COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA PUBLIC HEARING - COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - - - Room 400, City Hall Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Monday, April 5, 2004, 10:20 a.m. - - - BILL 040257 - An Ordinance to adopt a Capital Program for the six Fiscal Years 2005-2010 inclusive. BILL 040258 - An Ordinance to adopt a Fiscal 2005 Capital Budget PRESENT: COUNCIL PRESIDENT ANNA C. VERNA COUNCILWOMAN BLONDELL REYNOLDS BROWN COUNCILMAN DAVID COHEN COUNCILMAN W. WILSON GOODE, JR. COUNCILMAN JACK KELLY COUNCILMAN JAMES F. KENNEY COUNCILMAN JUAN F. RAMOS COUNCILMAN FRANK RIZZO COUNCILMAN FRANK DI CICCO COUNCILWOMAN JANNIE L. BLACKWELL COUNCILMAN MICHAEL A. NUTTER COUNCILMAN DARRELL L. CLARKE COUNCILWOMAN JOAN L. KRAJEWSKI COUNCILMAN RICHARD T. MARIANO COUNCILWOMAN DONNA REED MILLER COUNCILWOMAN MARIAN B. TASCO COUNCILMAN BRIAN J. O'NEILL - - - V A R A L L O Incorporated Litigation Support Services 1835 Market Street, Suite 600 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103 215.561.2220 215.567.2670 2 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 P R O C E E D I N G S - - -
Good morning, everyone. May I have your attention, please. This is a public hearing of the Committee of the Whole. I would ask Mr. McPherson to please read the title of Bill 10 numbers 040257 and 040258. MR. McPHERSON: Bill Number 040257, an Ordinance to adopt the Capital Program for the six fiscal years 2005 through 2010 inclusive. Bill number 040258, an Ordinance to adopt the fiscal 2005 Capital Budget.
I would ask members of the Administration who will be testifying to please approach the witness table. And to my colleagues, I would tell you that the first go-around for questions will be five minutes, and then we will have a second go-around, so that everyone will have an opportunity to ask questions. Thank you. 3 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04
Good morning. My name is Maxine Griffith. I'm Secretary for Strategic Planning and Executive Director of the Philadelphia City Planning Commission.
Thank you. Before I start my testimony, I have an apology to make. It's my understanding that our first transmittal of the Capital Program and Budget had some omissions, including one page on aviation.
Aviation. And some of the totals also, because of a formatting problem, did not appear. This is only on the electronic transmission. The book that was handed out is correct. And I apologize. It was a combination of human error, and also we have a new computer program that I'm sure will be excellent once we get the bugs out. But right now we have some difficulty 4 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 between the two computers translating.
Is the amendment that you submitted with the black lines, was that --
Yes. All of the corrections have been made. And also, I want to thank your staff and Council's technical staff. They were tremendously helpful and supportive during this challenging period.
Thank you. And is the Aviation Department in the latest copy that we received with the amendments?
Thank you. And now for testimony, and we also have a PowerPoint. Good morning, Council President Verna, and honored members of the City 5 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 Council. I am Maxine Griffith, Executive Director of the City Planning Commission and Secretary for Strategic Planning. I am pleased to be here this morning to present for your consideration the City Planning Commissions recommended FY 2005 to 2010 Capital Program and FY 2005 Capital Budget. One of the Home Rule Charter mandated responsibilities of the City Planning Commission is to prepare and submit to the Mayor a recommended Capital Program and Budget. As you know, this recommended Capital Program and Budget is the Administration's proposed six-year plan for investing in the City's public buildings, community facilities and physical infrastructure. The City's Capital Program supports numerous municipal government priorities. Among these are the continued development of the City's economy, improvement to the City's neighborhoods, and the quality of 6 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 life of its citizens, improving conditions related to public health and safety, promoting the City's fiscal stability by increasing the efficiency of governmental operations, and supporting the repair and renovation of our civic infrastructure. This year we are again recommending a lean and efficient spending plan that makes effective use of the City's increasingly constrained resources. This is an austere but comprehensive Capital Program that strategically allocates our limited resources so as to preserve the City's ability to deliver essential public services. The recommended level of spending in the FY 2005 budget year is minimally sufficient to maintain municipal facilities. The City's borrowing limit for capital spending, set by the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, will continue to impact our ability to fully fund needed facility and infrastructure 7 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 improvements over the life of this Capital Program. As a result, we are recommending funding only for the most critical renovations of City facilities. 139 billion over a six-year period to renew the City's extensive infrastructure and public facilities. 5 million residents. Some of these facilities are physically deteriorated and under utilized. Over the coming months, we will work closely with the Managing Director's Office, our other sister agencies: The School District, community based organizations, and of course members of the City Council, to consider a range of strategies. 8 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 These include but will not be limited to determining which facilities should be combined and placed in enhanced structures and which services can be incorporated into other facilities, such as new or renovated school buildings. Our objective remains the provision of excellent public facilities and services for the people of Philadelphia but right sized for our City. Sources of funds. million. million or nine percent is funded by new, City issued general obligation bond funds. An additional 27 million or three percent will come from operating revenue and tax supported loan funds that were authorized previously. 1 million or 54 percent of total budget year 9 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 funds. 1 million or 31 percent in the budget year. Over 192 million of this other government funding is budgeted for transit related projects. 2 million or less that one percent of FY 2005 funding will be provided by private sources. Most of my testimony will focus on FY 2005, the budget year of the Capital Program, since it is this budget year funding that becomes actual appropriations. Projects and priorities for the subsequent five years of the Capital Program represents planned spending based on our best estimates of future needs of the City. Uses of funds. The uses of funds in FY 2005 Capital Budget are divided into five broad categories.
The largest portion of these funds is allocated for economic development, with 385 million or 49 percent 10 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 of the total budgeted for projects that support the growth of the City's economy. 6 million or 33 percent budgeted for renovations to neighborhood facilities and physical infrastructure improvement. 3 million targeted to civic infrastructure projects that fund quality of life improvements for all City residents. Capital investment for economic development category aims to retain and attract businesses, provide jobs for residents... Excuse me. provides jobs for residents. I have lost my place.
Let me start from Neighborhood Development. Neighborhood development is the next largest allocation. 11 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04
Capital investment in the economic development category aims to retain and attract businesses, provide jobs for residents -- you're correct -- spur economic activity in the City's neighborhoods, and support other development initiatives. A total of 385 million is recommended for economic development projects in FY 2005. An ambitious improvement program continues at Philadelphia International Airport, in order to maintain this facility at world class standards. 5 million of private funds, are recommended for airport improvements in FY 2005. 12 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 Funding is recommended for the City to acquire existing airport parking facilities, including five parking structures, surface lots, and associated facilities and equipment. Funding is also recommended for projects to increase airfield capacity, renovate maintenance and service buildings, upgrade ground transportation facilities, and soundproof private residences adjacent to the airport to meet Federal environmental standards. The terminal expansion and modernization program will continue to make mechanical and cosmetic improvements needed to ensure passenger comfort and convenience. 25 million of federal, state, and self-sustaining funding is recommended for airfield and facility improvements at Northeast Philadelphia Airport. In support of future development at Penn's Landing, 500,000 is recommended for 13 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 critical infrastructure repairs and other necessary site improvements. An additional 500,000 in combined City and state funds is also recommended for improvements to the Schuylkill River Greenway and Trail. Continued funding to support development in the City's industrial parks is also recommended in FY 2005. A total of 475,000 in new City tax-supported loan funds will support site preparation and infrastructure improvements in these areas. Resources from existing revolving funds are also recommended for continued environmental testing and remediation, land acquisition, and roadway and utility line improvements. Neighborhood development projects directly support a range of community revitalization efforts, including the Neighborhood Transformation Initiative, through the renewal of community facilities, including libraries, park and recreation, police and fire stations, and 14 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 site improvements in support of neighborhood commercial revitalization programs. Improvements to transit stations and other SEPTA facilities, street reconstruction and resurfacing, street signage and traffic control improvements and the replacement of water and sewer mains are also included in this category. 6 million is recommended for neighborhood development projects in FY 2005. In the Recreation Department, funds are recommended for the renovation of playgrounds, basketball and tennis courts, lighting and needed repairs to recreation facility roofs, heating and safety systems, and other code compliance issues. Swimming pools will continue to be upgraded to improve health and safety conditions, as well as to minimize water losses due to outdated circulation systems. Through a state grant matched by million of City funds, additional 15 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 neighborhood playground and recreation centers will be renovated. 55 million in new City tax-supported funds are budgeted for these recreation projects in FY 2005. The Fairmount Park Commission will continue to renovate and restore its ground and athletic facilities, many of which serve City neighborhoods. Budget year funding totaling 525,000 is recommended for athletic and play area improvements at Hunting Park, the Tabor Rams facility, and other sites throughout the City. Funding also continues to be recommended for planting new park and street trees, and the removal of dead and dangerous trees throughout the City.
The Free Library is nearing the completion of the construction phase of its Branch Library Rehabilitation Program, using a combination of public and private funding. In FY 2005 City funding totaling 16 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 950,000 is recommended to enable the Free Library and make needed mechanical, structural and safety improvements at the Central Library and its various neighborhood branches. Improvements in neighborhood commercial centers will continue, with 1 million in City tax-supported funds, matched by an equal amount of state funding for site improvements, curbs, sidewalks, street trees, signs, lighting and public parking. These improvements as part of a program of comprehensive neighborhood and commercial district plans, are intended to attract and leverage other investments in retail and residential projects. 5 million is recommended for neighborhood street reconstruction, reconstruction and resurfacing, bridge reconstruction, traffic control and street lighting improvements, and school and pedestrian crossing signs. 7 million in state and federal funds. 4 million in self-sustaining funds recommended for these projects. The Health Department will continue to upgrade its neighborhood health facilities with recommended funding of 640,000 for FY 2005. HVAC and other building improvements will be made at health centers in West Philadelphia and Germantown, at the Employee Health Services Building, and Air Management Laboratory, and the City's Animal Control Facility. Other facilities will receive new equipment and furnishings to provide better service and more effectively compete with private sector providers in attracting and maintaining insured customers. 18 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 The Police and Fire Departments will continue major investments to improve working conditions for its personnel, and to ensure the continued operational effectiveness of its stations. Recommended funding in FY 2005 emphasizes the rehabilitation of existing fire stations, with 2 million budgeted for heating, ventilation and air conditioning systems, roof replacements, and other needed interior and exterior renovations. 8 million in new City funds, matched by over 192 million in contributed federal, state and regional funds, are recommended for transit infrastructure investments that. Support overall neighborhood development. Among these are the continuing reconstruction of the Market Street Elevated Line, improving station accessibility through installation of elevators and escalators, continued renovation of the Suburban Station Concourse, the acquisition of paratransit 19 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 vehicles, and a variety of other track, signal, maintenance facility, infrastructure and environmental improvements. In the health and safety category, the recommended FY 2005 to 2010 Capital Program provides funds for improvements to the City's Water Treatment and Waste Water Treatment Plants, renovations to the River View Home, and the Health Administration Building, asbestos abatement and life safety improvements at facilities, and City matching funds for public transit projects that affect rider safety and accessibility. 9 million is recommended for health and safety projects in FY 2005. Recommended projects in this category include 235,000 in new tax-supported funds for mechanical and interior improvements at the City's Gateway, Stenton and Woodstock Shelters in FY 2005, at the River View Home, the City's residential facility for indigent elderly, and 875,000 is recommended for building 20 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 modernization and fire alarm improvements. The City's fiscal stability is improved by investing in projects that enable government operations and services to be provided more efficiently. 5 million is recommended for fiscal stability projects in FY 2005.
Recommended projects in this category include improvements in communication and dispatch system used by the Police and Fire Departments. The Managing Director's Office will continue the development of an integrated database to coordinate the efforts of the Health Department, Department of Human Services, Office of Emergency Shelter and Services, and the City's Prison System, in providing social services to children, families, and individual adults. Other fiscal stability projects recommended in FY 2005 promote greater effectiveness in delivering government services, by consolidating functions and investing in new technology. 21 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 Advances in digital technology, for example, have had a substantial impact on communications and information management. In the budget year recommendations are made for several such communication and technology improvements. The Municipal Energy Office has spearheaded efforts to make the City's use of energy more efficient. The Green Lights Program focuses on installing energy efficient lighting fixtures. And in 2005, 250,000 is recommended for lighting upgrades at facilities throughout the City. A similar amount is recommended for the Energy Star Program to replace HVAC and other mechanical systems at City facilities, with more efficient units. The Capital Program is committed to these and similar projects because they generate substantial operating budget paybacks, in the form of reduced energy costs. Finally, civic infrastructure projects make an important contribution to 22 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 the livability of Philadelphia as a whole, as well as to the City's reputation as a destination for tourists and visitors. 3 million is recommended for improvements to cultural facilities that are used and enjoyed by all citizens. Among these projects is the restoration of City Hall, being effectively managed, I might add, by the City's Capital Program Office. The western facade and roof restoration is scheduled for completion this fall, and the next phase will address the southern facade and roof. This project is revealing the true magnificence of this building's sculptures, cast iron pieces, and other architectural details. Recommended funding of 5 million for City Hall in FY 2005 will allow continued roof and exterior treatments, as well as improvements to interior heating and cooling systems. An additional 21 million is programmed for this project before its 23 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 anticipated completion in 2010. 2 million is recommended for renovation work at the recently acquired Perlman Building. An additional 1 million is recommended to continue improvements to the Art Museum's security system. 8 million of City funding is recommended for improvements to historic structures, utilities, drainage and landscaping, footways, stables, and parking areas. 9 million in federal, state and private funding for these improvement projects. In conclusion, let me say again that this recommended Capital Program and Budget strategically allocate very limited resources to ensure the City's ability to deliver needed public services. It also provides for the kind of investment in Philadelphia's physical infrastructure that is critical to the City's economic health and growth. 24 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 I'd also like to introduce my two partners, Rich Lombardo, who is the Deputy Executive Director of the Planning Commission, and of course Rub Dubow, Budget Director, who needs no introduction and will be making a testimony of his own.
