for people with disabilities who live in Philadelphia. According to the Office of Housing and Community Development on of the Year 27 Consolidated Plan, the number of people with disabilities in need of housing is 65,300 people. This is 30 times more than people with AIDS, 10 times more than the frail elderly, and 10 times more than people with mental -- health and mental retardation. The housing crisis for people with disabilities has been due to a lack of enforcement 127 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 and implementation of Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, especially concerning the Philadelphia Housing Authority, a lack of 1affordable housing for people with very low incomes. People with disabilities live on an income of approximately $6,000 a year or less. There is an 85 percent unemployment among people with disabilities. Affordable housing for us really has just been a dream. We have never been able to have access to it either physically or economically. In 1997, the Office of Housing and Community Development entered into a partnership with the Disabled in Action to try to address the unmet housing concerns of people and family members with disabilities, but after four years, it's become apparent that the City has not been able to significantly alter or diminish our housing crisis. The vast majority of people with disabilities cannot afford any of the accessible housing units, which have been developed with tax credits and City financing because it is aimed at 30 percent below median area income. People with disabilities disabilities are 80 percent or more below the median 128 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 area income. As an advocate, I have come across many people with disabilities who are living in the most horrible circumstances. People are paying anywhere from 80 to 120 percent of their incomes on rents for inaccessible apartments. These apartments are usually owned by slum lords. These slum lords keep these places in horrible and deplorable conditions. There are many people that live without windows that adequately open or close or even glass panes in the windows, heating, any of the major systems such as electricity or water. And yet these slum lords have been able to make profit off people with disabilities and also people who are poor in this city by thumbing their nose at Licenses and Inspections and never having to meet any of the codes that housing has to meet. That is why the Disabled in Action is a member of Philadelphia Affordable Housing Coalition, and we endorse the call for affordable and accessible housing for people who make under $18,000 a year. We really need housing that is integrated. 129 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 Currently, housing that has been built for people with disabilities have been in congregant settings. People with disabilities have been and are still placed in disability-only apartments controlled by nursing homes and other services providers. These apartments have been placed away from the community as a whole. " We want to live in homes that are integrated with non-disabled people of all ages. We want to be a part of every community and be a vital, giving member of the community.
We cannot do that in the segregated high-rises, often in a forgotten corner of town. Moreover, we need to increase some of the access-modification program. Currently, it's only at $2 million and underserves people with disabilities, many of whom who live in housing that doesn't often meet the codes required by Licenses and Inspections. A lot of people with disabilities who do own their own homes do not have the money or the means to fix up their homes when their homes need repairs. So there needs to be some coordination 130 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 between the access modification program and any emergency home repair programs in the City so that people with disabilities don't have to lose the homes that they do have, and these homes don't have to turn into blighted shells. " By being visitable, we mean a home with a zero-step entrance, a 36-inch wide doorway, a path of travel that is 36 inches wide, and an accessible powder room that a person in a wheelchair can use and be able to close the door behind them. This allows people with disabilities to visit other people in the neighborhood and it allows elderly to age in place so that they are able to keep their homes. Already the United Kingdom has embraced this concept. In the United States, Austin, Texas, and Atlanta, Georgia, have adopted these ordinances. Disabled in Action has information and videotapes regarding visitability. In the end, what we really want is affordable, accessible, integrated housing. 131 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 Thank you for the opportunity to speak today.
Thank you. Thank you very much. Council will stand in recess until 2 o'clock. Thank you. - - - (Counsel stands in recess, then reconvenes.) - - -
Good afternoon, everyone. We're back in the public hearing regarding Resolution 010562. Mr. McPherson, who is our next witness?
Good afternoon. And thank you very much, Madam President. It's my honor to address this Council regarding the issues of neighborhood transformation from the standpoint, 132 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 one, as a longtime resident and community activist of some sorts in North Philadelphia primarily based in the 28th Ward and the 5th Councilmatic District of Councilman Darrell Clarke, and also as a business owner in that same neighborhood who's decided to pull down stakes and to make sure that we could maintain as much positive activity as possible in the community. I was here earlier this morning for approximately two hours and listened to a lot of the testimony from a number of the neighborhood groups and in addition to some of the people who were stakeholders in the process -- or potential stakeholders in the process. One of my concerns -- and there are many, but one of my primary concerns is that the Neighborhood Transformation Initiative develop what is a plan of action that can be distributed amongst the people in the community so that we know exactly what the Neighborhood Transformation Initiative is and how it's going to be implemented in our neighborhoods. In the initial meetings regarding neighborhood transformation, we had requested 133 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 information about the plan, meaning that exactly how resources are going to be deployed, exactly what areas, and why, so that we could justify what is going to be done in our neighborhoods. We don't want to see general and wholesale demolition without their being a plan in place to show how that demolition then is going to affect our continued occupancy in the area, because we have a lot of problems in North Philadelphia and we feel that an initiative of this type in intent, as was discussed earlier, could absolutely benefit the residents of this city, but we also want to make sure that it is not just a political process which doesn't lead to effective change for the people in our community. The best way we feel that that could be done is the make sure that the people who are the subjects of the transformation initiative are actually workers who are involved in the transformation process. Because one of the major that problems we have in our community is employment for those who are unskilled laborers or those who are lowly-skilled laborers. And we think there exists a lot of opportunities in an initiative of this type which could help a lot of the people, who 134 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 are outside of the labor pool right now, to help transform themselves, in essence be a part of the solution, instead of staying outside of the process and then remaining a part of the problem. So that is one thing we're really concerned with how the people in the community are going to be involved, if at all, in the transformation process -- the physical transformation process, meaning how they're going to work along with whatever community organizations or municipal agencies that are going to be involved with actually implementing this plan in a comprehensive way. Secondarily, one of our concerns is how do we ensure that we move to stabilize the existing communities that exist, the housing stock, and to maintain and improve our economic development corridors and strips. Because one thing that I find a lot in traveling around North Philadelphia and West Philadelphia is that the areas that are closest to the economic development strips in, for example 52nd and Market Street, in North Philadelphia, we have 29th and York Streets and the like. In and around those areas, you have blighted conditions 135 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 that have not really been addressed so that they can then be a part of improving on what those strips are, because most of those commercial strips developed out of the late '70 in the Model Cities programs.
Some of them may have developed in the '80s under the Enterprise Zone programs, and then in the '90's under the Empowerment Zone programs. So at every interval and every decade, there was change, and there's a lot of change that is going around us in Philadelphia, but we're not keeping pace with the change because we don't have an effective plan that then replaces over time the things that we lose every ten years or so. For example, we don't have an effective plan which replaces population in the housing setting, and we don't have an effective plan which replaces businesses that go out of business in economic development setting. So we're not replacing what we lose. And that's, I think, one of the things that the resolution was designed to address: To identify how we can replace the population and how we can replace the businesses that we have been losing in our cities. We don't see a real distinction in a real 136 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 sense between housing and economic development. Earlier a lot of the speakers spoke about affordable housing, and a lot of the concentration was on the housings stock. Absolutely that is critical, but it's very important also to maintain economic development in a coordinated fashion that connects with the housing. 'Cause a lot of times what will happen is that the people in the neighborhoods where the housing is will then take their dollars outside of that neighborhood and spend those dollars with businesses in other communities, which there is no problem with, but ultimately, we need to make sure that the business that is exist in those communities are supported by the residents that live there. So I spoke very generally. And specifically, I would like to speak about the housing issue as we see it, as I have been requested from some community groups to address, because I guess me being a lawyer and me having some experience in this regard, there are some things that I could address. One of foremost problems in stabilizing, as I talked about -- I'm still under the 137 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 stabilization issue -- in stabilizing the housing stock is that the buildings as they get older, those that are not in imminent danger of collapse and that do not present a very significant problem in terms of structural condition in our communities, they will at some point present those problems because those properties are not being repaired. So I think there needs to be at some point an initiative to make sure that there is a fund developed, a grant fund. And if that can't be supported in terms of our budgetary issues, maybe a loan fund, but some type of fund which allows for anywhere from 2,000 to $5,000 so that people can apply for that money to fix up those properties which are not in imminent danger of collapse but which just need repair.
I'm speaking of properties that may be maintained and, in some instances, yes, vacant properties. Because a lot of us, it may be a roof needed to stabilize the property and --
In the concept of this program, there is encapsulation.
So the encapsulation would address part of what you are talking about, would it not?
Yes, it would. But then the other part, if I were to go and attempt to acquire a vacant property on my block from the Vacant Property Review Committee and I go through that process, then once I would acquire that, then the -- realistically, there becomes a need at some point in time for financial resources in order to stabilize that property. Sometimes folks can come in and do that, but they can't raise the money in order to stabilize the process. So they can get the property but they don't have the funds to put a roof on it, to repair some beams or some joists that may be faulty, to prepare a utility system, whether that be heating, electrical, or otherwise. And this is something that they could do potentially with small contractors and organizations that exist out there already which are City-certified and which would come in and do those 139 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 repairs. But if the cost then becomes a or a $15,000 issue, then often that's way beyond the scope of what someone can do in getting that property repaired and then get someone in there so that they can either get rental income or they can buy it for themselves or their families. So I feel that if a fund exists in that range of 2 to $5,000, that amount of money really 10 can repair a lot of the properties that may eventually go under demolition and act as a preemptive strike in a sense against wholesale demolition. And there was a discussion earlier about some of the cost of rehabilitation as opposed to the cost of demolition. And certainly, it would probably be easier to demolish some of the properties, but then is there a plan upon demolition to address what the potential use would be and how much the cost would be for including that property in an overall area-wide plan? One of the good things about North Philadelphia plan, even though it fell short of its broad-based goals, was that it did identify what were some of these significant issues, and you can 140 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 still go and look at the plan and see what may have been achieved and what may not have been achieved. " I don't know if that exists in this current initiative. I hope that it does, and that is what we have been asking all along in terms of the initiative. Does it present a plan of action which allows us to get involved and have input into that process? So those are some of the issues from the standpoint of stabilization. It's a very, very real problem when you create more and more needs from demolition as opposed to stabilizing the existing stock in and around our city, and I think we need to focus on stabilization and secondarily on demolition. Thirdly, we've talked about a number of the other issues which have a collateral effect upon development in our city, and we know those issues are education, those issues are crime, and those 141 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 issues are just general neglect, but not neglect in some cases. On the issue of education, we feel that it's important to make sure that the educators understand that there is a causal link between the outcome of education and how the young people in our city are educated and the continual repopulation of our communities. If our people are not educated in the proper way, then they cannot then get the employment, which allows them to joint the tax base, which allows them to then purchase houses, which keeps the link of activity going and going and going. And in and around our schools a lot of times, it gets back to stabilization. There are a lot of vacant properties which could be utilized, if rehabilitated, for some type of training program, an initiative which is going to link the education of the young people to their daily activities in school.
So that if you know that you do not have the resources to have a great computer program in your school, then there may be a community organization that can have the property across the street and then to utilize that nonprofit structure, 142 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 if supported through our local foundations, to then service the students in the school where they can come after school and get training, which is going to help to develop their skills and talents, whether that be computer training, whether that be basic -- basic construction training, any kind of training which allows them then to not only go from the school but then to link into other activities which are happening in the community that would then increase the output of those young people being involved in a productive manner once they graduate from school. I don't see the properties that are around and near our schools which are vacant properties being utilized as buffers or in any way linking school activity to the activity that's going on out of school. I see a lot of those properties being used for a lot of negative reasons -- being used to sell drugs and some other things, when those properties can be shored up and made a part of the school extension. I know before, there used to not only be the major school, but there were extension activities which helped those schools to graduate our young people. 143 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 So from the standpoint of housing and its influence even upon the surrounding reality of our schools, that's one thing Also crime. The overall impact of crime upon our communities is very devastating, but one of the issues that is important is that the Police Department and the law enforcement community be more proactive in reaching out to our communities and working along with us. And you see that happening now where you have some community policing efforts going around the City, which are going to help with effort like neighborhood transformation and others to try to transform our communities. So it's important, we see, to make sure that there is no separation in the way that we look at this population loss and the way that we look at transforming our communities, that education is linked with crime, crime is linked with housing, housing is linked with economic development. We look at them all as being part and parcel of a larger process, which we as a community believe to have some input into. So I would like to challenge Council to continue to reach out in efforts of this nature to 144 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 make sure that community residents -- and not just those who are already involved in the process, but those who are out there who have not been involved, who may not even know about these types of sessions, and certainly may not have access to get to these type of sessions, that Council continue to reach out to people and make sure that folks are involved. That means that then Council holds meetings in the community at our churches, at our schools, at our other places of activity. I think those are important things because Council really serves as the body which is protecting the interests of the larger communities. And its pure legislative function is one thing, but I think also Council's function goes beyond just enacting legislation but making sure that the people are involved in the processes of government. And a lot of that will not take place necessarily from an executive level. It really has to happen from the standpoint of Council in its role as a legislative body. So I would encourage the Council to try to reach out and to take that reach-out into our communities and make sure that people have a part in 145 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 what happens with not only this particular initiative but with everything that Council is doing, because a lot of times we don't really know out in the communities what's going on down here in City Hall.
And our people are largely not informed in many cases, and in some cases, overwhelmed by the nature of the process that exists here in this governmental body, and they just will not saying anything because they don't know what's going on. So I applaud Council for this effort and encourage you to continue to reach out to the people and make sure that they know what's going on. Councilman Nutter spoke earlier about the mechanics as it relates to this process, and he discussed his concern that people know about really what was going on, and he asked some questions, and folks said that they didn't really know from a planning standpoint where this process was. That is in essence really why I am here. I wanted to take the message back to my community to let people know what was going on and what is going on from the standpoint of the plan, from the standpoint of the ground level, not those who are already necessarily involved, but those who would 146 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 like to be involved in this process, and to make sure that Council demands as a part of its charge to the Administration that that information be transmitted to the public. Because so far, we really don't know -- I mean we -- we support the Mayor and we support exactly any effort that's going to try to bring Philadelphia into the 21st century and make us the world-class city that we are and make us a better city, but we certainly want to know what the reality is, the real deal, not just, you know, the speeches and the like. We want to know what the transformation really is and how that's going to takes place. I don't think we can know that without the involvement of Council and Council buffering some of that information down to the community from whatever levels that that exists. Those are some of the issues that I just wanted to raise for the purposes of my community. And if you have any questions, I will gladly address some of those.
Thank you I know that you were here earlier this morning, and we did call your name out, but 147 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 apparently, you had left.
I'm delighted that you came out, because I think you have clearly expressed your concern and I guess not really knowing too much about the program. We are hoping to have community meetings and I'm sure that Councilman Clarke will undoubtedly want a meeting in his district, at which time I think that we could spell out exactly what the concept is of the blight program. Presently, nearly 75 percent of the proposed new money in the NTI initiative is dedicated to demolition. In total, about 4,000 lots are proposed to be cleared. Given no other change in resources, I just can't imagine how many of these lots either your organization or many of the organizations throughout the City would be able to redevelop during the next five years. This is a five-year program, as you may be aware.
And I know that some people are thinking that we're moving at a 148 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 snail's pace on this. Nevertheless, I think it's something that we should all be very aware as to how this money is going to be used. And you talk about vacant buildings. There are schools. That truly disturbs me because I don't think that we should ever have a vacant building near a school because I know that in my district, there was a very large vacant building directly across the street from the school, and there were such nightmarish stories that I heard about what was going on, and it cost a great deal of money to have that building demolished. But it was demolished and we still have a vacant parcel of ground there that could certainly be developed into something worthwhile. But, again, it's the resources, and not everybody has the resources in which to build something there. But I'm sure that there will be a great deal of discussion on this, and we would be more than happy to come in to your community.
Are there any questions or comments? The Chair recognizes Councilman Goode. 149 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562
For the record, Mr. Sharp is a friend of mine for over ten years and a campaign contributor.
Mr. Sharp, because I've had the benefit of talking with your for many years over these type of subjects, I wanted to have you reemphasize a part of your testimony where you talked about education, investment education, and the fact that an investment just in the school district is not enough. And I don't want to paraphrase, but you're saying that basically, there has to be community involvement after school by community-based organizations. Could you just elaborate upon that vision and how investment in the school district and reform in the school district itself is not enough, but investing in community-based organizations that are concerned about education. 150 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562
Yes. What we have been able to do up in Strawberry Mansion is that we have made a concerted effort to go into the schools and to pull out as much as possible young people who were interested in being involved in activities beyond the scope of just their normal 8-to-3 reality, and we found that there were a lot of young people who were interested in that, but the resources that they have to do that are somewhat limited, and they depend largely upon the business in our community and the nonprofits in our community to present them with opportunities to continue their education and to broaden the scope of their training. So what we've seen is that when we bring in young people from the community and teach them the way to operate a business, teach them basic computer training and how to navigate the Internet, when we teach them how to plan and organize special events, because of a lot of times, young people would like to put together special events to raise funds for some of their activities, their organizations, their sports needs, etc. When we have gotten involved with the schools and we've gotten involved with the young people, we've seen a 151 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 greater interest and involvement not only by the community groups but by the young people in those communities, and that they are very willing to be a part of the process of the redevelopment of our communities. Now, we have a long way to go, but we feel that the community is a very important player in the process of reorganization and transformation from the state that we are into the state of the reality that we'd like to be. And, unfortunately, the funding issues and problems in our schools, which we all know about, and the involvement of the private sector and the Edison organization and the like have caused some concern because some people feel that they have not been allowed a voice and a say in what should happen with our schools, and they're the ones out there on the front line who are working to make the educational process as beneficial as possible for our youth. So certainly, we feel that the community organization is a very important player in the process of transforming not only the physical realities in our communities but also the mental 152 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 realities and making sure that people are involved in change, because right now, there's a lot of change going on anyway around us. The change has kind of exceeded our capacity to deal with it. But I think that with efforts of this nature, if we open up the process to the people in the communities who are dealing with the problems, then we will catch up to the changes and get ahead of the curve. Right now, we're a little behind the curve.