Good morning. I'm here to testify on amendments to Bills Number 040257 and 040258. The modifications we are proposing add appropriations necessary to carry forward all of the unobligated funding from Fiscal Year 2004 appropriations. In the proposed amendment all unobligated general obligation, PICA and revenue bond capital appropriations have been carried forward from prior years, with a few exceptions. The exceptions fall mainly into four categories. The first is unspent appropriations for which projects have been completed under budget. The second is 25 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 aviation projects that were either funded with other sources or completed. Third is water payroll costs which don't carry forward. And the fourth the state and federal grant appropriations which didn't materialize, mostly in Commerce and Streets Department. There are a large number of projects that have been included in the carry forward budget, at the direct request of City Council members. I can assure the members of Council that all of the remaining funding for these projects has been included in the carry forward amendment proposed today. This recommendation does not include the lapsing of any unencumbered funding for projects of this nature, whether or not those projects have been completed. Other than the addition of these carry forward appropriations, there is one other proposed modification to Bill Number 040257 as introduced. The requested modification is to add a general obligation Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 appropriation of 1.6 million in Fiscal Year 2006 for the Belmont Mansion project. That concludes my testimony, and I would be happy to answer any questions. Thank you.
Thank you. At this time the Chair recognizes Councilman Clarke.
Can you briefly talk to me about the City's debt capacity. For the last several years we've been talking about us approaching our limit, our Constitutional limit, as set by the state. What is our long-term strategy forward? Is it simply reducing the amount that we're allocated per year for capital projects or are we looking at a process of accelerating or repayment of our debt? What are we going to do years out? I know some of us may not be around in a few years, but I'd like to look to the future. 27 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04
I would call upon the Budget Director to respond to that question.
There... I guess there are two things that limit how much debt we can incur. One is the State Constitutional limit, and then the other is just our debt as a percent of our revenue which is what rating agencies look like. And we're near our cap in both places. So, I mean, the thing we really looked at is limiting the amount of new debt we issue. Another approach, as you discuss, would be to accelerate our debt repayments. But if we do that, then we're increasing the percent of our operating budget that has to go to those debt payments, and it would squeeze other things out. So we haven't really been looking at that.
Have we looked at... And I don't know where we are, in terms of interest rates and municipal 28 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 borrowings. But I know here recently people were able to, on an individual basis, go out and refinance their home because the interest rates were so great. Was there a time over the last several years or do we foresee a time where we can essentially refinance our debt to increase our ability to accelerate the repayment?
Yeah. We actively look for any opportunity to do that. And we have done some refinancings over the last couple years. And I assume as the opportunities go, we'll still do more, and that will get us some more capacity. It won't be a panacea that will get us, you know, hundreds of millions of extra capacity, but it will get us some extra.
I think for the last several years while interest rates have 29 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 been low, we've been...
You answered. Do we see similar reductions in the interest rates in your ability to refinance on a municipal level, as we've seen in the housing market?
Yes, there have been real opportunities for refinancings. And we've taken advantage of some of them.
Yes. Now our debt service is lower than it would have been otherwise.
Is there a point of time in the foreseeable future, if interest rates continue to be low, that we can foresee a situation where we're able to increase our spending or our borrowing 30 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 capacity?
I would say probably slightly but not -- not a significant increase.
Well, of course a strategic objective which is to increase development and redevelopment to the level that the basis on which these calculations are made also rise. In other words, the more successful development, the more tax-paying and revenue generating entities there are on the ground. And that forms the basis for the formula. But that is a long-range objective. That's the objective of NTI. Obviously, that's the objective of the River City Initiative, and the other development oriented initiatives.
Where is that in the ranking, in terms of our ability to reduce taxes? I know we're talking about 31 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 the return on our investment. We talk about a number of ways that we're planning on spending that money.
Is that high on the list or is it low on the list or...
It's not a linear concept. It really is a dialogue between all of the objectives, but that's one piece of it.
Right. Consolidation of facilities. For the last, I guess two years, there's been a discussion about consolidating our facilities, particularly with the School District, and this whole Capital Improvement Program. And while I've heard the proposal and talked about the concepts, I have yet to see any substantive activity related to that. As recent as three weeks ago, I met with Mr. Vallas and talked to him about it. And he indicated that his work was done, as 32 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 it related to his capital facilities and recommendations. But he also said that he had not heard from the City and its recommendations for the potential consolidating facilities, as we shut down some rec centers and possibly utilize schools. Where are we with that? Are we going to get there? Are we really having discussions? Are we just talking about this? Or is there somebody working on it or what?
Well, Councilman, as you may know, the Mayor recently formed a working group that's led by the Managing Director's Office. However, the City Planning Commission, the Recreation Department and others are part of this group. As you probably know, Commissioner Richards has for a while had some concepts and some suggestions about how to move forward on this. We are now sort of supporting that 33 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 with a demographic analysis and data. And I believe the Managing Director has begun to meet with Council members to understand better their priorities and concerns.
When are they going to meet with the School District? That's the concern.
We've been meeting with the School District on an ongoing basis. As you may know, the Planning Commission has a Charter mandate or responsibility to review both School District siting decisions and their Capital Program. And we have been doing that and making suggestions on an ad hoc basis where they make sense. However, I think the sense is that the City also needs to develop a forward-looking plan that doesn't necessarily rely on using School District facilities and relies on that only for enhanced and not for core services. At least, that's, as I understand it, the way the Recreation Commissioner has wanted to 34 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 move forward. So, to give the same level of service to the residents of Philadelphia we do now through enhanced City facilities initially, and then to work with the School District to try to enhance those facilities.
Miss Griffith, you're going to have to give shorter answers.
No, no. You're cutting into my time. Thank you, Madam President. I'll come back.
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman Tasco. 35 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04
Good morning. On would you explain the 322.6 million self-sustaining funds for the Airport improvement?
Well, as I understand it -- I'm going to let the Budget Director --
Those dollars, loan fund dollars, are they dollars that are traditionally provided by the airlines for the support of the Airport? I thought most of the operation funding for the Airport came from the airlines.
Is there anybody from the Airport here? We're going to give a global answer. A more detailed answer would be helpful.
Good morning. My name is Ed Anastasi. I'm the Deputy Director of Aviation for Finance and Administration. I'm here representing Charley Isdell today, the Director of Aviation. Mr. 36 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 Isdell was called to a family emergency this morning. So I'll do my best to handle any questions that you may have.
I'd like for you to explain the 322.6 million self-sustaining funds, and what are they, and what will they be used for. And isn't it traditionally that the Airport is sustained by the airlines?
Yes. The $322 million in self-sustaining funds are, generally speaking, new airport loans. They are called general airport revenue bonds. And the debt service on the general airport revenue bonds are paid for through the rates and charges that the airlines pay for the use of terminals and air field facilities at Philadelphia International Airport.
These specific funds would be used for a number of projects, 37 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 including our... on the air side our taxi-way expansion program which is budgeted in FY 2005 at $101.1 million, new air field lighting improvements which are budgeted about 500,000, the acquisition of airport parking facilities budgeted at 275 million. Also, other modifications include terminal D and E alterations which are budgeted for Fiscal 2005 in the amount of $20 million. And all of these projects, as I said at the beginning, are developed and funded by loans that are self-sustaining in nature, that are used for the continuing expansion and development of the Airport.
Do you have to have approval by the airlines, relative to these Capital funds?
Yes, we do. There is a process in our use and lease agreement with the airlines, Councilwoman, which provides for the airlines to be notified of the specific projects, to be told of the 38 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 cost, and also to be told of the impact of that project to the rates and charges they pay at Philadelphia International, including what effect on landing fees, what effect on terminal rentals that they pay, and so on.
What is the increase in cost to them? Is there an increase to cost?
There is an increase in cost which, generally speaking, is that the debt service that is charged under these general airport revenue bonds. So if it is a $300 million increase in bonds, that probably would roughly be equivalent to about a $20 to $25 million increase in rates and charges. That probably would not be an immediate increase because in most cases they are capitalized interest. There is capitalized interest on these projects. So, probably the increase in debt service will be phased in over a four- or five-year period. 39 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04
Well, in some cases we have gone to them, if the project was far along enough, to obtain their approval. In some other cases, however, we would be putting together what we call an MII report, a majority in interest report, which would go to the airlines, and the airlines would have a 45-day period to consider that project.
Are you saying that this... if we have this amount of money programed in the Capital Budget now, do you have their approval to ask for the increase that they would pay for?
Yes, we do. We certainly would have the approval to ask for that increase. And as I said before, we would 40 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 prepare the majority in interest report that would be submitted to the airlines. That would include the descriptions of the projects, and the impact on their rates and charges, and how the debt service would be phased in over the four- or five-year period that I was referring to.
Okay. So you're saying we pass the budget, and as you approach each project you would get their approval?
So in essence if we pass the budget, we're approving what you will use this money for.
We are approving what we would use the money for. You would be approving the line item, the appropriation within the Capital Budget. But we would still have to, in cases 41 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 where we haven't gotten airline approval, do the MII report to get it to the airlines to give them sufficient time to consider the project.
Well, we don't know what the airlines have approved at this point in time.
We could provide you with information for each line item as to whether or not they have approved.
We think we could certainly provide that information to you.
Because I notice that in the recommended budget it has, funds will be used to acquire existing parking facilities of the Philadelphia International Airport, including five parking structures, service lots, and 42 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 associated facilities and equipments. And that's to the tune of $275,000. Has that been approved?
That has not been approved. However, in a number of cases, the airlines have approached us, and indicating to us that they would be supportive of that project. However, that is not to say that is an approved project. We would still have to do the MII report to submit to the airlines, and the preparation of that MII report is in process.
I think Councilman O'Neill would just like to piggyback on that.
How recently have they approached you? And I understand what you're saying, that from time to time they had asked. But it was my understanding that that was not 43 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 in the recent past; it was in the distant.
Well, as a matter of fact, back... I believe it was in July or August, Councilman, of 2003, we had a rates and charges meeting with the airlines. And what that is, we proposed to the airlines are operating at cost for the next year. And we calculate what the rates and charges would be for fiscal 2005, based upon those operating costs and non-airline revenues, and so on. And at that point in time, they raised this issue with us, indicating their support, that they would provide their support for our acquisition of the airport parking garages.
That was in July or 44 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 August of '03.
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Brown.
Thank you, Madam President. I do know that my colleague for the Fourth Councilmanic District, Councilman Michael Nutter, has been intimately involved with this issue; and I pay attention as well, given my responsibilities as Chair of Recreation, Parks and Cultural Affairs. The issue is Belmont Mansion. Can you provide me an update, if you will, on the status of the renovations there or restoration there, the third floor, where that is at this hour?
Yes. I'm going to ask the Rick Tustin of Capital Program Office to come up. But as you heard in the Budget Director's testimony, funds are being allocated for that work. And we're 45 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 very pleased, that it looks like that that is finally going to be moving forward. But Rick can give more detail.
My name is Rick Tustin, and I'm the Director of the Capital Program Office. You are correct. This project has been on the boards for quite a while now. There was some debate over how the building should be finally constructed as a two- or three-story facility. That debate has been resolved. And we've gotten... As Maxine just stated, we've gotten approval for additional funding in '06 so that we can move forward now and complete the design documents for three-story facility. We're starting that process right now. We just got the final approval probably no more than a week ago on the additional funding. 46 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 So we're starting the process right now of redesigning. And that is normally a ten-month process. And then we'll get into construction: Bid, award and construction. So I would more than likely say that this time next year it will be under construction, the project.
Very good. So excepting minor glitches that come up with these type of projects generally, the bottom line is, at some juncture months 13 from now or 12 or 24 months from now we 14 will see a new third-floor restoration of 15 Belmont Mansion? 16
12 months from now 17 you'll see the construction started. It 18 will probably take anywhere from 18 months 19 or longer to complete. 20
It's a very complicated 23 building, and we have to put a structure 24 within the structure --
Okay. Thank you for the testimony on that. Following up on Councilman Darrell Clarke's interest with regards to rec centers, we've heard and paid attention to a lot of the dialogue and challenges facing the Administration around rec centers. My interest lies with salvaging the programs. And buildings are important, but what matters more are the programs in them. And of course we have programs because you have staff to make them happen and/or real. A number of the programs you have indicated will be salvaged, picked up, embraced by the School District in a very strategic way.
Well, not simply by the School District. And perhaps I should ask Vic Richards to come to the microphone. But not just by the School District. I think the team that the Managing Director has pulled together has a concern 48 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 that we're able to provide these basic core services out of City's facilities. In some cases they may be enhanced facilities, combining more than one program in a nearby facility.
One of the things that my staff is doing is developing criteria based on national criteria and what Parks Associations and others are recommending about how far you should have to walk to get to a facility if you're a child.
And developing parameters also around the loss of population and the expected gain of population through NTI and other neighborhood development projects which is a little complicated. And we will be meeting with all Council members, including the at-large Council members, about this. Vic, do you want to add anything? 49 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04
Good morning. Vic Richard, Recreation Commissioner. I had the opportunity to meet with a... I want to say six or seven of the Council District members, and our goal was to get to every member of City Council...
...once we finished the members. Our number one priority, as you said, Madam Councilwoman, is to not lose the services. And all of those have been taken into very high consideration in the criteria. As Maxine talked about, the proximity of one facility to another and everything that we propose so far has addressed that no disruption in any of the services for the parents or the children is in place.
And given the complexity -- 50 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04
Councilwoman, your time is up. So this will be your last question for this go-around, please.
All right, then. I get one more? The complexity of government, when it comes to a number of different activities happening at the same time, what type of safeguards are in place to ensure that we're not investing funds in a facility that may ultimately face the decision that it simply doesn't fit with the overall plan?
That has been considered in the initial planning as well. We put together a listing, showing the age of the facility, when it was initially built, when it was most recently renovated. We went back and also applied to any monies that has been spent in the last four years from '02 up to '04, and we also created another spreadsheet column, showing the money that has been appropriated on the 51 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 recommendations. And all of those are on hold based on final decisions by the City Council.
I would just add that obviously any repair that relates to the safety of children and relates to code compliance, we would move forward and make in any case. But certainly those long range or strategic improvements and enhancements would not be done on facilities that, where it seems from the criteria that the Commissioner developed, that we would not be moving forward and maintaining that facility.
Thank you. Thank you very much for your testimony. Thank you, Madam President.
You're welcome. What is the amount of the tax-supported new loans in the FY '05 budget for economic development? And can 52 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 you please give us the breakdown of the funds?
It's taking us a moment because that number is spread through a number of agencies and entities. We're going to have to get back to you, Madam Council President, because as I said, the number is spread through a number of agencies.
Well, before the end of the hearing, I think you would be able to provide us with that.
I'd like to know what the breakdown of the funds are, and how these funds integrated into the City's overall economic development strategy.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I just have a couple questions that 53 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 it has to do with the Planning Commission per se. One of the -- One of the mandates of you is to present the Mayor's recommended Capital Program and Budget, and you did so this morning. But one of the other mandates of the City Planning Commission is the orderly physical development of a City requires... Bears with me. Requires current and long-term planning and a master development plan. The 1951 Charter, the people that worked on that Charter definitely were visionaries. They gave you a tremendous amount of power. They looked at you as the engine of creativity for this City. Economic development was one of the things that they charged the Mayor with, and passes it on, to a certain extent, to other departments and functions of government, including the Planning Commission. How far are you in keeping with that 54 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 charge that was mandated in the 1951 Charter then? You do long-term planning, and then you have a master development plan.
I think we've done a pretty good job. We have a Strategic Planning and Policy Division, and many of those folks are here. Would the members of that division raise your hands? (Indicating.)
These are also the staff that helped develop the Capital Program. And the concept is that the Capital Program becomes sort of the framework or the armature for the orderly development of the City. I think it was determined by a number of cities sometime ago, including my hometown, New York, and Philadelphia, that rather than a static master plan that said this building shall go here in five years and that building will go there in ten years -- because those things never necessarily come to fruition because of 55 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 market forces and federal and state programs, et cetera -- that we would develop frameworks. Zoning is one framework that speaks to where housing should go, where commercial development should go, et cetera. The Capital Program provides another framework, although in these lean times we're not able to necessarily support a great deal of additional development. But still, where we do place our funding supports this overall vision. And then the Mayor has developed a vision, which speaks to keeping the Center City engine churning.
But you understand that the Charter says -- That's fine that the Mayor has a vision. We have heard about his vision now for a number of years. But does the Planning commission have a vision?
Yes. As a matter of 56 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 fact, those members who are here a couple years ago probably heard me say that one of our objectives was to take the City to the water, to revitalize our waterfront. That has now been sort of translated into a Philadelphia as a new river city. And I'm pleased and proud to say that along with the Commerce Department and PIDC, and other economic development entities, we've been part and parcel of that planning through the North Delaware Riverfront Plan, through supporting the Navy Yard Plan, and supporting the Schuylkill River Development Plan, our involvement in the Penn's Landing Plan, et cetera. So, although there is not a huge master plan -- and I can tell you in New York there is a number of people who have supported their coffee tables based on the master plan that was developed but not voted on there in the '60s. Rather than a static master plan, we have developed strategic plans, both community based strategic plans through NTI 57 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 planning, and these larger scale economic development plans as the North Delaware Riverfront Plan.
But it seems to me that it is within the Mayor's vision of Philadelphia which is to a certain extent -- And though he's a visionary individual, that it's within the framework of him being Mayor of the City of Philadelphia. Do you have something that goes beyond some of the projects and programs that the Mayor has proposed?
Well, I mean -- COUNCIMLAN RAMOS: River City is the Mayor's -- I heard when he brought it up at the Chamber of Commerce. And I'm hearing you say -- and it's rightfully so for you to reiterate the plan of the Mayor. But I believe that this Planning Commission, and recently you had the Chair of your Commission resign. I've reached out to him. He's not available right now. But I sure would like to hear from him 58 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 because he seemed to be concerned about the future of the Planning Commission, and so forth. Then I read in your testimony that you're going to be speaking to the community based organizations, the Managing Director's Office, the School District in the next few months, to consider range of strategies. I'd like to see you guys work on the strategies beforehand, instead of proposing them in the next few months, after you have presented your plans.
Well, Councilman, I look forward to working with you and actually discussing this in more detail as we move forward. But I assure you that the 20- to 30-year art that some of these larger strategic plan sort of takes in is a long-range plan and a plan that can only be done incrementally. And also, I would not want to leave the impression that because we have to 59 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 reach out and partner -- That's consensus building, is the way we do government in America. That certainly does not mean that we don't have a vision for the future and that vision is not promulgated very succinctly and very strongly. I don't know whether the Deputy Executive Director, who's been working on some of these longer-range economic development projects, might want to say a few words.
Yeah. I am interested in hearing some more about... And I have people from your staff. And I thank you for making your staff available to me. But I saw recently the downtown business district, Paul Levy, made a presentation of what the business district foresees our Center City as looking, and what could be here, what could be there. Seems as though they have... And probably -- You know, some of it probably won't be possible. But they have a vision 60 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 of where the downtown district, what it should look like, what should be there, what should not be there. And I don't see that right now with the Planning Commission.
Well, we also have a vision. We don't necessarily have the budget that the Center City District has to promulgate that vision.
But we do have a vision. Rich, do you want to say a few word.
Yeah. Richard Albert, Deputy Executive Director, Philadelphia Planning Commission. For example, the North Delaware Plan, which is a piece of the Mayor's New River City, actually is a piece of work that the Planning Commission commissioned 61 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 about, with the help of both the District Council people and I think Councilman Borski, to look at the future of the ten miles of riverfront north of Center City. That was a vision -- That plan was announced is a 30-year plan.
That's a good answer. That's a good answer. No; go ahead.
And what's happening now and is being subsumed into the new River City are the first sort of phases of that 30-year plan which is beginning to build a new river road, to reinforce neighborhood connections to the riverfront, to make some strategic investments in abatement and in acquisition of sites, to encourage private redevelopment of individual parcels that have come on the market. Like, for example, Philadelphia Coke site is on the market right now. It's privately owned. There's a series of private developers. I believe it's gotten 62 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 down to three developers who are bidding on it. There would be need for some improvements when that development is ready to move forward. But still, over the long haul, it will probably be to 30 years. 8 If you recall -- You may not 9 recall -- there were a lot of people 10 talking about, you know, Baltimore's 11 central riverfront. And that plan was 12 over -- Again, it's not completed yet, and 13 it's about -- it's over 30 years old. 14 So it does take a period of time 15 between the planning piece which we do, and 16 the implementation and the final 17 realization of it. So... 18
I'm just 19 concerned about the Planning Commission not 20 diluting as being the engine of creativity, 21 when it comes to the planning of this City. 22 And you've got that mandate with the 23 Home Rule Charter. And it doesn't -- You 24 know, it seems as though if I want to open 25 up a grocery store in Center City, and I 63 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 bring it to you, and if I can convince you, hey, that's not a bad idea, let's put a grocery store there. And it's probably something good, right? But I want to see my Planning Commission saying, you know, we should have maybe ten different type of grocery stores in the next years because of, you know, 10 X, Y reasons versus bring me a project and 11 I'll see if I can accommodate you. 12
No, no. And frankly, 13 Councilman, we appreciate that kind of 14 support. 15 I should add with regard to Center City, when the new census data came out, we took a look at the Commission's plan for Center City which was developed in 1988 by the Planning Commission. And the development that occurred, we believe, between '88 and the present time was in large part supported and sparked by that original plan. We've now updated the plan, but that plan predates even my tenure. And we hope 64 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 to continue that sort of creative work neighborhood by neighborhood and large section of the City by large section of the City as we go on with this 20- to 30-year art. And we look forward -- I mean that quite sincerely -- to working with you and garnering your support because it's appreciated.
Thank you. I would like to ask a question regarding the Capital Program Office. Can someone explain to me why we would be funding 78 positions at a cost of $6.5 million out of the capital budget at a time when our debt capacity is minimal?
Well, I'm going to ask the Capital Program Director to come to the mike. But I would say that the Capital Program Office supports design and construction of all the Capital Program projects within the Managing Director's 65 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 purview. So...
Ten percent of our capacity, if you think about it.
Right. We assign it to the Capital Budget because it's work that's directly for capital projects.
As I said, it's over ten percent over the amount available. How do you justify it?
Because it's work for Capital. I mean, obviously, the other option is we could -- if we ran it through the operating budget, then we'd have increased operating costs, and something else would have to come out of the operating budget.
What is the percentage over the life of the Capital Program?
I'll calculate that. 66 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 I'll have to calculate that.
All right. When you get back with the other answers, you could provide us with that, too. Is Councilman Clark still in the room? (No response.)
Thank you, Madam Chair. My question is for Capital Programs, so could Mr. Tustin come back to the table. Thank you. We've had this conversation in the past. And the reason I've asked you to come back to the table today is to bring me and my colleagues up to speed on what I believe is a very important issue. It's our fire fighters. We prepare and equip our fire fighters at the fire ground with Scott Air Packs, to prevent them from ingesting any products of combustion, to prevent them from disease 67 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 and other problems that they've experienced at the fire ground. But one of the issues that was brought to Capital Programs -- and I know you're doing something about it -- is when the fire apparatus, cold start inside the fire house, the products of combustion are everywhere. And I know you've undertaken a program to equip those fire houses with ventilating equipment. Could you explain where we are with that program? And understand that there might be a delay in some of those fire houses being equipped with that equipment, to prevent that diesel fumes from being ingested by the fire fighters as they depart and also arrive back to the fire house?
Sure, Councilman. I'll be happy to answer those questions. As you know, we got involved with this project last year through your office, as well as the union for the fire fighters and the 68 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 Fire Department themselves. We started a pilot program where we looked at various types of ventilation systems, everything from total exhaust of the facility to a filtering system. And we came back last year with what we thought was the ideal solution to the problem. We involved the fire fighters union in the decisions, as well as your office. We took them out to see some facilities that were completed in Jersey that were very similar to what we want to do now. And I believe we had total buy-in from everybody on the way we should proceed with the projects. Since last year, we've got four facilities completely done and up and running. And we haven't had any negative response at all to those facilities, as far as the cleaning of the diesel fumes which were the majority concern. We have another ten fire stations right now out for bid, ready to start 69 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 construction within the next couple months. Within the next month they'll start construction. And we have more fire stations in 6 the design stage right now. So, within the 7 next three months, we'll have another 20 8 stations, design completed, and then out 9 for bid. So we are very quickly now -- We 10 are gearing up to do as many fire stations 11 as quickly as we can. 12 In addition to the City Capital 13 money that's been made available for this, 14 there has been a $750,000 grant that we've 15 also been able to get -- the Fire 16 Department has been able to get for this 17 project. 18 So we're going to use that, as well 19 as the City funds, to try to expedite and 20 speed up the number of stations that we can do it any one time.
Why has there been... I'll use the word a lull in this program? Why in almost a year-and-a-half have there only been four? 70 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04
Well, it was the first set of stations that we were trying this new way of cleaning the air, so to speak. And it did take a little longer to do the first four, to make sure that we had the proper type of equipment, the equipment positioned in the right location within the facility, and actually get it up and running and let -- and get feedback from the Fire Department on how well it's working. And that has been done. Those stations have been completed. And with that information, we are now packaging the rest of the fire stations. We're using the first series as our prototype, so to speak. And we're now packaging the rest of the fire stations in the same manner. And we can -- Because we're duplicating a lot of that type of work, instead of taking four or five months to complete a design package, we can get ten stations designed in two to three months.
So there's no 71 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 funding issue here. The money's there. We're ready to go. And all of the fire houses that you mentioned, the ten, the twenty-two -- I think that's the number you used --
We're not going to hear in the next budget we're up to seven.
No. Absolutely. Hopefully by this time next year we'll have as many as half of the total fire stations completed.
On the street. We have to deal with that in the fire house. My next question is --
Your time 72 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 is up, Councilman. Please make it a very brief question.
The last point -- not question. You mentioned that the Fire Department found a $750,000 grant? I would hope that part of your process over there is to turn every rock over and look for grants. If the Fire Department hadn't found that, would you?
Councilman, we do look for every available source of funding when we do a project. Sometimes the individual departments have better access to funding sources than actually we do. There are occasions where, for instance, the Fire Department may know a grant that supports a fire type of project through a state or federal agency through their interaction with other agencies like that across the country.
Well, I would hope that would be, like, block seven on the form, that you work with every project 73 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 that you do with the operating department, to see if there might be some grant money out there. It would be a shame to go and conduct or do a project and not take advantage of a federal, state or --
-- association grant. Thank you. Thanks, Madam President.
Welcome. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Miller. Councilwoman Miller.
Thank you, Madam Chair. And good morning. I just wanted to get some specific information about the status of the Mallory and water tower roof.
Let me bring up the project director for that team, and hopefully he can give us more detail on that.