Clearly you're saying also that if we don't stimulate our young people's minds after school, then it's going to be a reflection upon what happens within the schools and within the community.
Yes, it will. It will have a negative reflection if we don't. And it will also mean that the folks who are primarily going to be benefiting from whatever initiatives we have like neighborhood transformation will not be a part of that process. And if such, that means that we can build up great structures but if the folks who are going to benefit from that then destroy those structures because they're not a part 153 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 of the process, then we've actually wasted a lot of time and money on doing things that are not going to reach the desired result because we don't -- we didn't involve the people in it who were supposed to actually change the process. And that's one of the things that's just wrong now with a lot of what we do as leaders and such, but it's a very difficult job that you all have, but you just have to make sure as much as possible that you try to involve the people who are going to be most affected by the decisions that are made by this body and other bodies in the actual process of decision-making.
Thank you. Are there any other questions from members of the committee? (No further questions.)
Mr. Sharp, thank you for coming in to testify, and thank you for your patience.
And thank you, Madam Chairwoman. 154 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562
Is a panel. Ellen Somekawa, Kevin Conare, Steve Culbertson, Paul Malvey, and Ed Schwartz. (Witnesses come forward.)
Mr. Schwartz, I guess you're going to be last, are you not?
So we'll be getting ourselves quite comfortable for your testimony. Who's going to testify first?
I have prepared testimony but it doesn't speak specifically to the initiative but looks more broadly at the question of blight and makes the assumption that blight is the product of 155 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 people choosing to leave the City, so I'm thinking that we have to really examine what makes people stay or leave. My family and I have made a commitment to making Philadelphia our home. We bought a house in Olney. My spouse is a public school teacher of ten years, and I have spent a good part of the past twelve years helping to build Asian-Americans United, a community organization dedicated to strengthening Asian communities in Philadelphia. For the past six years, I've been executive director of Asian-Americans United. The single factor that has ever caused my partner and I to discuss leaving Philadelphia has been the thought of sending our son to the Philadelphia public schools. We want to stay and be a part of the fight for quality education for all children, but what if the cost of staying is to sacrifice our child's opportunities to develop to his full potential? We want to be a part of the diverse and vibrant mix that is Philadelphia, but we also want our child to have access to schooling that is challenges, rigorous, and safe. And I know that we are not alone in this. 156 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 What families want is to live and raise their children in healthy, environmentally-just, and sustainable communities. Baseball stadiums, regional performing art centers, and hotel rooms do not get us there. Tow trucks and wrecking balls will not get us there either. Today I want to talk specifically about the crisis of Philadelphia public schools. This nation and this commonwealth have made it a policy to turn its back on poor children. The underfunding and unequal funding of public schools in poor communities in this country should be called out for what it is: Neglect, willful, criminal child neglect. What else do you call it when children go to schools with leaky roofs, peeling paint, closets for bathrooms, and filthy bathrooms? What else do you call it when children can go through 12 years of schooling and leave without being able to read? What else do you call it when children are labeled "failures" for the failures of the adults who are responsible for them? It is repugnant that Tom Ridge and State legislators have been using the failures of the 157 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 Philadelphia public schools as a rhetorical wedge in the push for the privatization of public schools. The public schools in Philadelphia are in their current state of neglect because of the inadequate funding from the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. With its unjust and inequitable State funding formula, the Commonwealth is violating its constitutional responsibility to provide for the thorough and efficient education of all children. The Commonwealth has shown it would rather pour money into imprisoning our children than in educating them. And then these same decision-makers are the very ones who now say that they are appalled by the conditions of our schools. I am speaking to you about this because I find that there is an unforgivable lack of City leadership in responding to this crisis of our schools. What the folks of this City expect and deserve is for City leaders to stand up in defense of our children in the face of the attacks. I'm talking specifically about the Mayor, City Council, and the School Board. What we expect is for City leaders to be addressing the crisis of our public schools with a 158 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 sense of urgency, moral outrage, and purpose. Instead what we have been giving is vague and simpering resignation. I expect City Council to take a stand in principle against the privatization of Philadelphia public schools, to examine and pursue all avenues for fighting against this fundamental and historic step backwards. Why? 1.
Privatizing the public schools would be a fundamental betrayal of the principle that all children are entitled to a free public education. " Why is the Mayor so anxious to say that to our children. Is City Council going to be complicit in its breach with a century-old social contract, the promise of universal, free public education? 2. Public education works. Just look in the suburbs, in places with an adequate tax base to sustain quality public schools. Why is it that school districts serving poor children, like Chester 159 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 and Philadelphia, are subjected to these experiments in privatization? It's because privatization is A crass attempt to get out of committing adequate funding for our schools by instead disclaiming responsibility for them. The same suburban politicians who tell us that you can't fix the problems of public education by throwing money at it lavish money on the schools of their own children. This society has the money and the will to educate an elite, but rather than commit the same kind of resources to the children of the poor and disenfranchised, we engage in a charade of commissioning study after study to learn how to make schools that work. We know how to make schools that work. What we lack is the will to do it. I expect the City Council to join in as a plaintiff in the racial discrimination lawsuit against the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Every time the City agrees to postpone action on its racial lawsuit against the Commonwealth, it is submitting to extortion. It is trading off the only long-term solution to the crisis of our public schools for temporary favor with State officials. 160 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 By allowing the Mayor alone to speak on behalf of the City of Philadelphia and to postpone action on the lawsuit time after time, City Council is ceding its responsibility and giving up its own responsibility for the well-being of the children of this city. I expect City Council to examine its own funding priorities, even as it is challenging the Commonwealth to live up to its obligations. I expect City Council to demand that the Edison report be made public and that there be public engagement on this issue. Don't allow our children's futures to be decided in backroom deals and behind-the-door trading. It's bad enough when those practices bought us NexTurf; let's not make the same mistakes when it comes to decisions that affect the life chances of future generations of Philadelphians. For our part, we will fight for our children, we will fight so that they are able to grow into the literal, articulate, analytical, critical, passionate, creative, committed, confident people that we know that they are capable of being. We ask that you join in the fight with us. 161 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562
Hello. My name is Steve Culbertson, the executive director of the Community Development Corporation of Frankford Group Ministry. I want to thank you, Madam President, and members of City Council for allowing me and all of us to speak today. In a moment, I'll speak about my experiences with population loss and neighborhoods revitalization in Philadelphia. However, I want to be clear at the outset that I am in support of the Mayor's Neighborhood Transformation Initiative. I am in support because we need to embark down this pathway of revitalizing neighborhoods wholesale in Philadelphia. I've been involved in the revitalization of low-income communities in Philadelphia for the last 12 years. Currently, I'm working to stabilize and revitalize parts of Frankford. I've also worked in eastern and North Philadelphia and West Philadelphia. If there's one thing I've learned in Philadelphia, it is that there's no easy answer to turning around neighborhoods that are declining economically. However, the solution to 162 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 neighborhoods decline is out there. It is not simple, fast or cheap. If we want to change our neighborhoods, we must invest heavily in four things: Land acquisition, demolition of existing structures, abatement of environmental hazards, and restoration of the infrastructure. This is number one. And in other words, the Mayor's Neighborhood Transformation Initiative. Real-estate development and home improvement to stimulate residential and commercial markets in Philadelphia's neighborhoods; in other words, a little bit of NTI. Crime prevention to make neighborhoods completely safe. And education, because all of these other things are irrelevant as long as the public school system of the City of Philadelphia fails to provide a decent education for its children. Let's take the last one first. I believe in order to bring about neighborhood transformation, the single most important issue that we must address in the City is education. It's the single most important factor in why people flee Philadelphia. 163 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 People appear willing to put up with some petty crime and high taxes if there is a decent public school for their children to attend. The most recent example of this is in my neighborhood with the new public school in University City neighborhood. Property values in some sections of my community have more than doubled since the announcement that Penn was backing a new public school. Then there's crime. Crime is actually the second most cited figure in population loss, as far as I know. People leave Philadelphia because they are scared of being victims of crime. I won't talk about this issue because I'm no expert on it, and it appears that we're starting to deal with crime under the leadership of Chief Timoney -- though I do believe that there's a limit to what can be done as long as any guns -- that's right, I said "any guns" -- within the City limits. With these things said, removal of blight, or more exactly, the transformation of our neighborhoods through land reform is absolutely necessary if we are to stem the tide of out-migration from Philadelphia. And I think even 164 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 more importantly make Philadelphia a destination residential community which, let's face it, if we fail to do, will leave Philadelphia without the revenue to support City government. This picture is rather bleak. I don't want to leave you there. The Neighborhood Transformation Initiative, which, I would agree, is not perfect, and asks that we trust the executive branch of government way too much for comfort, is the best shot we've had to bring about Philadelphia's neighborhoods. What will be the result of this initiative? A lot of cleared and hopefully clean land. Is that enough? No. But it's a lot better than what we've got now. And I do believe -- and I guess I would say if I don't believe that if you clear it, they will come.
I don't believe that for one minute. In select sites close to Center City, the rivers and the outer rim, yes, some for-profit market-rate developers will come and be able to make a lot of money. But guess what? If you give me cleared land and cleaned land in large quantities in the majority of Philadelphia's neighborhoods, I'll 165 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 give you community development corporations. Yeah, that's right, here we are. That's what we've been doing for the last ten years, with no land, little support beyond the Office of Housing and Community Development, the Redevelopment Authority, and the Commerce Department, and truly meager resources. We're here, we're planted, and we're ready to develop all that land. Use CDCs. CDCs are creative, flexible, nonprofit real-estate development organizations under community direction, staffed by crazy, dedicated tenacious people who rarely take no for an answer. Who better to be working with over the next two years while we acquire, clear, and clean all that land to plan with and to continue to develop Philadelphia's neighborhoods. Use CDCs. In short, CDCs are going to need a lot of money to build new communities and rebuild old communities within our neighborhoods. In fact, we're not just going to need $250 million. The figure is probably more like 4 or $5 billion. So, yes, I'd like to see us allocate more of the NTI resources to development through CDCs and low- and moderate-income communities, but we can't 166 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 afford that right now. What we can afford and are poised to do is just start the acquisition process, which is the beginning of all development projects. So let's start it now. I beg of you, pass NTI. And while we're going through the acquisition phase, use CDCs to plan, figure out financing, and then develop stores and houses and apartments and schools and factories for the future of Philadelphia's neighborhoods. Thank you.
Good afternoon. My name is Paul Malvey. I'm director of land-use management at New Kensington Community Development Corporation. I'd like to thank the Council for this opportunity to address the issue of population loss in Philadelphia. According to our surveys and community meetings, we have found that the quality-of-life issues are the most important to the people in our community. Among these life issues, the quality of education stands out. For couples with children, the primary concern is the quality of education at 167 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 all levels. Although there are fine examples of good schools in this city, such as McCall, Masterman, Girls', and Central High, across the board, the perception is that there is the lack of quality education. Another concern to residents and business owners alike is the problem of the City's tax structure. Of major concern to most of our neighbors is the law enforcement issue. The perceived lack of police response and the failure of Licenses and Inspections Unit to enforce laws that already on the books are problems that must be addressed. Teen vandalism, recklessness, underage drinking, drug use, troublesome neighbors, unlicensed car lots, and misuse of vacant land are some examples of our neighbors' complaints. I have personally been to Town Meetings where police captains have promised zero-tolerance for underage drinking and drug use, but with no 22 constant and continued campaign to address these issues, they just creep back to business as usual in no time at all. Quality-of-life issue should have some 168 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 parity with criminal issues if good people are going to be encouraged to stay in the City. An issue we have been dealing with New Kensington, Fishtown, and Port Richmond has been blight, vacant land, and abandonment. We know the people with resources will not live for long in a dump. Since 1996, our partnership with the Pennsylvania Horticultural Society, new Kensington has aggressively targeted vacant, abandoned lots for cleanup and renewal. From simple stabilization -- for example, trees planted around the perimeter and mowing of grasses and weeds to community gardens and pocket parks and by working with City Council and other City agencies, we have transferred over 160 vacant parcels to adjacent homeowners and transformed over 500 parcels of land, each parcel representing a row home, into attractive green spaces. All of this has been accomplished by engaging the community in the planning and development and by insisting on workdays to ensure a feeling of investment in the process and the pride of accomplishment. While once-large tracts of vacant land and 169 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 trash were ignored or avoided, a couple of tires or a small pile of trash now bring calls to us in City services to have the mess removed. This represents a major shift in perception. What was commonplace before is no longer tolerated. The people who live around Comrade Square, a small park dedicated to a firefighter killed in fire in our neighborhood in 1996, have worked constantly with the help of our councilman, Frank DiCicco and the Philadelphia Horticultural Society and New Kensington CDC to clean and restore this park to a bright green space and a fitting memorial to a fine and decent man. These Friends of Comrade Square are now working with the police and with each other to bring -- to begin working on this use of drug-dealing that has sprung up around the park. By coming together to clean and regreen this once-rundown park, they now feel empowered to begin working on other issued related to their quality of life. In the last three years, several new businesses have moved into the neighborhood, including Yards Brewery, which has relocated from 170 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 Roxborough.
Most of these businesses have noted the maintained appearance of the neighborhood and have said that it looked like a place where people care about their community. Recently, a long-term vacant building on Frankford Avenue has been purchased by a business owner who plans to open a bicycle shop. We like to think that the building became more attractive as a result of the two community gardens next door and across the street that we and the neighbors created. By working to change the visual appearance of a neighborhood, you can encourage people to stay. Where abandonment and trash are commonplace, people feel an emotional depression, a feeling that they have been abandoned along with their surroundings. But if a concerted effort is made to reverse this downward spiral to a positive, uplifting turn, a sense of renewal, a feeling begins that maybe things could be improved with hard work and good will on a community level. Not so long ago, we constantly heard people saying that the first chance they got, they were moving out of here. Now more often we hear that the old neighborhood doesn't look so bad after 171 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 all, that things seem to be improving, and that maybe we can stick around and see what happens. We believe that the reform of education, tax, and law-enforcement issues will take time and determination to accomplish. While these issues are being worked out, a concentrated and sustained effort to attack blight and abandonment with community involvement could be accomplished fairly quickly by comparison. By improving the visual image of the neighborhoods throughout the City, it will lift the spirits of the people who live there and hopefully attract new people to share in a feeling of progress and renewal. Thank you again for allowing New Kensington to address the Council.
Hello. My name is Kevin Conare. I am the executive director of Action AIDS, and I will thank Madam President in absentia and all of the members of City Council. My comments are mostly going to be based on the experience of our clients, but they're also going to be based on the staff of our staff, our 172 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 volunteers, and also myself as a professional who came to live in the City eight years ago. And I think all of those are important because the work that we do does enliven neighborhoods, and it involves all of those people at the same time. We serve about 3,000 individuals and families throughout Philadelphia. And when I say "throughout Philadelphia," I mean not many in the Northeast, but in North, South, Southwest, West Philadelphia, and Center City. And we have about 90 employees, 400 active volunteers. One of the major initiatives that the Mayor has had is redeveloping neighborhoods, and we are extremely supportive of that, and we actually believe that that's what needs to happen. Over the last ten years, we have developed -- you know, we have offices in North Philadelphia and West Philadelphia, and our -- our direction is to develop more and more in those neighborhoods where it makes the most difference. I'm going to say what probably has been said before and it's pretty obvious: Simply tearing down abandoned buildings and putting up new ones does not build a community. That's not to say that 173 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 we shouldn't do it and that's not essential, and I absolutely do believe that it is essential, but it has to be a part of the part of a plan. Real communities are a combination of having people involved in their community and having services at those communities, and those are service of all kinds, whether they're health clinics, social services, cultural centers, recreation centers, stores, parks, good schools, affordable public transportation, etc. And I know that seems really obvious, but I think the way we do our planning makes it seem like we don't believe it, and I just want to make sure that we -- make sure our planning looks to the fact that we do believe that, that we cannot have a neighborhood simply by tearing down a building or building a new one. The way it happens is by having -- and I guess I'm repeating what Mr. Sharp -- I don't know if he's still here and I think that was his first name, the first gentleman speaking said, which is that you have to engage those neighborhoods in that planning. That includes private businesses, that includes not-for-profits like many of us at this table, that includes churches, that includes health 174 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 clinics, schools, but engaging them in the planning there. The City has a lot of strengths, and I think we don't capitalize on that. You know, we have the museums and we have the cultural and seasonal and neighborhood events, we have great hospitals, we have great clinics. People come into the City from the suburbs to go to our hospitals, but then they flee back out to not have to experience the other things that happen here. But I think if we could build off of those relationships and let us, those of us who are working in communities and particularly those of us that have particular plans for those communities be a part of what's happening there, even down to the land-use portion of it. If you're going to tear down a building, have somebody adopt that piece of parcel of land; don't have 4,000 empty parcels of lands there. You know, President Verna's letter was actually very specific and gave us four questions to answer, so I think maybe I'll go back to those four questions, but I'm going to skip some of my answers because some of them have already been said here. 175 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 The first is, what are the most pressing issues that Philadelphia faces?