Could you say 74 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 that again? I couldn't hear you. Say it again. I couldn't hear you.
I want to bring up the project director of that team, that can give you the details.
Good morning. Please identify yourself for the record.
Good morning. My name is Eric Evrig, with the Capital Program Office and the Project Director. The water tower, the roof project, is in design right now. We should be receiving the preliminary documents later this week, according to the schedule I had received from the architect. Documentation for the Mallory roof renovation had been done. That is an alternate. Funds weren't available at the time for that, so that job is designed but not awarded.
So, you said 75 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 that... What is the last comment you made? The design what?
The design for the Mallory Recreation Center roof renovation is done, but at the time of the bid the funds weren't available, so that job is not awarded.
Okay. All right. So neither one of those jobs have started, except with the design stage.
Okay. The other questions I have right now relate to Health, the Health Center in Germantown.
Okay. On 44. I was over at the Germantown Health Center, you know, on a variety of occasions. And one of their biggest issues is the need to expand the pharmacy -- the pharmacy cubicle, I'll call. And in looking at the renovations that's described here on , it says 76 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 that you intend to upgrade the building envelope. Can you tell me what that means, upgrading the building envelope? And then the exterior improvements will include a new window and storefront systems, with appropriate insulation. Can you tell me what that means? Because actually, what they have been wanting for the last several years is to have the outside wall that's near the -- near the... that's actually the exterior of the pharmacy, to demolish that wall and expand the pharmacy out, because there's sort of like a little deck. There's a small deck on the front of the building that they thought they could utilize as space. As I'm sure you know, that they really, really are in desperate need for space to service the clients that come in there.
Councilwoman... My name is Mariette Buckland. I'm Deputy Director for the Capital Program Office. 77 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 We do have continued conversations with the Health Department about the needs specifically for Health Center 9, which is the one you're referring to. There are a number of issues at that Health Center. And I know discussions continue about the best way to spend the existing capital dollars for that facility. But we'll certainly take your comments into advisement as we continue.
Right. Well, I'm sure that they've told you... I'm almost positive, because we've had meetings, too, to talk about expansion of the pharmacy there. When you go in there in the pharmacy, the actual drugs are all over the place because there's just no space for them to store in an organized fashion the drugs. So one of the things I'd really like you to consider -- and maybe we can set up a meeting to talk about -- if we're going to do some renovations there at the Health 78 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 Center, I think you might as well do what they need. What does upgrade the building envelope? What does that mean?
Well, to go back in time a little bit, we did a significant public area renovation to the facility three years ago. And a lot of interior renovations were done at that time. So the next step in the process was to do HVAC and electrical improvements, which were also done, completed about two years ago. And then the exterior envelope of the building, we want to make sure that that's sound and watertight so that this building can carry forward through the next 10 or 15 years. So that's what the discussions have been centered on. I know they have a few little HVAC issues, but I'm not intimately aware of the pharmacy issues. But we'll certainly have another meeting and discuss those.
Okay. Thank you. 79 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 Thank you, Madam President.
You're welcome. Chair recognizes Councilman Nutter.
Let me go back to what... I think you were responding to some of my colleagues questions. And I wanted to better understand developing the criteria or the standards that I heard you talk about, with regard to the proposed enclosure of recreation centers. Can you be a little more descriptive about that? What do you plan to do? How will that process work? What's the role of the Planning Commission in that?
Sure. And I will also invite Commissioner Richards to come back up to augment anything I have to say. There are a number of inputs into this decision about what recreation centers 80 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 or what programs get consolidated into nearby facilities, for instance. One of those is the age of the --
Well, for instance, there are, as I understand it, recreation centers that can be no more than two blocks or three blocks away from each other. And the expert has come to the --
We can get you that information, unless Commissioner Richards knows it off the top of his head.
Good morning. Vic Richard again, Recreation Commissioner. There's approximately facilities 20 that we've identified that have at least 21 one and up to and including three or four 22 facilities within one mile radius.
So that wouldn't be two or three blocks. I mean, in Philly that's... 81 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04
But there are some facilities that we've identified that are within three blocks, six blocks, and eight-block increments as well.
Through the Chair. So let's talk about how Recreation and Planning, and Secretary Griffith, you mentioned that there are a number of inputs. What are the others?
Well, first let me say the Managing Director's Office... Can you hear me?
Can you hear me now? The Managing Director's Office is taking the lead. It's a team approach. The... Obviously, the Recreation Department, City Planning, and the Secretary for Education, and probably others in terms of getting resources or 82 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 information, are on this team. We have contributed demographic information in map form that shows where there is a decrease in population and where that relates to other location of existing recreation centers. As I mentioned, we have also given information related to NTI and other development projects, so that we don't make the error of closing a facility now, where we are promoting development and where we hope to bring back population in the very near future. So we have been supporting the process in that way. We've also been asked to gather and to try to digest in that criteria either best practices criteria that other cities have used, but also association criteria, the American Planning Association, Association of Parks, and others have developed urban criteria about how close you should be to or a household should be to a recreation facility and what kind of recreation facility that should be for 83 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 different age groups, et cetera. And that will also be another input. And also, as I understand it, though we have not been a part of these meetings, the Managing Director and Recreation Commissioner have begun to talk to Council members about issues which may not be apparent, just from a cold objective look, at mapped data. And I don't know whether -- I think Commissioner Richard mentioned earlier that there had been at least six meetings. Vic, I don't know whether you want to add anything to that.
So... I mean, who ultimately, I guess, makes the decision and what's the Planning Commission's role in all of this?
In the process that's taking place now, Mr. Councilman, we're asking the City Councilperson within their prospective Districts to look at what's being recommended, and to jointly make the final decisions. 84 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04
Well, I understand that. But Secretary Griffith talked about these criteria being developed, and standards and best practices. Where are we in that process, and how does that match up with the decision-making process for proposed closures? Have the criteria been developed? Have we done all the analysis that we need to do or is that ongoing as well?
We have just about completed the analysis. Some time ago, probably about two-and-a-half years ago, as part of the NTI process, we issued a document called, I believe, Criteria for a Healthy Neighborhood. That gave very broad parameters which are now being used as part of this vetting process. The Managing Director has asked to us look a little more deeply, and we're doing that. 85 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04
And so you have that information which you're presently working on. You're talking to Recreation, Managing Director's Office, possibly some others. And all of this is to come together in the course of the next couple months?
Yes, sir. And I should say that Commissioner Richard has been doing work on this, I guess, for the last couple of years, and looking at the situation on the ground. So we're very much anchored by the work of the Recreation Department in their ongoing deliberations with Council.
I will be able to also give you -- I believe our meeting is scheduled -- I don't know if it's today or tomorrow; I'm not sure. But at that time or if you'd like it today, I can have delivered to your office the analysis that was done on the other cities across the 11 country that was comparable as well. 12
Okay. Well, my 13 time is up. But I mean, don't -- I mean, I 14 strongly encourage you to send it to the 15 Chair, and then it will -- 16
It always shows 18 up in our offices. 19 Thank you, Madam Chair. I'd like to 20 come back soon.
The next Council member to be recognized is Councilwoman Blackwell. Is she in the room? I don't think so. (No response.) 87 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04
If I may, I am never comfortable doing points of information, but I feel compelled to do a quick point of information for Councilman Nutter, as it relates to the work that's been done on rec centers. And that is that the about two -- Well, I guess that was --
I yield to Councilwoman Reynolds Brown, even though I have no time.
Fall of 2001 we had hearings. We called for hearings around the park system. And one of the findings or... One of the findings out of the park hearings was that we needed to look closely at whether or not it made sense to begin to think about rec centers and closings and combining them with parks, and the like. So the initial discussions, ideas to look at that carefully was sparked by the hearings around the look at the parks. And I say that so that Councilman Nutter 88 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 understands the work that Commissioner Richard has been doing goes all the way back to those hearings that started in the fall of 2001. Thank you, Madam President.
You're welcome. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Blackwell.
Thank you, Madam President. Sorry. I had to get some caffeine. This is my only question -- Well, it's not. It's a specific question. On of this year's budget where they talk about a project, this one says Lancaster Avenue, 49 to 59. Last year on they talked about Lancaster Avenue, 52nd to 63rd. My question is, can we expect that, since we've finally gotten the 205 and we have a federal grant here, as well as a City loan, that this project will be acted on this year? 89 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04
Oh, one more question. Would you ask your folks to look into it to see if maybe we could go down to 40th, as opposed to 49th? And you can let me know if that's possible.
You're welcome. The Chair recognizes Councilman DiCicco. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Thank you, Madam President, and good morning.
Good morning. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: If we could pick up on the conversation that took place between you and my colleague, Councilman Ramos, concerning a vision and a plan, particularly for the riverfront, Delaware 90 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 River, which is mostly my District. The lower end is Council President's District. You and I and Mr. Lombardo had a number of conversations about our vision and all of our visions for the waterfront. I think it would be helpful to all of us if there is in fact a document, an artist's rendition, something that we can actually look to and say, this is the concept of what we're all talking about. Because for years... I can remember when this Mayor was first elected in his first term. Probably within 30 days after his swearing in, he convened a meeting down at Dave and Buster's, of all the communities that were adjacent to the Penn's Landing sites. And he talked about we shouldn't just be talking about developing that 13-acre site which we've all become accustomed to thinking of Penn's Landing because Penn's Landing, as we all know, is much greater than that 13-acre site. And he talked about his vision for a master 91 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 plan. I'm not being critical of the Mayor or this Administration. It's been several years, five, six years almost, five years at least, since that time. And there really has not been a plan that anyone could -- at least any of us could look to and say, well, this is something unique; this is something that, you know, we should be putting out there for prospective developers to look at. We are still, in my opinion -- and again, I'm not trying to be critical. We are still development driven, as far as I can see, at least as it relates to the river. Peter dePaul's project. Piers 9 and 11. Discussions are going on there. And it's not because someone from the Administration is reaching out for those folks. They're generally coming to us. About not quite a year ago when this whole discussion about the 13-acre site was pretty prominent in all of our minds, there 92 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 were developers that RFQs were being issued for were talking about, as the community groups that I represent along the Penn's Landing area came together and commissioned a well-known local urban waterfront planner, Wallace, Roberts & Todd, to do a study of what they perceived as some of the development and infrastructure issues relating to Delaware Avenue. Recently I sent a copy of that to the Mayor, I think within the last two, maybe three weeks. But what it does is, it may not be the plan. There may be some parts of it that going forward we would use. There may be none of the parts that we would use going forward. But what it is is something that people can visually look to and get a sense of what the river could be, should be, and some day may be; and that developers look at that and say, you know, my residential tower might fit in here. The retail developer may come and say, well, you know, I could fit one or two 93 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 different things along the river to create the neighborhood, as we all like to see along the river. So, I think that would be very helpful. And when the community groups really anteed up $50,000, of which Senator Fumo has recently reimbursed them by way of a grant, and I've recently asked the Senator for an extra $50,000, which I think he's going to approve, if we're able to go out there and retain an architectural firm to come up with a vision, why shouldn't we or why are we not doing the same thing? And if we are, I think that would answer some of these questions Councilman Ramos and some of the others have about what the vision is. There has to be a master plan. The developers who looked at that 13-acre site, the number of them had plans that went beyond the 13 acres. There was one, the Atlantis Group, which came across I-95 to the west side of I-95.
I mean, they basically were creating 94 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 a city, 600 million square feet of retail, residential space. It was humongous.
And for free. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: And for free, yeah, until -- until we started getting interested in it; then the free stuff went away. But I think that would be very helpful. And if you don't have a complete one is one thing. We understand that. But you need -- I think that it would go a long way in getting everyone to understand that the Planning Commission's role is not just reacting to developers. And again, I don't mean that to be critical, but I think that's what most people think is going on.
Well, first, I don't take your comments to be critical. You've always been very supportive of the Commission. And our dialogue, even when we disagreed, has always been very civil.
Miss 95 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 Griffith, I'm sorry. We're having difficulty hearing you. Can you speak -- Hold the mike closer to you, please.
Okay? I was just saying that I don't take your comments to be critical at all. I think you've been supportive of the planning process. And in this case, I think we're all thinking in the same way. The New River City initiative is really an initiative to put a lot of the disparate plans and projects that might seem as if their isolated... Penn's Landing, the very large North Delaware Riverfront Project, PIDC's Navy Yard project, the work that we were doing with the Schuylkill River Development Corporation, to put them in the context of an urban river initiative. As a matter of fact, one of the things that I've asked our GIS Department to do is to develop a map of the riverfronts, of all of our riverfronts, highlighting the planning that's being done, the zoning sort of construct that's 96 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 being moving forward, especially in the North Delaware River, and to show how those are connected. Because that's the way we think of them in the Planning Commission. And I think perhaps we haven't done a good enough job in communicating that holistic aspect. With regards to Penn's Landing, as you know -- and you were kind enough to host a meeting with the Planning Commission in some of those groups, I think, was somewhat productive. There we're looking to meld a vision. And we're happy to take the criteria that our urban design staff has developed, in part in response to some of the hearings that were had, both by University of Pennsylvania and Penn's Landing, to take those criteria and sort of make them manifest. Right now they are in written form. And I think it's difficult to see that that in itself is a plan, connecting this area to the City, making sure that the view 97 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 corridors are maintained, making sure that there's a plaza, et cetera. So I think you're correct. And I also agree with Councilman Ramos, that we need to do a better job in promulgating this vision. And I think the New River City Initiative is one mechanism to do that. And it's not just doing the substantive work. It's also doing the communications and marketing work, to the development community, to residents who might -- who are making the decision should I stay in Philadelphia, should I move, and to others who finally realize what a great place Philadelphia is to live. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Thank you. And just finally, I just want to mention that I don't have an extra copy, but I could get you a copy. I know the Mayor's Office has one because he and I had a conversation about this, the Wallace, Roberts & Todd. And it's quite elaborate. I mean, they have visuals on 98 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 everything, including those infrastructure issues that we talk, how to bridge the gap across 95. Their recommendation which was rather unique -- and again, not suggesting that we'd have to do that -- would be to put a deck on Delaware Avenue, as opposed to just putting a lid completely over I-95 which is less expensive than the lid, accommodates some of the issues that we have with the two highways, that make it very difficult to get from Front Street over to Delaware Avenue.