First of all, I want to say that coming from a health-care agency, working in AIDS, I will say that health care is not one of the most pressing issues, and that says a lot about both our City clinics and our hospitals and what we're able to do. I do want to emphasize that that's a wonderful thing, there are things that we have done. But two things are education, which I'm not going to talk about because it's been spoken about by a lot of people here; and housing, decent, affordable housing. All I do want to say about education is, though I will say for our volunteers and our staff, and I've watched this as we opened up offices in North and West Philadelphia and hired people from those neighborhoods, almost 100 percent of them, when they have kids, move to the suburbs, even though they were hired and the reason they're working in those neighborhoods is that they were raised in those neighborhoods. So without going further and really letting the words of the people really speak for it, it can't be under-emphasized. 176 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 I want to take a slightly different tack on the affordable housing piece, though in a population we don't think of when we look at economic development, and I'm talking folks who are in subsidized housing or people who are trying to get subsidized housing but can't because there's not enough slots. There are not -- there are so many folks in the City who need subsidized housing and they don't get it. It's simply because there are not enough slots right now, and that means that they live in overcrowded conditions or on the streets. And the people with subsidized housing are living in awful conditions, terrible buildings, ones that are really substandard. And then, of course, people who are not in subsidized housing are still living below standards in terms what they're getting. The reason I'm talking about this, though, is that I think when we're thinking about economic development, we're really thinking about the tax base, and it doesn't seem like helping this group of people is going to help the tax base if these are people who earn entitlements. But not doing something about this is going to continue that downward spiral that we're in because as those 177 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 people live in overcrowded conditions, it is -- it's debilitating in two respects. Number one, it just simply debilitates the buildings they're in and the neighborhoods they're in; it's just that simple. And it debilitates their families, which, in turn, causes the crime, which, in turn, you know, puts other pressures on -- on the neighborhoods and the cities they're living in. So do I think that part of a redevelopment plan really needs to be looking at those folks and making sure that they have decent living conditions so that the whole area is an area that people want to live in. One of the things that -- I guess let me actually go back to what were the questions. The first question was the main issues, how should they be addressed? I guess the way they should be addressed -- what concerns me a little about the current plan, the 250 million plan, which, I will admit, I have not read; I've been told about it. But is that -- $250 million is not a lot of dollars, but there are a lot of dollars out there right now, and I wonder whether those dollars should be used to leverage other dollars, both private and public, and 178 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 make a larger impact that, in fact, infuse the dollars that many of us have either from HUD or dollars that we have from community development, other kinds of dollars, and have them work together, whether you might not get a bigger bang for your buck. We are building -- we have seven lots up at Sixth and Lehigh and are going to be building 10 transitional housing units and an office space 11 there. And I'm using this as an example.
And 12 what's very interesting is that people said to me, people are -- who don't know and who have not worked in these neighborhoods, and we've been at Fifth and Lehigh for many years. They say, Well, are these people going to want you to have, you know, an AIDS housing up in their neighborhood? Well, in fact, there's none of that prejudice in the neighborhoods. We haven't experienced that at all. The community is very supportive. They're partly supportive, though, because we're not just building housing there; we're building our office there, and that we're becoming a part of that community. And I will tell you, very interestingly, on those plots of lands, now that we have decided that this is our 179 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 neighborhood, we're going into those plots of lands, putting up fences, clearing them up every six months; they get filled with trash if you're not monitoring them. The reason I'm using this example is I wonder if you're going to have 4,000 empty lots and they're not adopted and they're not a part of some community, whether it's any of plans that have been spoken here -- I'm not saying it has to be, you know, an AIDS agency building housing, but if they're not adopted, they're going to be a problem for folks. So it's really the two things that working with the communities to see what they want to do with those areas and making sure that a plan is already being done with it, and also seeing if you can leverage some of the dollars that we have. The biggest thing that prevents us from doing this -- and I will be fast and end quickly. The biggest thing that prevents us from doing this is the cost. I have to be careful because I could get a lot of people angry at me, but the cost of building in the City is exorbitant, and we're not going to get anywhere if we don't figure out how to 180 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 deal with it. Some of it is, we have to figure out how to get the costs down. Those of us in the not-for-profits aren't going to go and build in the suburbs anyway because we've already committed ourselves to this city. But if I weren't a not-for-profit and weren't committed to doing this work, I wouldn't try to do it in the City. So some of it is getting costs down, and again, I think some of it is leveraging the City dollars. If in fact community groups can get some sources of funding, can the City put in other sources of funding? So rather than putting in $250 million unaided -- again, it's the whole leveraging thing -- is there a lot more that we can do? So I guess I'm going to end it with that because I think most of the other things have already been said. I want to just reiterate that I think the most important thing in all of these plannings is to really involve all of us who are in the community, let us be a part of the plan -- not just tell us about it, but actually let us be a part of the plan, and then see if there's ways that we can start bringing some of the different sources of 181 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 money to together to make it more than -- to make it that or $5 billion that we really need. Thank you.
I'm wondering if the four of us on the panel that have testified could take questions now, with due respect to Ed Schwartz. He's got a very poignant point and should probably have this table to himself when he testifies. So I'm wondering if there are any questions for the four of us.
Sure. Are there any questions from the committee for the four panelists at the table? (No response.)
No. But I would like to say that I thought that your testimony was absolutely excellent, and I appreciates your coming in. Thank you so much.
My name is Ed Schwartz and 182 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 I'm here from the Institute for the Study of Civic Values. My testimony itself is in the five and a half pages with the cover and the title on the top. I have shared also with you a rather elaborate packet of data from which this testimony comes. I'm happy to leave it here and let you explore it. I refer to it to the extent that you have questions about things I say in the testimony that might be further answered here. I'm happy to do that too. I guess I'll make one added point. The computer databases from which this comes can also generate this sort of thing by Council districts and planning districts, and I'm willing to work with some of you if you're interested to do that for your own districts. As I understand it, the purpose of this hearing is to gain new insight from the public as to why people continue to leave Philadelphia and what, if anything, City government can do to reverse the trend. It's a question well worth asking. Of the top five cities in the United States, Philadelphia was the only one that lost population. We were one of only two cities that lost population in the top ten, the other being 183 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 Detroit. We do have company in Pennsylvania, however, given that Pittsburgh and Erie lost people as well, three of our four major cities. And in fact, the percentage decline in Pittsburgh was percent, higher than here in Philadelphia. But 7 this is small consolation given the historic role of 8 Philadelphia in the country and the assets that we 9 would like to think that the City has today. We used to take solace in saying that all cities face the same problems that we face, but this is no longer the case. Having spent the last five years in managing national e-mails lists of urban activists on the Internet, I am now persuaded that Philadelphia's in significantly worse shape than many cities, and it is still not clear to me that we know how to recover. So I welcome these hearings as a new opportunity to address this critical problem, which gets at the heart of our overall strategy for improving Philadelphia as a whole. Moreover, as I've said, I'm pleased to provide with you a packet of demographic data that sheds considerable light on what happened within this city between 1900 2000 that points to the areas we need to focus our 184 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 attention. IFCV has been tracking neighborhood data for more than years, both in and out of 5 government. Some parts of that tracking occurred 6 right here on this floor. Over the past few years, 7 we have made considerable use of the serious crimes 8 between 1991 and 1997 database on the Philadelphia 9 Inquirer's Web site which enables us to see every 10 crime created around individual addresses during 11 that period of time. 12 Finally, I have held on to a four-year 13 housing production report that was put together as I 14 was leaving OHCD in 1992. The document on 15 rehabilitation activity in every sense was tracked 16 in the City. The report goes back nine years, but 17 OHCD is continuing to work in most of the same 18 areas. It is interesting to see, therefore, what 19 impact, if any, these efforts are having on the 20 demographic patterns of these inner-city neighborhoods. The results are revealing and not encouraging. Within this framework then, I want to first review how population has moved within the City over the past decade. From there, I will 185 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 relate these patterns to other data that we have relating to crime, schools, and housing rehabilitation. And finally, I will lay out what I believe needs to be done to reverse population decline and what the Institute for the Study of Civic Values is already doing. The data here is extensive, but I will summarize what it shows in each instance. 3 percent decline as opposed to the 8 percent that was predicted.
This, in turn, was due to the higher-than-projected influx of Latino and Asian residents to the City. But of 366 census tracts in Philadelphia, only showed an increase in all of 17 our major groups: White, African-American, and 18 Latino. These were mostly in Center City and around 19 University City, with the rest scattered around the 20 small areas in West Philadelphia, Northwest Philadelphia, and the Northeast. Conversely, there were roughly 50 census tracts with a net outflow of all three groups, and that outflow of all three groups -- white, African-American and Latino -- were mostly in 186 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 Southwest, West and North Philadelphia and West Oak Lane. So there were more than twice as many census tracts, which everyone, regardless of race, color, and national origin, left; as there were tracts where all groups wanted to live. There were census tracts where whites 8 moved in while African-American were moving out, 9 mostly in Eastern North Philadelphia up through 10 Hunting Park. There was net population decline of 11 in these areas of 9,507 people. 12 But the main reason for population decline 13 in Philadelphia, both citywide and within individual 14 neighborhoods, remains what everybody knows -- and I 15 would add, but few in the public arena want to 16 discuss openly, namely white flight. 17 There were 848,546 white residents in 18 Philadelphia in 1990. There were only 683,287 white 19 residents in Philadelphia ten years later, a drop of 20 165 270 people. There were 631,936 African-American 21 residents in 1990, 655,824 in 2000, an increase of 22 23,880. And as has received wide attention, there 23 were 89,193 Latino residents in 1990; 128,928 in 24 2000, an increase of 38,735. 25 These citywide statistics are 187 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 well-reflected in the population shifts in our neighborhoods. There were more than 190 census tracts where the white population declined as the African-American population increased. This wasn't even close. An increase of 92,000 African-American residents in these areas was more than offset by the departure of more than 155,000 white residents. The same was true in the 250 tracts where the Latino population increased. 46,000 Latino residents moved in, 146,000 white residents moved out. 108,000 whites left the roughly 80 census tracts with significant Asian populations as well. So while some of us may applaud, as I do, Philadelphia's new look as a multicultural city, nearly percent of our population dropped over the 17 past decade in response, the most compelling reason 18 for why we continue to lose population while most 19 other cities actually grew over the past ten years. 20 The racial and ethnic harmony that now does exist among the civic and political leaders of Philadelphia has yet to be found in many of our neighborhoods. And until we face up to this harsh reality and start addressing it directly, this process will continue. 188 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 Moreover, if there are tangible problems, such as have been addressed in testimony today like crime and failing schools, that contribute to white flight, then these will end up driving out African-American and Latino residents as well. Between 1980 and 2000, the population of lower North Philadelphia dropped from 170,000 to 125,875, more than percent. In 1980, North 10 Philadelphia was mostly African-American. 20,000 11 people left lower North Philadelphia over the past 12 decade, despite the North Philadelphia plan aimed at 13 turning this process around. The same has started 14 to happen in West Oak Lane, as its elected 15 representatives tell us. Today's white flight 16 becomes tomorrow's black flight if serious social 17 problems aren't addressed along the way. 18 And both crime, especially on our major 19 commercial corridors that serve as neighborhood main 20 streets,coupled with the neighborhood climate not 21 conducive to education, are at the top of this list.
22 Germantown Avenue in Northwest Philadelphia, where I 23 not only live but where I've lived around for my 24 entire life here in Philadelphia 1at one place or 25 another, is a good example of the impact of corridor 189 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 crime on the areas around it. According to the serious crime database that I mentioned before, accessible through the Inquirer's Web site, more than 55 major crimes were committed between 1991 and '97 between the 5500 and 5800 block of Germantown Avenue. 588 white residents left, offset only in part by 264 African-American residents who moved in. Of 10 census tracts around Germantown Avenue between 11 Chestnut Hill and Wayne Junction Station, however, 12 14 lost population. 13 We are now examining the population shifts 14 around other commercial corridors for a distinct 15 report on this phenomenon, but the patterns are the 16 same. In North Philadelphia, Central Philadelphia, 17 90 percent, 99 percent African American, 19 major 18 crimes were committed on the 1900 block of 19 Montgomery Avenue between 1991 and '97. The 20 population and census tract 152 along the avenue dropped from 8,134 in 1990 to 5,167 in 2000 in response. No white flight here; just people moving to safer grounds. The educational climate of the neighborhood plays a strong role itself. The 190 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 population in 72 census tracts, where more than 500 adults did not have high school diplomas ten years ago, dropped by more than 23,000 people in the '90s, with a white flight of more than 74,000. You may recall, some of you, that in the middle of this decade, when welfare reform in the '90s occurred, I came in with data from which this, in fact, comes about the impact of not having a high school diploma would have on the quality of life in neighborhoods. Well, now the census data is the other shoe dropping. Here in the census tracts where there's a sizeable number of residents who don't have high school diplomas, people leave. On the order hand, the population where most adults did have high school diploma -- fewer than a hundred who didn't -- actually rose by 3700 people. Here only 6600 whites moved out, which was, by comparison, a remarkably small outward migration. Clearly, the higher the educational level, the less racial and ethnic differences play a part. And what role is housing rehabilitation, much of it initiated during my four years at OHCD played in reversing this project, especially in areas of greatest need? My answer is, virtually 191 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 none that I can determine. There were 75 census tracts where OHCD financed the rehabilitation of more than housing 5 unites between 1987 and 1992, when I was director. 6 Of these, only 6 gained population. One reason is 7 obvious: There was not then, nor is there now, 8 enough money to deal with the more than a tiny 9 fraction of housing units at any given time. 1 percent of the people who were living in those areas. So unless housing rehabilitation is a part of a broader plan to make the neighborhood clean, safe, economically viable, and a decent place to raise our children -- a point that I have tried to make again and again, both before I was at OHCD, while I was there, and since then -- it will have no 21 impact whatsoever. The Rendell Administration showed no 23 interest whatsoever in adopting such a strategy, as the voters kept saying throughout 1999, We have now to do something for our neighborhoods. The results 192 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 speak for themselves. So given this data, what should we be doing to reverse the population decline over the next decade and make the City a better place than it was before? I can tell you what the Institute for Civic Values is now doing as an example.
We are bringing our resources and leadership-development programs down to the block level through what we call "Philly Blocks," an effort to build a citywide network of block activists and neighborhood groups working to make every block clean, safe, economically viable, and a decent place to raise our children. As part of this program, we've been conducting monthly meetings in the American Street Corridor -- under contract, by the way, with the Empowerment Zone between representatives of more than 30 blocks, City departments, and area organizations like the Norris Square Civic Association, a CDC, not only around cleanups, but around code enforcement and demolition and cleaning vacant lots, around improving neighborhood safety, especially as it affects very young people, around 193 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 strengthening community services for kids and building stronger partnerships with the schools. And as part of this project, we assigned as many 30 TANF participants working with the (indiscernible). I would add here that Norris Square is one of the few areas in the City with a very active CDC, where that one census tract virtually lost no population. And having worked there myself over the last four years in one way or another, I can see why. Because they are, yes, doing housing, but they're trying to solve all of these other problems that you've heard today, and they're making some real difference. There are two or three major organizations that are working together. And that's really what's needed. Beyond American Street, we have created a Philly Blocks e-mail list that has grown from 60 participants last April to more than 230 this month, with new people signing up every day. More than 6,000 activists use our Philly Neighborhoods and Philly Blocks Web sites every month to file 23 complaints with the City, gain information on all aspects of neighborhood revitalization, and how to help one another. 194 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 And on September 15th, just four days after the World Trade Center catastrophe, representatives from more than 50 neighborhood and block associations participated in a Philly Blocks Town Meeting with Ray Jones from the Mayor's Neighborhood Transformation Initiative and Paul DeLorenzo from the Mayor's Office of Children. In the 1970s, ISCV helped build a Philadelphia Council of Neighborhood Organizations to help empower the neighborhood groups of that decade. We are starting to perform the same role in relation to block activists and associations today. And a critical element of this process is finding ways to bring the diverse groups on our blocks and in our neighborhoods to work together so we can overcome the ethnic and economic divisions that still divide the City, as we have seen. " to make the point that we are all in this together. Perhaps our current national crisis has driven this point home as well, I certainly hope so. Either way, this is what we are attempting to do. 195 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 So then, what do we advise City Council add the Mayor in relation to the Neighborhood Transformation Initiative? Put plainly: Take seriously the framework of the entire program and not just the so-called blight reduction plan that admittedly lies at the heart of it. Mayor Street has made it clear that if the program is conceived simply as knocking down buildings, clearing vacant lots, and then finding a handful of CDCs and developers to rebuild 'em, it won't work. Even with the $250 million bond issue supplement annual federal allocations for housing and community development, redevelopment will take years, as we have seen City residents waiting for improvement walk away, especially if there is no improvement in neighborhood appearance, safety, and education along the way.