More bridges in between. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: More bridges in between, connecting... Very similar to what they do in Europe, only they have pedestrian bridges going across canals and stuff. We would do it across I-95. So if you want, I could probably get you a copy, but I think it would probably be helpful.
I would appreciate 99 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 it. We did have a staff that were involved. I think Warren Howfar, Director of Urban Design, is familiar with the plan. But it would be useful to get a copy so I can share it with the entire staff. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Thank you. Thank you, Madam President.
Thank you. Councilman Clarke, do you mind if I get a question in?
Miss Griffith, you state in your testimony that $260.6 million is allocated for neighborhood development. How much of that is CN funded and how will these funds be used?
That's another instance, Councilwoman, unless the Budget Director -- and he's shaking his head no -- that we will have to get something to you, hopefully by the end of the session. Again, it is spread out amongst a number of 100 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 agencies.
All right. And we would like to know how you arrived at that amount.
Thank you, Madam President. I want to follow up on the last question I had, with respects to the schools, slash, City consolidation of facilities. Who specifically is responsible, from the City's side, for working on that project?
Well, as you know, Councilman, this Administration works a lot in teams. And this is --
I need a person. Miss Griffith... 101 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04
I need a person. I been hearing about this for a year.
Who is the person responsible for the team in this Administration?
I gotcha. With regard to recreation facilities, it is the Managing Director. And he is very hands on.
We've had, I believe, three meetings of that team, and Phil has been there at each meeting, actually, with 102 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 his sleeves rolled up.
So with all the other things in the City of Philadelphia that the Managing Director's responsible for, he's taken this on himself as the person who attends all the meetings, does all the follow ups.
Could that be alluding to the fact that this is not --
I apologize for interrupting you. He has volunteered that role. I expect and assume that Vic Richards, the Commissioner, is going to have a very responsible role in making those choices as well and moving that ball forward. But I think, for an issue of this importance, the Mayor has determined that 103 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 it would be useful to have a cabinet level appointee actually in the trenches.
He could certainly be here. I spoke to him at the beginning of the hearing, and he said to contact him if we needed him. I don't know whether there's someone else from the Managing Director's Office.
Councilman, would you want the Managing Director here?
You said he was the point person. I wanted somebody else. You said Phil Goldsmith is the point person; there's nobody else responsible.
Because this has been going on for a while, and I really need to understand what the process is. When I meet with the school people, they said they developed their strategy, and 104 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 they said they have yet to hear from you guys.
We will call him, and I'm sure he'll be happy to come and speak to that issue.
All right. Thank you. On Airport expansion, I had heard, I guess, on the radio within the last week there was a report done on airports across the nation. And Philadelphia was in a category of airports that was getting dangerously close to not being able to accommodate the flights.
Operating at capacity. Is the gentleman who spoke before still with us in the room? I'm sure he's still with us, but...
Thank you. Mr. McPherson, can you put the clock on pause until he gets up to the table?
Next you will have 105 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 roller skates.
Ed Anastasi, Deputy Director of Aviation for Finance and Administration. I would like to introduce Mark Gail, who is the Deputy Director for Operations and Facilities. Since it is a matter of airfield capacity, he can address your question, Councilman.
I had heard earlier, I guess on a radio show, that they have done an analysis on all of the airports in the country. And it was this category of airports that were reaching the critical stage in terms of their flight capacity. And Philadelphia fell within that category. And I'm wondering what do we plan to do? And based on the story, I got the assumption that it had more to do with 106 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 runways and air traffic controllers, as opposed to terminal expansion.
Yes. The FAA is constantly looking at the overall national air space architecture and how airports are operating. Philadelphia, unfortunately, has had the distinction of being an airport that is rapidly approaching its limits of capacity the way that the airfield is currently configured. In addition to that, we also have gained an airport with a distinction of having delay problems, again, associated with the way that the airfield is currently configured. As you may know, Councilman, the airport has embarked on a master plan effort, specifically designed to address those issues dealing with airfield capacity and expansion, to be able to deal with not only reducing the amount of delay that we incur today, but also to address the needs of the City and the region 20 to 25 years 107 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 into the future. Those --
Excuse me. Excuse me. On the airfield expansion, was that -- the potential for that impacted by the Kverner crane? I had heard that the crane being placed at the specific location limited our ability to expand a couple of runways in that flight path.
The placement of the Kverner crane came into play back in 1999 when we added runway A26 which was our newest, our most recent runway. We did modify the runway in terms of changing its elevation at the end, in order to clear the crane, so we are able to operate that runway without any major safety issues associated with that. In terms of future expansion of the airport, how the Kverner crane plays, is the more that we expand the airfield to the east, towards the Kverner crane and to the shipyard, we will then have to compensate by continuing to rise the -- actually the elevation or the height at the end of the 108 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 runway, in order to make sure that planes arriving or departing --
We are looking... There are two airfield development alternatives on the table right now that are being evaluated. The FAA has embarked on an environmental impact statement for the two airfield development alternatives. One is essentially what we refer to as the parallel concept which is a takeoff of what we have in place today, by adding a fourth parallel runway, basically where the United Parcel Service facility is, located adjacent to the river. And the second airfield development actually changes the orientation of the 109 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 existing runway configuration and spaces the runways further apart, to the distances that are required to run simultaneous operations, in order for the airport to achieve the number of operations that it's being -- you know, the demand is being placed upon it right now. The FAA, as I stated, has hired their own consultant to do the EIS process. And as a matter of fact, we actually have some public information hearings that are coming up next week in New Jersey, Delaware and in Pennsylvania so that the residents and surrounding communities can voice their concerns, as well as an opportunity for the FAA and the airport to basically brief everybody on the status of where we are and the plans for that development.
What level are the airlines involved in, in terms of airfield expansion? US Air and hopefully Southwest and this expanded plan, are they involved in the process?
Yes. In the master 110 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 planning effort, there were a number of committees that were developed early on. Community advisory committees, technical committees. And a number of the airlines have members that have served and continue to serve on technical advisory committees, in terms of taking a look at the alternatives that are being presented, and to be able to add in how they operate and how their individual respective airlines operate, in terms of numbers and runway lengths and requirements, and whatnot. That's just on the preparation side. The other side of it I would let my colleague respond to, Mr. Anastasi, with respect to it would require and will require their approving any type of financial plan to be able to fund those developments.
Point of information. 111 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04
Thank you, Madam Chair. You got my attention when you were talking about -- You had my attention but you got more of it...
...when you mentioned the fact that the Kverner crane, the way we compensated for that obstacle is that we elevated the runway. During ideal flight conditions, how far does the average aircraft clear the crane?
Oh, it's several hundred feet, Councilman, depending upon the positioning of the crane. The crane itself, actually, is on a set of tracks and it rolls back and forth. Some days you'll look out and it will appear as through it's right on the center line of the runway. And then the next day you look at it, you'll see that it's 112 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 shifted all the way to the north, and it doesn't look like it interferes at all.
Well, let's talk about a day that it's interfering, and the jet clears it by a couple hundred feet. What happens if the conditions aren't ideal, where there would be an aborted takeoff? What happens then?
There is an instrument landing system that's associated with that runway. So pilots that are on approach to that runway are following -- typically are following an instrument landing or guided landing which will ensure their clearing the crane. If they're not following the instrument landing system, they can approach the runway on a visual basis, whereby the pilot has the responsibility to see and avoid the crane. And that's all the function of the visibility of the time of day.
I'm not talking about arrivals. I'm taking about -- 113 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04
-- to give the aircraft additional lift to clear the crane.
We have a jet that's taking off. Something isn't right. The plane doesn't lift at the lift rate that it's supposed to.
Well, the pilot would -- You know, depending upon what is happening with the failure, the pilot would be required to take --
I understand the FAA has approved all this. 114 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04
Boy, a couple hundred feet is kind of... Next time I do that, I'm going to look down and make sure that you're right. But it sounds to me it's quite tight.
When the runway was taken into consideration being built, any pilot that chooses to use that runway for departure, knowing that that obstacle is out there, has to take a look at the performance criteria for the aircraft, that should he or she lose an engine, let's say, for example --
...that the aircraft is required to maintain a certain amount of lift and climb rate that would enable it to clear that obstacle.
And a pilot can... Am I hearing that a pilot can 115 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 refuse departure on that runway if he or she chooses?
He's probably doing it for your safety if he feels he's too heavy to take that runway.
Great. Thank you. Thanks for that point of information, Madam Chair.
Do you have another question? And then I'll call on Councilwoman Tasco.
If I may just point out that the Managing Director -- 116 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04
I just wanted to point out, the Managing Director is here, if it's appropriate for him to respond to the Councilman's question.
Mr. Managing Director, did you hear the question?
In earlier testimony, and actually in one of the other days of testimony, the question about consolidation of facilities with the School District and the City had come up, and had 117 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 actually talked to Paul Vallas about three weeks ago in his office and asked that question about what the status of the Consolidation Plan is. We're now talking about the potential closure of several rec facilities. Knowing that the Mayor made reference to this particular program, I guess more than a year ago, I continue to be concerned that I don't see any substantive -- at least I don't -- any substantive discussions or recommendations. When I met with Mr. Vallas, he indicated that the School District had done its work, had came up with its recommendations -- had come up with its recommendations on this issue, but he did not get any feedback from the City. I asked Miss Griffith, you know, repeatedly who was the point person on this issue. And she said you were. No staff, no 25 deputies, no assistant deputies. You, Mr. 118 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 Goldsmith, were the point person. So as the point person of the team -- you actually said of the team -- can you tell me where we are with this process, what's happened over the last year, a time line on when you think this program will be in place. Will we be able to access the recommendations of the City before we have to make decisions on any closures of any facilities in our Districts?
Okay. Let me try to answer the best I can. Phil Goldsmith, Managing Director, City of Philadelphia. We have, as you know, a process going on that we would, I guess, have called right-sizing which includes really looking at our rec centers and swimming pools, and so forth. I think there's a number of different contexts to that. Part of that would be partnering with other organizations, whether they be non-profit, in some cases businesses, as well as also 119 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 the School District being another organization that we would be looking at. We have put together, through the Recreation Department and others, what we consider an analysis of all our rec centers and pools, as to utilization, proximity to other recreation centers, proximity to other available possibilities, such as schools, and so forth. And we have been engaging members of City Council in our analysis. We plan to talk to each and every member of City Council that wants to, you know, talk to us about it because we think it's got to be an iterative and collaborative partnership. We have also had -- And I would say Debra Kahn has been the person as Secretary of Education who has had more contact with the School District and engaging the School District as to their sites, what their potential school facility construction program is like. And that is part of the overall process.
Excuse me. 120 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 Excuse me, Mr. Goldsmith. So is Debra Kahn is the point person and not you?
I would say, in terms of -- If the specific question was in terms of the relationship, that part of the programming or planning the School District in the City, Debra Kahn would be the lead person, I would say, in the overall scheme of what we plan to do with rec centers and how we plan to work with Council and try to make some decisions here. I would be responsible, obviously, as serving the Mayor --
She has been the person point with the schools, you know. But as -- You know, there's a number of people that have been dealing with it. And I think she as recently as last week had a conversation, another conversation with their folks. They may be further ahead than we are. But there have been discussions and conversations about 121 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 these issue.
So are you suggesting that Debra Kahn would be the best person to answer whatever line of questioning that I may have on the status of this particular --
She would be -- She would be more up to speed than I would be, yes.
I would assume that she's not here. I'm just simply trying to find out who's been working on this for the last year. And if you're not the person, I'm sorry you had to come over here.
Well, I'm ultimately responsible, but, you know, we try to divvy up the responsibilities. And there have been conversations. So, she can give you a better idea of her most recent conversation with the School District because I think that took place last week.
All right. I 122 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 mean, I'm not necessarily -- I just need to know who's the responsible person. And for some reason I've been unable to get like a straight answer.
And I mean, I understand that you're the Managing Director. But as Darrell Clarke, Councilperson, going to a community meeting, they don't want to hear about a staff member --
-- didn't get something done. I'm the person. It's all on me.
Right. Right. I would say she would be most knowledgeable to answer your questions at this point.
It would be helpful if we can have this kind of... Thank you. 123 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04
Mr. Goldsmith, just a moment. As long as you're here, does anybody else have any questions of Mr. Goldsmith? Councilwoman Tasco.
The Managing Director has been trying to meet with me. And I'm sorry we have not been able to connect. But I'm sure we will before this budget process is over.
Councilwoman, for some reason we can't hear you.
I'm sorry. I can't talk for some reason. I have a question to ask about projects that have been in the hopper while 124 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 we are consolidating and maybe closing some facilities. I'm very concerned about my facility that's been on the drawing board for many years and the community is waiting for. Since the money has been appropriated and the dollars are there, are we still going forward with my project?
I don't know if we have scheduled a meeting with you yet. We will talk about that. And those are things that, you know, obviously we want to have a discussion with you. There's been no decisions made one way or the other on that. And obviously, we want to meet with you before we would even, you know, come up with any decisions what we would do.
Are there 125 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 any other Council members who have questions of Mr. Goldsmith?