But if we see the Neighborhood Transformation Initiative as a powerful framework not only to clean up the neighborhoods but to bring us together around comprehensive strategies for improvement, such as we are trying to develop in Norris Square through Philly Blocks and in other through similar means, then it most definitely can 196 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 succeed where other programs have failed before. The Mayor is calling upon every City department to participate in this effort. And let me add the one line that not only City Council needs to join them, but the program desperately needs perspective and the geographic representation and the resources that this Council always has to be able to put these kinds of comprehensive strategies and plans into effect. I want to thank you for the opportunity to share this data and to testify here, and I'd be happy to answer any questions you may have.
Thank you Your testimony is very informative. I notice in your last paragraph, you do say that the Neighborhood Transformation Initiative is a powerful framework. I think that there are many people who truly believe that the $250 million bond issue is going to be a cure-all. I don't see that ever happening.
Well, anybody who thinks that the $250 million bond is a cure-all hasn't read the plan. I mean, the fact is that the plan is laid out both in the five-year plan that you get through 197 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 the City's budget and some other material and it doesn't even begin with that. It begins with the discussion of comprehensive neighborhood planning such as needs to occur. It talks about what in fact is unfolding now, which is the interim step to remove cars and to clean up vacant lots, demolish buildings more aggressively, and then to develop an interim strategy for maintenance. It talks about the need to add a thousand or more block captains to the current group of block captains. It talks about tightening up the restrictions and regulations on code enforcement. It talks about longer-range efforts to integrate all of this with the Mayor's programs for children and new efforts around social services. So that's what neighborhood transformation in paper from the Mayor means and what, in my judgment, is happening in the Administration. Now, my problem -- and I do have one -- is that I think there are a lot of worthwhile initiatives moving forward, but I don't think they're moving forward in an especially coordinated way. And then we do run the risk of raising a lot of expectations on some simple matters that will 198 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 destroy confidence in the program before anything else gets off the ground. Example: While we're talking about let's not demolish, let's not start before we're done, the fact is that barn door, you know, that barn door has already opened and closed. The City has moved more aggressively to demolish properties. And, frankly, in the American Street Corridor, which I know best, people are delighted. We have spent the first six months of the year helping block and neighborhood activists get action on demolitions that they have been trying to get done for years. Now they're very happy that lot cleanups have occurred. The problem is that the system for maintaining those lots, now that cleanups have occurred, is not yet in place in any way that I can see. And so we run a real risk right now within the next thee months of having all of those lots pile up with trash and, thus, negating the role of the cleanup. Now, I think it would be a fine thing if every Councilmember in your district were working with the Administration to see to it that as a lot is cleaned, blocks and others had the resources to 199 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 be able to maintain them, because that's what's going to have to happen over the foreseeable future. The plan, as described, is usual described in two steps. Step is demolition and cleanup, Step is redevelopment. But in fact, the real process is three steps. Step 1 is demolition and some cleanup. Step 2 is maintenance, and that's the long-range effort such as is going on in New Kensington right now. And then Step 3 over time is redevelopment. But between 1 and 3, there's all of this other set of proposals about reorganizing the way this government works with neighborhoods around the day-to-day quality-of-life issues that we talked about, on improving human relations, on strengthening the quality of life for young people, and reducing crime. All of those things are now being put under the framework of neighborhood transformation by the Administration, and it seems to me we all owe it to the City to start talking about this project in those terms, because that's the only way it can succeed and that's where it becomes a really useful new point of departure for everything that we might 200 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 be doing in the near future.
Where do schools come in the aspects that you talked about?
Because it's essential in any flight program or blight program, and in order to be able to handle that, that we do fix up and construct a viable public school system.
Well, I think that, you know, I've stayed away from that here, but you're obviously -- when I go into these neighborhoods, we talk about clean, safe, economically viable, and decent places to raise our kids.
But you're talking about Norris Square, which has Shepherd, Hunter, schools that are close to a hundred years old and have really no facilities really to educate those kids.
Well, what's interesting about those schools, in fact, is that between Norris Square Civic Association and Norris Square 201 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 Neighborhood Project, they have worked very hard, as you know, with those schools, and it shows in their test scores. Now, we have been -- just as we are negotiating social contracts between, let's say, L&I and a bunch of blocks in Norris Square around cleaning lots, in Logan, we negotiated a social contract between the Cook Middle School and the neighborhood groups and, frankly, the ward leader, Shirley Gregory, in that surrounding area, around their mutual responsibility to improve education. And going back to a point Councilman Goode maid earlier, some parts of it did involve improvements within the school but an all lot of it involved the creation and advancement of after-school programs and other resources within the community to help those youngsters. A lot of kids are just not going to be able to make it at this five or six hours a day. Now, we have this phenomenon at the school district and this incredible crisis at the same time as the Administration is significantly expanding the resources available to use after-school programs. They've just put out an RFP and were awarded a 202 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 number of grants. None of these things are coming together. But they can come together at the neighborhood level. What I would love to see, you know, is that after test scores come out for these schools, there ought to be Town Meetings in every neighborhood area that, in fact, is served by a specific school to discuss what, in fact, where the schools are and where they need to be, such as we did between Cook and the area of Logan surrounding it. And where I live in Mt. Airy, they'd be a small group of schools where -- the Northwest Schools Committee, in fact, is paying careful attention. It would be the focal point of our attention. Back in Germantown where I was, there would be another group of schools. So, I mean, that's how I would integrate improving education to the process that we're describing. Now, I have no way of knowing, Councilman, what is going to be negotiated here in terms of the funding of the schools, so I stay out until we see that. I do know that whoever runs the schools 203 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 and whatever funding we have, education is not going to work unless this kind of partnership with the neighborhood takes place. And I'm not just talking about it; we have actually done it. And in fact, beyond the social contract, Kelly Green on my own staff has worked with the civic education group, but I can tell you, we've done it almost despite the lack of support from the system. I mean what made that possible was the special 21st century grant that the Olney Cluster coordinator managed to raise independently that paid for the work that we did. And that grant has continued along with some additional support from the William Penn Foundation. We tried to get that process going in other schools and we had the superintendent's support and all of that but, you know, you've got to be paid, and we never raised the money. So that is my answer to you. I think we that we need to ask the question. The Mayor has put out the -- Safe and Sound has put out the Children's Report Card; that's another vehicle I've been using. You give a group of people in a neighborhood that covers not only education but health and safety. You say, All right, this is where the City's report 204 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 card on kids is, what's the neighborhood's report card? And what comes out really right now is that youth violence is a huge problem that's understated in the public arena, and we've had some meetings recently about it. But that's another way to go about it.
Any situation where we can create public goal for improvement, whether it's improving test scores, reducing crime, bring the people from the neighborhood together with the relevant agencies that are, in fact, doing this. That's where we can do it. I want to make one final little point. In Los Angeles right now, there's a kind of democratic -- a small derevolution going on. The city charter of Los Angeles passed last fall, set up -- authorized the creation of neighborhood councils. These councils -- you know, they report to the Council district. The council there even under the new charter has more power structurally than this council does structurally within our system. So all over Los Angeles right now, there are groups of citizens working to develop and build 205 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 these neighborhood councils, which will have advisory authority, not only over housing but over the entire city budget, a critical say over development projects, and even be considered in the performance reviews that city department managers go through for reappointment. " Five different areas of Hollywood that are negotiating and building these neighborhoods councils brought me in, and I was able in a week to give them the benefit of what took me about ten to fifteen years to learn here. But what was exciting about it is I'm having this argument with them. This started with them with the city budget. I walked out and came out there and then one day downloaded their entire 160-page five-year plan related to the city budget, turned it into "Clean, Safe Kids, An Opportunity," was able to start the discussion the next morning, and by the end of the week, we had a social contract that they now are making the centerpiece of their neighborhood agenda. 206 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 That is where we need to start, and I had people in the room -- I had the police captain from this area in the room for the entire session discussing safety. I had two people who were working with the schools, many church and civic leaders as well as the head of the Chamber of Commerce, the labor unions that were active in the area. They were all there and we put that together. And it's integrated. Nothing like that exists here now. And therein is the starting point of the problem. We are fragmented to death and we cannot deal with comprehensive problems without comprehensive structures to help us solve them.
Are there any other questions of Mr. Schwartz? Yes, the Chair recognizes Councilman Goode.
Thank you, Madam President. Good afternoon, Councilman.
Let me start with saying that I agree with a lot of what you said. I think the research you did, you put a lot of time into and you should be commended for it. But I believe that you made so many points today that I'm at a loss for where you're really trying to go in terms of delivering a message. So I will focus on some of the things I think I heard and ask you some questions based upon that. The first being, you drew a -- you compared CDBG investment under your tenure and the tenure of John Kromer to population loss. Did you do any analysis regarding CDBG investment and population gain? Was there CDBG investment in areas where there was population gain?
Well, I don't know about the last seven years, but the data that you have in your packet shows that there were only 6 census tracts out of 75, whatever I said, that actually gained population.
No, I'm saying these are the ones -- see, what I have in my briefcase here -- 208 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562
That's a question, Councilman. My question to you is: Is it likely that where there was population gain, there probably was not CDBG investment? I'm just asking for your opinion.
Okay, let me suggest in the record a point that I've tried to make over the last months. The real correlation between 12 investment and population gain or loss is probably 13 private investment, not public investment, and 14 definitely not CDBG investment. CDBG investment is 15 less than $100 million. We have $3 million 16 operating budget and we spent over a billion dollars 17 on schools. We have a capital budget that's over 18 $100 million on an annual basis. 19 So CDBG investment you would never be 20 something you would examine in terms of population 21 gain or loss. And as far as I'm concerned, you 22 probably would not even have examined public investment, but you would probably examine private investment in terms of population gain or loss. And would you also say that it is most likely true that 209 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 the areas that experience population gain had private investment at a level that dwarfs the areas that had population loss?
Absolutely. And I'll give you the compelling example here, where we're sitting. I mean, Center City' a success, right? $2 billion, we add up. Some of it I voted for, right? Starting with Gallery I, the Center City Rail Connects, a $327 million investment, the Convention Center, $150 million from the State, as I recall, another multimillion dollar investment. Gallery II. All of that is put into place, so that's a couple of billion dollars. Then in 1991, while I'm still in the government, the leadership comes to the Goode Administration and says, We cannot let this huge public investment be subject to the vagaries of uncoordinated City departments and, therefore, we're going to make a deal with you: We want to create what at that time was called "a Special Services District" so that we can help market the area, but also get some control over safety and cleanliness and social problems in our area, and in exchange, we'll even raise more money from the businesses to 210 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 support it, we'll give 'em what anybody else might call "a tax increase," and there was a quarrel in the administration about it, and we went forward with that. And now the one area of town that's really going gangbusters despite the fact that we are charging them more money, and their real-estate values are among the highest in the City in the City, is Center City. And no CDBG dollars went into that.
Well, in my judgment, however, public investment was necessary as every developer who came in here from every particular project that involved anything at all was necessary to make the private --
My point is that I understand that public investment drives private investment, but in the end, you can't measure public investment if you're trying to draw a correlation to population gain or loss. You actually have to measure private investment. That's the only point I was trying to make. 211 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562
I think that's one variable. It's not the first. It's like the housing market --
But private investment is more of a variable than public investment is in terms of population gain.
Well, but you see, here's the problem: The Average citizen -- we heard five groups testify, saying pretty much the same thing -- crime and schools. The average --
Let me -- (Unintelligible, parties talking over each other.
Councilman, thank you. Let me go to my second question.
Even those areas that have experienced population loss for whatever reason, be it public investment, private investment, what is the role of community development corporations as it relates to dealing in those areas that have experienced population loss?
I think if there is a community development corporation and some part of 212 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 parts of the recovery effort depend upon an agency to do the development, I would put that in the hands of a community development corporation. Hell, I spent most of my four years in housing helping to get them off the ground, because they have the best chance for us to be responsive to the community needs and accountable to the community.
Well, beyond those developers, what is their role in terms of neighborhood planning?
I think they play a part of the role, but they're not -- right now, they've not been permitted by the fragmented structure that we have to get as broad an involvement as would be needed. So in many neighborhoods where there are good CDCs, there may be other groups more appropriate to helping in the planning around security or planning around schools and kids. But in an area where the CDC has branched out into those areas, it's certainly a key player in anything where it's chosen to have an impact.
So you would or would not agree that community development corporations should be the primary planners in areas where we've 213 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 experienced population loss?
No, I would agree that some community development corporations that have developed a wholistic vision for their neighborhoods should play that key role in those neighborhoods. In many instances, there are no CDCs, and in some instances, there are CDCs that tend to be housing developers, and I think there I would turn to other organizations.
I agree with that, but, you know, what I'm saying in the end is, who's going to coordinate the stakeholders there? Is it the District Councilperson is it the Community Development Corporation? is it the State rep? Who is it going to be?
Oh, if there is a strong CDC that's in a position to command the loyalty and the sort of involvement of the neighborhood, that's a logical place. In Norris Square, you've got Norris Square Civic Association and New Kensington. We've been talking with them about doing the block captain meetings. At Frankford, which you've just heard from, that would be a logical group. So those are 214 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 three areas where that would play. In Germantown, Greater Germantown is already playing a critical role. But what I'm saying here -- and this is -- in John Kromer's book, you know, he makes his point that CDCs are, by their nature, centralized, not terribly democratic, and they need to be centralized undemocratic 'cause they got to make fast decisions. Well, if that's the case, who talks to the block captains? And right now, you see, I, meet with 30 or 40 block captains, and there have been good CDCs and they've done some block organizing, but they haven't really benefitted from a lot that the CDCs have been paid to do. So these structural changes need to be put together if it's going to work.
Councilman, that's not particularly fair. I mean, to suggest that you as the housing director and then John Kromer as the housing director have any criticisms about CDCs that they don't think they can they contributed to, I mean, let's just be honest about what CDCs do. CDCs are forced by nature as a survival instinct to do what the funders dictate. 215 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562
I'm not arguing that. In fact, I'm arguing quite the opposite for seven years. Look, when I came to housing, as you well know, there were no CDCs that were getting significant funding from the City except South Central. Four years later, this whole network of successful CDCs existed for the next administration to carry them forward. What I wanted then and what the CDCs have wanted by their own platforms is the opportunity to be players in a much broader range of areas and issues than simply housing development.
And as a movement or an industry, do you think that they are there yet?
As a movement in industry, do you think they are there yet?
I said exactly what I mean: I don't think it's an industry that has been given enough money or leverage or time to think through what they would do, but I think where they're operating --
They have the most 216 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 comprehensive neighborhood strategic plans, and giving them more money is our job.
I think they have, in some instances, the most comprehensive; and in other instances, they don't.
Just -- (Unintelligible, parties talking over each other.)
I'm sorry, I'm not boing to make a blanket statement about that. I didn't as director, and I think there are some neighborhoods, frankly --
I can go neighborhood by neighborhood and name the CDCs. Just give me some examples of neighborhoods where you see housing and economic development, community involvement in education in some comprehensive way has been planned out that is not being done by community --
Well, let me just say that to me, the core work needs to be on a block-by-block basis, and in many neighborhoods what we have is a clean blocks program that operates with isolated block captains and a CDC with no connection no 25 connection to any of them. And I do believe, in 217 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 contrast to what you're saying, is that there needs to be two elements -- three elements of what goes on here that CDCs largely are not right now involved in. One is block organization. The second is improvements in education through direct partnerships with the schools, and the third is serious involvement in crime prevention. Those are often three very different networks of organizations. In Norris Square, you've got the Norris Square Civic Association doing one set of things, and Norris Square Neighborhood Project, which manages the Weed and Seed Program and a number of other valuable programs. So I don't make it a religion. I funded a lot of CDCs, and I think they're valuable, but it's not a religion for me. There are all sorts of civic groups in the neighborhood, and they all have to be involved, and CDCs are certainly an important part of the process. And if a CDC wants to take it on, it --
My question really was related to what community-based organizations are actively involved in housing and economic 218 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 development, along with education initiatives, along with job creation initiatives that you can name and in what section of the City that are not community development corporations.
Look, you ask the question that way, then I agree with you.
If you ask that question, but if you -- my point is that neighborhood transformation is -- (Unintelligible, parties talking over each other.)
I asked the question. If you can't give me an example, that's fine. I'm finished.
If you're talking about economic development, you're right, but I think --
For housing and economic development, you're right, but I think neighborhood transformation involves a lot more.
Councilman -- 219 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562
My point is that if that's the only way you're thinking about neighborhood transformation, my advice is to think again because you just heard five groups beyond me here say two things that have nothing to do directly as housing and economic development is fine.
I mentioned education and job creation as well. I mentioned education and job creation also.
Are there any other questions for Mr. Schwartz? (No further questions.)
Thank you. Do we have anyone else who wishes to testify? (No response.)
Seeing no one, this committee will be recessed until Wednesday, 220 10/15/01 WHOLE COMMITTEE RES. 010562 October 17th, at 1 p.m. Thank you all very much for your attention. (Proceedings end at 4:15 p.m.) - - - 221 CERTIFICATE I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing proceedings of the Council of the City of Philadelphia's meeting of the Council Committee the Whole of Monday, October 15, 2001, are contained fully and accurately in the stenographic notes taken by me upon, and that this is a true and correct transcript of same. RE: Resolution No.010562 _______________________________, Josephine Cardillo Registered Professional Reporter and Notary Public (The foregoing certification of this transcript does not apply to any reproduction of the same by any means, unless under the direct control and/or supervision of the certifying reporter.)