On and 50 in your department, there are appropriations for expenditures for City-wide facilities. That's on page item 51. City funds will be used for critical renovations or improvements to City-wide sites on an as-needed basis. And on there is integrated case management system. Could you explain those two items for me, please?
Okay. Thank you very much. My staff explained it to 126 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 me. That's okay.
Thank you, Madam President. I'm going to refer to Rich Tustin's testimony, the last paragraph. I want to get some information around the minority participation in capital project. And I guess I just want to start with in the last paragraph it states that 40 design contracts and 140 public work contracts, and that you anticipate another 127 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 design and 80 more public works, which means there's going to be 65 design or maybe there has been 65 design; I don't know. Is this future? Are these numbers future or are we talking about what's happening now?
Councilwoman, what that 9 refers to is to date, as of today... 10
...we have initiated 40 12 design contracts and 140 public works. 13 That's for this fiscal year. And we 14 anticipate it is what we expect to complete 15 by the end of the fiscal year. 16
Okay. All 17 right. 18 Can you tell me of the 40 design, 19 how many of those contracts went to 20 minorities? And of the 140, can you give 21 me a percentage level of participation by 22 minority firms? 23 On the back of your testimony you 24 state that there were 33 percent of 25 professional service contracts that were 128 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 awarded to minority firms. But we're not... I just need to know the breakdown here.
Most of the information I provided on my testimony refers to professional service contracts, as far as minority participation. When it gets into a public works bid or public works contract, that's running through the Procurement Department. So when you see my numbers here of 33 percent, that's the total percentage of dollar values that we spend in designing contracts, professional service contracts. I'd like to say that we also try to, whenever possible, when we put out a design contract, we like to do a hundred percent of that contract either minority, women or a non-minority firm, as opposed to splitting up and making it small percentages of individual contracts. We feel it's a better way of getting a full participation from those type of firms. We do the percentages on the much 129 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 larger projects because it's easier. There's more opportunity to subcontract out portions of the work.
Right. I understand that. And that's why I asked you how many of the 40 design contracts were issued to minorities.
I don't have that exact number, but I can get back to you. Roughly it's 33 percent. So, what we did was, we came up with a percentage based on dollar value. But it may not be exactly what you're looking for. You're looking for a number of contracts.
Okay. And I have another question, too. 130 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 I'd actually like to get more information on minority participation. We're spending a lot of money in this City, just like other cities, on capital improvements. And I don't have a sense that -- I don't have a good sense yet of how we are complying with the executive order that was issued by the Mayor and how we're actually dividing some of this work up. I'm a strong believer that public means public. Public money means public, and everybody is entitled to participate and get these contracts. What disturbs me every day when I come in and I see people working on City Hall, and I never see any minorities working on City Hall. So I'd just like to get more information about what's going on. Are we practicing what we're preaching? Are we putting things in writing that we're not complying with? And does the Capital Office or who has the authority to issue a 131 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 waiver to a contractor when they don't have minority subs on the job?
The authority to issue a waiver like that would -- on a construction contract would come through the Procurement Department, not through our department. The Procurement Department oversees minority participation on public works contracts. When we develop our list of design contracts, professional service contracts for the year, one of the first things we do is we sit down with the Minority Business Enterprise Council. We review with them all the design contracts we anticipate doing that year. And with them together, we try to come up with which firms we should solicit, purely minority; which firms we should solicit as just women or other firms. So it's done jointly with the Minority Business Enterprise Council to develop our list of projects and who we want to solicit to do the work. 132 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 We've done that in that same fashion for the last four or five years. And it works very well.
Well, I know one thing, you know. I had a playground renovated in my District. And you know, the good faith effort did not produce enough minority contractors. So, I don't know that there is... I don't know what effort goes into good faith. I guess... I don't know what effort really goes into a good faith effort because I don't see people getting contracts. And you know, I'm personally kind of tired of dealing with this because I think we should be doing what we need to do to help promote small businesses here in the City. So, I just need more information. And whatever information that you can forward, I would absolutely appreciate it. And forward it to the Chair, which is standard procedure. 133 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 But I'm particularly interested in what's going on in my District, in addition to the process for getting more minority some of the City work.
I will -- I will talk to the Procurement Commissioner and try to get from him the response to your questions, and I will forward them over.
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Brown.
Thank you, Madam President. Before I get to my question, though, Councilwoman Donna Reed Miller's follow up. The Procurement Commissioner is not here to address those issues?
No; I'm sorry. I don't believe I see anybody here from Procurement.
And I would say 134 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 to say that it is working okay is relative. It ultimately really does depend on who's speaking, because in the eyes of a lot of individuals in this town, it's not working. And I say that because of the past year, I've received letters where the Art Museum and the Zoo -- and I'm curious to know -- the Free Library as well are thinking about expansions. And the question always I raise is, what process is in place to ensure that people of color and women are getting a fair break at these multi-million dollar contracts. So I need to know procedurally what happens when one of our major City buildings, City facilities are thinking about expansion. Procedurally what happens with regards to the Procurement Department and the head of that entity being made keenly aware that this is not optional; it's an expectation. I need to know what happens.
Well, we're going to 135 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 try to get the Procurement Commissioner or somebody -- and/or somebody from MBEC to come here.
So is that to say that the ball does not kick start with you; it kick starts with the Procurement Commissioner?
We take the project through the design. We try to incorporate and to try to get as much MBEC participation as possible during the design process. When the project goes from design to construction during the bid initiation process, we also then send the information to minority -- to MBEC, who then basically defines what percentages should be included in the construction contract. And so that -- And then, when it goes into construction, those percentages are listed in there for the contractors to 136 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 follow. And then it takes -- From that point it takes off with Procurement.
We have asked the Procurement Commissioner to come to answer your questions.
I would appreciate it. For the leaders that head up those major institutions, what role or responsibility do they have in offering up? Because for sure they identify majority contractors, GMs who don't look like me to see that they're at least considered. What responsibility and obligation do they have, with regards to recommending small business, minority- and women-owned businesses, to see that they are at least considered, not by the Procurement Department, but by the leader of that institution?
I think that's another question that the Procurement Commissioner would best be able to answer
All right. Moving on to the final question I had for the City -- our City's Planner and as a follow-up to councilman Frank DiCicco's question regarding the riverfront development -- And I'm really leaning on my experience from the strategic plan that happened around the parks and how instructive that has been for us. Is she not here?
Councilwoman, I believe Councilwoman Tasco has a point of information.
The Capital Project Office. In terms of minority participation and the design, what is the -- what is your plan? And do you have goals for minority partition in the planning and design of 138 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 facilities?
Yes, Councilman, we do. As I said at the beginning, actually before the fiscal year starts, before FY '05 will start after approval of the budget, we usually then try to put together a list of what design contracts we're going to do that fiscal year, that upcoming fiscal year. It's that stage early on before July that we usually get together with the Minority Business Enterprise Council to review all those design contracts, and we work together with them to identify which projects, what firms we should solicit to get minority participation as high a level as we can. We've been trying to, you know, do better each year on our level of participation. And it's working together with MBEC that we can do that, and we can identify which projects we can solicit only minority firms or -- You know. There are many projects we put out, 139 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 and we don't even ask for proposals from majority -- from majority firms. It's only minority firms or women-owned firms. They're the only ones we focus for those projects.
But if you have a majority firm, do you ask the majority firm, if there is no minority firm to do -- to serve as the majority, do you ask the majority to --
We do that as well. In fact, usually when we meet with the firms, we have a representative of MBEC there at the meeting with us. And they also, you know, give instructions as to how we should -- they should try to incorporate minority participation into their subcontracting in the work that they do as well. And so... And on some of the larger projects, we actually require them to have 140 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 certain levels of minority participation and women participation in their subcontracting of design services. So it's done on a regular basis and in unison with MBEC.
This is simply a follow-up to Councilman Frank DiCicco's question regarding the riverfront development. We're hearing about NTI. We hear about the planning that's happening down at the riverfront, the closing of rec centers. And I'm leaning on my experience from what the strategic plan around the parks has taught us. It's been very instructive. Knowing also that the parks haven't had a strategic plan for over 20 years. Does the City have a City-wide plan 141 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 that we're actually executing from years ago or has there been any discussion of the City-wide plan? Where are we and where might we be in that process?
I'm going to start. And Rich Lombardo might want to pipe in. This is not a master plan city. In some cities, especially cities, for instance in California, there is a state constitutionally mandated master plan with elements, that have to be updated every so often. I went to graduate school at the University of California, Berkeley. And I worked my way through graduate school working in Oakland, California, in the update of their master plan elements: Landscaping, housing, et cetera. This is not a city like that. In this City, our zoning text is the primary framework for planning. In other words, that's where we say where we want housing, where we want commercial development, where mixed use development is allowed -- 142 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04
-- where industrial development is allowed, et cetera. Overlaid on that, we also do targeted strategic plans, especially for areas of the City where land use and activities are changing radically, such as the North Delaware, such as the Navy Yard, and frankly such as the NTI plans where we're trying to revitalize inner city communities. But each one of those areas are so different, that doing a City-wide master plan that tried to develop the same criteria across the board, in my view, as a professional planner, would not work. However, you do have to have something that tells the development community what they can do where and what you're going to encourage where.
And that is the zoning text. And I should point out that we have 143 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 just finished revamping and clarifying the residential component of that text. And we're very appreciative to Council for adopting that. And we are now entering into Phase II, taking a look at commercial zoning, et cetera. And I don't know whether, Rich, you want to add anything to that. He's been around longer than I have.
That's very helpful. I thank you for that explanation.
Yeah. Just to add that, you know, planning is a continuing process. I mean, the stuff that Councilman DiCicco talked about, a plan for the central riverfront, what you see out there today -- and there's a lot of stuff out there today as a result of planning that was done about 30 years ago --
The Dave and Buster's, the Piers 3 and 5, the current proposals for Piers 9 and 11, the Chart 144 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 House, Port Side, they're all the result of planning that took place 30 years ago or so. Center City, a lot of the office buildings that were built in the late '80s were educated by the planning process, new Center City plan. We're looking at that again because it's now getting to be 20, 30 years ago that planning was done. So it's a continuing process. We do the same thing in the neighborhoods, where on an ongoing basis we are doing a number of community plans, either community re-mappings through our zoning and remapping program or community plans through our community planning division. Even in some instances the plan may only be for a block or two of a commercial strip or it may be for the entire neighborhood. And the communities vary in size. You know, there's over -- As you know, there's over a hundred communities in the City. 145 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04
But we're -- You know, it's always an ongoing process. It doesn't have a beginning date and end date, but it's always ongoing.
And since you live and breathe this, do you believe in your own professional opinion that that methodology works, that the fluidity of it works?
Well, I can add from -- You know, I worked -- spent eight years as a private consultant and worked in about cities. And I can say that the -- 16 for cities over 700,000 the master plan does not work.
The master idea does not work, because there's so many moving parts and each one affect the other. Who would have suspected, for instance, that Center City residential housing market would be so hot? But we're now taking advantage of that and moving 146 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 development outward. We could not have foreseen that or years ago. 4
Now we're able to 6 take advantage of it and update the plan, 7 as we are doing, based on conditions today, 8 looking 20 years or so out. 9 I also believe, since you asked for 10 our professional opinion, that one of the 11 reasons Philadelphia as a northeast city 12 has remained so vibrant and actually has 13 remained vibrant if you look at other 14 cities in the same class, is because the 15 diversity of neighborhood types, and that 16 there's something for everyone here. 17 And we want to continue to nurture 18 that diversity. We don't want to flatten 19 it out so that every neighborhood is a 20 rowhouse neighborhood or every neighborhood is some other kind of neighborhood. We do want to encourage, however, market rate development, where that's appropriate, and try to revitalize communities who have hung on and stayed 147 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 with us.
You're welcome. The Chair recognizes Councilman O'Neill.
Thank you, Madam President. I think I probably need the Budget Director, Mr. Dubow. Good afternoon.
Let me just start out asking you to compare the total of the Capital Budget for '05 compared with '04. Just give me a feel for the different total amounts.
The '04 amount of the Capital Budget for GO supported debt was 80.9 million. This year's is 67.6. 148 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 '04 all sources of funding was 618 million, and this year's is 790 million.
So we are considerably lower on the GO supported, considerably higher on the...
Could you explain that, just in general terms, without getting too specific?
The lower is as our debt incurring capacity shrinks, then the size of our Capital Budget also shrinks.
Okay. Can you explain why our debt-incurring capacity shrinks? 149 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04
Our debt-incurring capacity is based on the value of our assessments. It's the average of the last years. It's and a half percent of 6 the average of the last 10 years. 7 So debt capacity goes up when 8 assessed values go up or when we retire 9 debt. It goes down if assessed values go 10 down or if we issue more debt. 11
Wouldn't the 12 reverse be true? Shouldn't we be having a 13 higher amount, then, because our assessed values are going on?
No. When the assessed values go up, there's an increase which is included in here. I mean --
So a one-year increase won't have as big an impact. If you have that sustained over a number of years, it 150 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 will have a larger --
What had such a big impact on the plus percent -- 7 somewhere between 10 and 15 percent 8 reduction this year? 9
When we did last year's program and we scheduled our funding out over a number of years, we scheduled this decrease. So --
Okay. Having run for election last year, I'm glad that you had the wisdom to unbalance your planning, but this year we have to pay for it.
Okay. Now, that's, you know, 10, 11, percent 4 decrease on City GO funds supported. 5 Recreation capital. The last 6 several years it's been pretty steady at 12 7 million, at least the particular part that 8 Council gets per district. 1.2 million, I 9 believe it's been, at least for a couple of 10 years. 11
So almost all the reduction or one half the reduction is in that area.
Can you explain that for me? I know we have to vote for this. It's not exactly a... honey you're 152 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 putting on the stick here. It's kind of a devastating number. So, I would just ask you if you could go into some detail on it, especially since you have such a great increase in the total funds.
Yeah. There's funding that comes out of the Managing Director's Office line.
There's funding that each Council member gets that comes out of the Managing Director's line. That's the extra... That's what --
We're talking about 500,000 per District Council member. That's 5 million total.
Which probably 153 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 is... I think we were getting more than that per District when Mayor Goode was Mayor. I'm not sure of the exact time, but... I can't remember it, so I figure it probably is at least before Mayor Rendell. Could you give us some more detail on that? I mean, just -- I think all of us have a difficult time stretching a million two each year. And I'm trying to see what the thought is about having us now go down to -- from a million two to five hundred per District. You can't get a whole lot with $500,000, particularly if you have, you know, 15 to 20 centers. Anything you could share on that, I'd appreciate it.
Well, let me try to shed some light on it. So... This decision came out of a lot of discussion. Part of it, I think, was derived from the fact that we are revamping the recreation picture across the board this year. 154 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 And the expectation was that because this was going to be a collaborative effort in some degree with Council, that Council would not have to bear all the burden of upgrades and revitalization of facilities, et cetera, that that was going to some extent be folded into an overall plan, because we are talking about enhancing facilities, some facilities as we consolidate operations, working with the School District, as Councilman Clarke said, et cetera. So I think the driver came simply from the need to have a very frugal budget. But once that was determined, some of the thinking was that instead of Council folks sort of being left out there to make upgrades out of their funds, that there would be a collaborative effort, in that we would try to right size the recreation infrastructure together.
Were any Council members, particularly District members, consulted as to whether they 155 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 thought it was a better idea because they weren't able to keep up with their infrastructure problems so they would like less money in their discretion, more money in some City-wide discretion, that would help their District? That seems to be what you're saying. I know I hadn't been consulted. It doesn't work in my District. So, for -- If it's a plan, I'm not sure who in Council is going to help. And again, we have to vote for this and defend it when we're in our Districts and around the City. And it's a pretty devastating number. If somebody sat down with a District Council member and the at-large members that have to support it and are interested in different projects, and said, well, it's only 500,000 this year, but we have this other money. And this is what we're going to fix up in this area that you're interested in or this area. I think we're going to need some specifics on that. 156 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04
And we're also going to need to analyze the specifics, to see if it isn't just engineering money out of certain Districts. I honestly, at least from the Tenth District, see it as something that's worked real fine up to now, and under the old system. And now the new system just basically takes 60 or 70 percent of the money off the table. Because that strategy of, well, we'll centralize it and take care of needs in a different way, I don't get a dime out of that. I mean, I can tell you that we can have all the meetings that we could have. There's no -- There's no way that kind of money goes into my District. And -- And it's $700,000 short, just one year item. I don't want to talk about the plan further out. Just one year... It's a devastating number. 157 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 So, I would recommend that somebody start sitting down with Council members, and I don't just mean District Council members. But that's where that particular item has worked. And I have one question, though, Mr. Dubow. The 67.6 is the amount of money we're planning to borrow. Is that the maximum amount that the City could borrow under our Constitutional obligations?
-- on the schedule. We have about 120 million in capacity. And in that -- You know, over the course of the program, it would go up or down. So we tried to schedule our -- get over the five years so that we didn't just use it all up at once.
Okay. But during that five years, will there be an increase in the 120? In other words, we didn't do anything this year, even though we could have done 120. Will it only be 158 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 120 next year or would it go up?
Oh. It varies by year. Some years it dips a little; some years it goes up, depending on our debt retirement schedule and what happens with the average of assessments, what years are falling in and what years are going off.
Well, it's not -- In the program, it's actually programmed to go down each year. Okay.
The 120 million we have in capacity right now, was it 200 last year? And we used 80.9 of it? Is that a fair number?
No, because there are a variety of things that go into the calculation, and --
Well, what was it last year, so I have some comparison?
So last year we had 80. 142 went down to 120. Okay. That's less. 5
97. Okay. 10 Is there any point where you foresee 11 that number going up in that total 12 capacity? Because it obviously was higher 13 at some point, right? 14
Yeah. In 2008 it goes 18 up. So as of January 1, 2008, that 76 19 becomes 89. And then after we assume that 20 we do 60 million that year, and it drops to 21 29.2 at June 30th. 22
I don't see it in the schedule. I'd have to look back. 160 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04
I shouldn't say ever. We had some really devastating years where we didn't have a Capital Budget back in the late '80s. But I mean, since we got back on our feet.
The schedule I have only goes back to about 2000 and it wasn't -- hasn't been that low since then.
All right. The PICA funds, are there any in the budget right now, Capital Budget?
There's carry forward of existing PICA. There's no new PICA money this year.
Because I got a few questions on that. Thank you. 161 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04
Thank you, Madam President. I'd like to... I'm going to ask this quick question, and then I'd like to go back to the area actually where Councilman O'Neill was. Secretary Griffith... First, can we figure out what the situation is with the sound system? It's got a buzz in it every time any of us speak. SOUND TECHNICIAN: I'm trying to work on it.
It's tremendously annoying. And I think we actually paid... Mr. Tustin, we paid for the system, right? Is it part of the new thing? I mean, with... Secretary, when you talked about the criteria or the analysis that you're going to go through, with regard to the centers and its best practices, some of the data I have indicates, for instance in Allegheny 162 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 West section, they've had a population decrease but the number of children under has gone up by about 40 percent. Does 5 that get factored into this discussion when 6 you start talking about what should stay 7 and what should go? 8
And also, what kind 12 of programming and what kind of facilities 13 might be needed. And we're not only 14 looking at that, but we're looking at 15 projected population 16
All right. And 17 what's the community's role in any of this? 18 When do they get to participate? Or they just get to see the list when it comes out?
Well, I know that the Managing Director's determine that the first step would be consultation with Council members. And I would assume that if Council members at that point feel that there should be community folks in the 163 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 room, that that could also happen. But I would... Again, the Planning Commission is not the driver of this process. So we... What we'll do is get the Managing Director's Office to respond to the Chair.
Okay. Mr. Dubow, let's talk about the $5 million, your response to Councilman O'Neill's questions. The budget book indicates 4 million political on , but you said it was 5. Now, is that additional million coming out of the MDO, , item number 1, 1.
So are you saying now that of the $3 million in that line, Council's getting a million?
Then why don't we just make it... Why don't you just... I think the path that Councilman O'Neill was going down -- not that I agree with the 5, but... I mean, why don't you just put 164 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 in the lines what they're supposed to be for the Council in the first place, as opposed to the more circuitous process of, well, we know we have 4, and then we'll go chase around and try to -- not that he's inaccessible -- but try to convince the Managing Director to give any one of us some X thousands of dollars for a particular project, as opposed to at least knowing... I mean, as, again, the Councilman laid out, when it was a million or 1.2, you knew what you had, you managed your money, and life went on.
The money has always been split between Recreation and the Managing Director's Office. And the reason we do that is so that there's money available for Council members that they can use in places other than recreation.
I understand that. But I thought that in previous years the... What is it, the IETF line was either 10 or 12 directly.
And the extra 2 million was already in the Managing Director's Office.
It's split between the same two places. The amounts are different.
All right. So... And what I took from the Secretary's response was something like, well, there's less money in the Districts specifically, but then somehow you get made whole or close to whole by this City-wide concept or that we're not burdened with the tremendous responsibility of having to 166 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 worry about how to pay for some of these additional items. I mean, based on that thought process, you would take all the money away, and then we wouldn't have to worry about it at all.
I apologize if I miscommunicated, Councilman. I certainly didn't mean to indicate that somehow through this process $12 million would suddenly appear. Simply that since the Administration is looking at a total revamp of the Recreation infrastructure, that some of the objectives that you might have, and where you might have used the original amount, could be met through this process. And I think I said at the time I was going to try to shed a little light on it. The fact of the matter is that the amount was driven by fiscal concerns. And then once that was determined, then we tried to look at how needs could be met.
Well, I mean, is 167 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 there some belief that we're not individually managing our money well? Or that somehow the MDO's office or other components of the government have a better sense of how we allocate the dollars?
No. I think there we were guided by habit and custom, and the fact of the Budget Director's --
Excuse me, Councilman. But the split has been customary. And that, as I understand it from the Budget Director, has been so that there would be some fungibility in the MDO funds, so that if there was no need to spend that money on recreation services, that it could be spent elsewhere, as 168 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 directed by Council members. But I hear your underlying point, and also --
Well, we've always had the ability to spend it elsewhere. It's not only for Recreation; it's not only for Fairmount Park. It goes to the Water Department. It goes to virtually any other component of the government when someone comes in and says, I've got this project. It's ready to go. It came in $30,000 over bid. Now, you know, we can rebid it and add four months... four to five months in the time frame or you can give me $30,000 and we can go start the project tomorrow. In most instances, what do you think the answer is?
Well, we try to be responsible. So the answer usually is, here's the $30,000; go start the project. I mean, I guess it does go back -- And I'm not ignoring the buzzer completely. 169 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 But it probably goes back to the first real question of this whole thing which is where we fit in in this process which pretty much seems to be at the tail end of the decision making. And I understand -- And we don't have to go back through the Home Rule Charter and who gets what when and all that. But, you know, we're not always guided by all those processes. And so, if we were going to have this kind of year and this kind of number, then it would seem to me that there would be a lot of discussion about it ahead of time, just like... I mean, obviously a decision was made that we're only going to borrow -- not only but we're going to borrow, you know, 67 plus million but we've got a capacity of 120. Mr. Dubow did not discuss and maybe doesn't want to bank on it... I mean, won't there be a fairly decent increase in borrowing capacity once we go to a hundred percent valuation? What's the estimate on 170 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 that.
Can I give more than a yes or no? It's yes on our state debt limit. It's no in terms of the percent of our debt as a percent of revenue. We still have a high -- high amount of debt service compared to our revenue. So what will happen is our constraint will really be that level of debt service.
What's with the debt service increase over the past three or four years?
I'd have to -- I don't have that with me. I'd have to get back to you on that.
Okay. All right. I know I'm cooked for the moment, but...
Thank you, Madam 171 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 Chair. Madam Chair, would it be appropriate to ask the representative from the Public Property Division to come to the table? Thank you, Madam Chair. Commissioner, how are you?
Commissioner, the reason I've asked you to come to the table, the problem that I'm about to describe I don't think is your problem, but I think that you can help solve the problem. I notice that regularly -- And we've talked about this before with the Public Property Department. The problem is that I receive mail from all of these operating departments, and I'm not going to be specific today. I'm not going to say what department. But I've received mail from the Administration from the second floor, from the Mayor's Office, with 37 cents postage on it. 172 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 I get a communication from -- I'll mention that department. I mentioned the other departments that we receive mail. I know that you have -- And maybe today the rest of this group can listen. You have in your department interoffice mail...
...that is sent all over the City, from the Fire Department to the Police Department, from the Police Department to Council. It goes all over the place. And it's supposed to be in place, and we have a number of employees there that we don't need to spend postage, correct?
My name is Joan Schlouderbach. I'm the Public Property Commissioner. And actually, Councilman, we only do a limited amount of interoffice mail in Public Property.
Well, you have a list that you provide, showing a whole list of agencies that interoffice mail is delivered where the service -- must be 25 173 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 minimum departments on there, that Public property distributes the mail.
That's correct, but it's primarily in City Hall, Municipal Services Building, One Parkway. It's pretty limited to the downtown area.
The list doesn't suggest that. The list suggests that you deliver to other agencies throughout the City. That's what the list suggests, anyway. But I don't understand why you receive a letter from Municipal Services Building, with 37 cents postage on it or you get a letter from the second floor and it has 37 cents. So if you're telling me that the interoffice mail system is nonexistent, it sends a terrible message, when you can collect 50, 60 letters in a month that were mailed by the operating departments to just a Council office, and that's just times one. So let's times it by 17. As a matter of fact, I have a box 174 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 full that I'm going to use as an exhibit one day, showing all this waste of money. I mean, the message that it sends -- And I'd like you to provide to the Chair -- And I'm not talking about the mailbox or the water bills. I'm just -- I would be curious to know what we spend in postage, especially postage that maybe if you double check and look at that list, you'll see that, I believe, the airport is on that interoffice mail list, Fairmount Park Commission is on that interoffice mail list. And I'd like to know how much money we spend. And again, not water bills, not revenue. I'm talking about the casual mail that we send out, because I really think that you need to look at that. Give you an example. I had some educational material, some brochures to send out. So I went to the effort to write on the envelope educational material, because there's a special postage rate. It's almost nothing. It's like, you can 175 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 send almost a pound out of mail for, like, 50 cents. Well, I sent it over, put a stickie on it and everything. Person called me back and said, we don't know about this educational mail stuff. Everything goes out first class. You know what that little package costs? Like $7.50 to send, when it could have been sent for 50 cents. So what I'm suggesting is that you get the City mail system, because I'll bet we'll all be surprised to see how much money this City spends on mail. And when you have to receive an envelope from One Parkway, when it could have been delivered by that interoffice systems and it's put into the U.S. mail bin and sent across the street with 37 cents or more. Some of them 57 because it weighs a little more than an ounce. I think that whole system needs to be overhauled. And if that list that you've provided us, Commissioner, isn't 176 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 current, then we need a current list because we are going through a lot of effort to stamp envelopes interoffice if you're just going throw postage on it.
Councilman, if I can interject, I think you're absolutely correct. That's my personal opinion. However, I believe that it's the Revenue Department that has purview over these matters. And what we will do is -- I don't think there's someone -- there's a representative from that department here. We will...
I've checked this out. And the responsibility that I'm told for the moving this interoffice mail is Public Property. Now...
Councilman, it's actually the outgoing mail or the U.S. Postal Service mail goes directly through the Revenue Department now.
That's the problem. It shouldn't be going there. It should be directed to the interoffice 177 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 system. Why would we want to put postage on an envelope that's coming from the Fire Department or the Airport to a Council office?
I think you're absolutely right. I think what the Commissioner was trying to say is, she doesn't see the outgoing mail. So what we need to do is talk to the Revenue Commissioner and say that any mail that's coming to a City agency should not be sent out, because your point is absolutely right.
But Rob, the situation is, you can't expect a clerk in the mailing room at the Revenue Department to read every envelope. I think that the discipline needs to be that if we have an interoffice mail system, the mail shouldn't even go to the Revenue Department. It should be directed to the --
And I was told the last check we wrote to the Post Office was hundreds of thousands of dollars for postage.
That's correct, we need to have a discipline, and we need to send out guidance to all the departments, telling them what they should and shouldn't send out through external mail. And in the process, though, for when departments don't listen to that -- and that has to come through Revenue because they're the final gatekeepers --
Whatever. It took a little clerk, a little high school person, working in the office to say, why would a, b, c department spend 37 cents to mail an envelope that was just across the street, and not put it into the City mail system?
It's a very valid issue, but it should be taken up 179 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 at the time of the Operating Budget.
And I think at that time we ought to know how many messengers we have that would be able to do these deliveries.
Well, again, your point's well taken. But you're right. I would be curious to know -- we have these postage machines all over this government -- how much money we spend. I was told that nobody could tell me that number because they didn't really have the ability to pull it all together. But I'd like to ask the Chair... Again, I'm not asking about the water bills. I'm talking about the stuff that goes out as doing your day's work. At the end you have a big pile like this. 50 of them are going to the going to other departments, a hundred are going outside. I don't have a problem with the ones going outside. But I do have a problem with spending all this money on 180 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 things just going across the street or up and down a floor.
No; you're absolutely right. And the Budget Director just said he will be able to do the research necessary to flesh out a coordinated plan to respond to that and be able to respond to you during the Operating Budget testimony.
Good. Thank you. Thanks, Commissioner. Again, it's not Public Property's problem. The problem is that it's not getting where it should be for you guys to deliver it. Thank you.
Thank you very much. The Chair recognizes Councilman Clarke.
Miss Griffith, is Miss Kahn here. 181 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04
Good afternoon. I'll repeat my question. Were you briefed on what the issue was?
Essentially, I was talking about a proposal that was made maybe a year or so ago by the Mayor to consolidation of facilities as we down size recreation facilities because the School District had this massive $1 billion Capital Reconstruction Program. And the thought was that some of those facilities would be able to accommodate recreation needs and other 182 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 community needs, thereby allowing us to take offline some of the facilities that were in close proximity in some cases, such as 25th and Diamond, as an example. You got William Dick right across the street from Hank Gathers Rec Center. So the possibilities of consolidating some of those activities could be very well done in this Capital Improvement Program. My concern, and it continues to be my concern, is that I can't really get a sense that there is a substantive discussion process in place. And I've asked this. And every time we talk about this issue, who is in charge of the process, where is the process, what's happened over the last year, what the time line is for consolidating some of these facilities, because we will be asked very shortly to vote on a budget that talks about reducing recreation facilities, and possibly some other type of municipal facilities. 183 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 And in the earlier testimony it was indicated that... First it was an Administration approach, and subsequently the team approach. And then Mr. Goldsmith was designated as the team leader. And when Mr. Goldsmith got here, he said he handed that ball off to you, as the deputy team leader, and indicated that you were the person who could most adequately respond in specific terms about that process. You know, what have we done since the Mayor made the initial speech about consolidation and who's been meeting, how many meetings. The other thing is that I said that Mr. Vallas, whom I met with three weeks ago, indicated that the School District has done its analysis on capital facilities and accommodations to citizens, as relates to down sizing rec facilities, but they were waiting for the City to respond. So I'm going to... Since you're now the designated individual who's been 184 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 handling all this, can you just tell me where we are and where we're going and what has been done to date?
Please identify yourself for the record, please.
I think it's probably accurate to say that there are sub-teams, and I accept the mantle of the School District sub-team in this process. The issue of coordinating between the City and the School District Capital Plans has been one very important and very much on our minds, and on our agenda, and in our actions for about the past year now. But it's also kind of a complicated process. And I think when the School District first announced its capital process, you know, not everything was set in stone. 185 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 And so, there's been a lot of movement. And it's just recently, for example, that the first ground breaking even occurred. And I say all of that just as a little bit of background. The School District has been made very much aware, and we've had numbers of meetings between sort of the City team which would consist of -- And if you want particular departments, I mean City Planning, Commerce, Housing, you know from time to time have all -- Managing Director's Office -- come to the table with the School District people who represent both the Operating and the Capital Programs. And we shared plans and looked at sites. And this goes back, you know, over, as you say, you know, at least the past year. So that we could all get familiar with what was on each other's agendas and the kinds of areas and neighborhoods that were being discussed for school projects. 186 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 To just bring it a little -- And I think through the course of that discussion, we certainly made the School District very aware -- and they've heard it from the community, as well -- about the need for whatever gets done in school buildings, first of all, to make them accessible to the community. And as a case in point, I found it very interesting at last week's ground breaking at the Feltonville School, they made a point of talking about how the facilities would have external entrances and exits so that after hour's use, as an example, in the gymnasium that's being built there would really come into play. And that was something the community wanted and something that we -- you know, was very important to us.
Right. Well, Mr. Vallas indicated to me that that was going to be done on a number of the schools.
But my question is, are they coordinating that with you to determine that if there is a facility close to Feltonville Rec -- I'm sorry -- Feltonville School, can those needs be accommodated in that school --
And I think that, you know, the answer to that is, of course, there's not a one-size-fits-all approach because again, using that example -- and here you have a really interesting campus where we've got a couple of schools now -- there's an elementary school, we have central East Middle School, and then this new building that's being built so that there will be actually a K to 8 campus. There happens to be a recreation center right across, you know, the street, really, from Central East Middle School. However, you know, when I -- when we looked into it, that, of course, is a 188 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 community that is growing so much, which is of course why we needed the school annex, to begin with. And it's a full-range facility, where it has, you know, all sorts of types of programming, and as I understand it, is really busy, you know, almost around the clock. Right now the... I guess it's the teams from the middle school actually use -- for their home games use the recreation center, I'm told, for their home games to play basketball there. And there's also lots of leagues and stuff. So they have lots of scheduling problems as it is because there's such high demand. So, I think that that's an example, that even though the physical proximity is there, where there needs to be programming coordination -- but let me get, you know -- so there's not a --
So here's what we're 189 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 doing.
I'm just trying to find out what the process is and who's been involved with the process. And I'm not...
And that's a, you know, really important question. So let me just say what we did even just most recently is, before the Mayor released his budget a couple of weeks ago, we made a point again of sitting down with the School District to discuss particularly the recreation issue. And to say that, well, there's going to be some changes here, this was not a situation where we handed over any list because as we've said time and time again, there is no preexisting list. But we wanted to make them aware of 190 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 the fact that there would be changes which could affect them, one, either from a facility standpoint; or, two, just, you know, the resources in their communities. And we said, we are going, however, to make meeting with City Council members the first step in the process which the Managing Director and the Recreation Commissioner have certainly testified to.
Right. Let me stop you there. If the School District is apparently further along in its determination as to the facilities that they were going to rehab or build and being able to accommodate needs other than the traditional school day, wouldn't it make more sense for you to look at their list as you make this analysis on what facilities and proximity that you may want to take offline, as opposed to giving them a list that you're not even sure that's going to be the ultimate list when you start with the School District? 191 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04
It's actually coming from both directions. I was going to say the first step would be to say, again, let's look at those facilities from the City's side that, for whatever reason, are in disrepair and not, you know, in good shape, and then looking at if and whether there are schools in the vicinity that could accommodate those programs. But it is equally true that when we look at what... And while -- The only, you know, thing I will say is that while the School District had those plans in their budget, it's not like from a design standpoint everything was laid out and they really knew exactly what all of the plans would be. Those are happening as we go along as well. But you're absolutely right. I think there needs to be that kind of matching and marrying process. And now that they have refined some of their plans, while we're -- while the City is doing its 192 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 planning and having those conversations with Council members, we intend to continue to bring these two streams together.
So you're the point person from the Administration. And do you have anybody from Recreation entertaining...
-- with the Commissioner and with his folks as well. Brought them to the School District, yes.
So as we move ahead in this process, you as the team leader will be meeting with the Council members, in addition to the Managing -- I understand the Managing Director's going around and meeting with Council members. 193 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04
Yeah. I actually have not been in those, but I can just take whatever --
All right. Well, shouldn't you be in that -- in that -- in those discussions, since you know more about the schools than anybody else, apparently?
I mean, if we want to talk about a rec center and there's a school in close proximity, you have all the information on the school reconstruction, new construction projects. 194 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 And we're not privy to that in these meetings with Mr. Goldsmith and Mr. Richards. It seems that you should be in that loop also.
That -- You know, any Council members that at the same time wants to, you know, have information about --
That shouldn't come from us. Shouldn't that come from the Administration?
You might have all the members of the team who have knowledge of this issue at the meeting when you meet with the Council people, I would suspect.
We can do -- I mean, I'm not aware so far if any other Council members had requested that, but that's certainly, you know, something that we 195 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 could do.
We can certainly convey to the Managing Director the interest of Council members in having the point person, vis-a-vis our relationship with the School District, at these meetings.
-- makes sense. We're being asked to make decisions on a rec facility and not understanding what's going to happen with the school in close proximity. If you had a better understanding that this particular school might have an exterior access to a gym, then we may be a little more interested in possibly taking off a basketball court offline in proximity to that because you have an opportunity inside the school. But without that information, it makes it kind of difficult for us to make 196 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 the following determination.
Councilman, we can also share with you some time ago the Victoria Nasan Alias (phonetic), part of her community planning responsibilities did a joint use survey, looking at existing schools and how they could be retrofit to accommodate programmatic activity, with regard to ap school (phonetic), et cetera. And we'll make sure that the Secretary gets that information and has it flow into the...
At what point are we getting this information? I mean, we're going to be considering this budget. I think Council members would like to feel that they're making the right decision. When will we be provided the information that we're seeking?
Well, in terms of the 197 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 ongoing discussions with the School District, I think Secretary Kahn articulated it very well. That is, it's a dialogue. It is not a list. What the Councilman suggests is that since --
But Councilman, weren't you told something entirely different by Mr. Vallas?
Yes. Mr. Vallas indicated that they are far along on their recommendations, if not complete, on the numerous schools as it relates to the Capital Program. I mean, he -- I got a sense that if I asked him for a list at that meeting, he would have given me a list, and talked about the specifics of what schools would be able to have exterior access and what schools could accommodate recreational needs.
I don't see why -- 198 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04
Or if it is difficult to get, you need to let us know, you know.
And we did ask them to take a look at their own facilities absent anything, you know, that might or might not be on the City's agenda, and to give us a sense of what buildings might actually be able to accommodate, you know, additional usage. I mean, some might, you know, for a variety of reasons, and some might not. So -- So I think that's correct, I mean, that they are doing that as well. But that again, I just want to be clear. That's not in relation to any information about particular locations that the City provided, because we did not leave them and have not given them any type of priority closure list whatsoever. 199 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04
Councilman, I guess you know as much now as you did before you asked the question.
This is like the right hand not knowing what the left is doing. And I am telling you very sincerely, before we vote on this budget, Council members want information. And I don't -- And it's something that you've been working for how long? It's over a year. We would appreciate whatever information you could give us. Thank you very much.
Miss Kahn, who is the point person from the School District that's working with the team?
Well, Natalie Paquin 200 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 (phonetic), who is the chief --
Natalie Paquin, who is the Chief of Staff. And also Karen Burke (phonetic), who is the Chief Operating Officer.
Yes. Thank you, Madam Chair. I just have a couple questions in regard to Maxine Griffith's testimony this morning. Good morning.
First of all, it's concerning the Art Museum. I'd like to know what effect the proposed cuts, two-and-a-half million dollars, have on the Capital Program regarding to the Art Museum. 201 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 For instance, if it's -- if they're forced to lessen the facility maintenance on this property, is this going to create, I think, a disastrous effect on the Art Museum itself.
Councilman, if you're referring to the Operating Budget cut...
...I'm going to defer to the Budget Director. The Planning Commission doesn't work directly on the operating --
Will it have an effect on the Capital, is what I'm saying, the facility itself?
Well, I guess it depends on how the Art Museum allocates its money. If it chooses to not allocate as much for maintenance, that could have a long-term impact on its capital needs.
Okay. And since you're there, I'd like to have another 202 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 question. It has to do with the Police development. The allocation, according to Capital Program, I think on , mentions about $400,000. Most of that money, if not all of it, concerns the... I think the headquarters down at Eighth Street, the Police Administration Building. And I just want to know if... if this is true, then there's no allocations for any Districts in the City of Philadelphia. And if that is the case, I would like to know how many Districts are more than years old. 17
We may have to get 18 back to you with detailed information, 19 through the Chair. 20 I know that the Capital Program 21 Office at one point was doing a 22 comprehensive assessment of facilities 23 needs of the Police Department, including 24 vetting through past studies. 25
I'm sorry. 203 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 You're not speaking --
-- into the microphone, and we can't hear a word you're saying.
You know, I was saying that I know the Capital Program Office had done a -- was in the process of doing a comprehensive assessment of police facilities, including looking at past analysis and assessments. I don't know whether Rick might have something to add.
Yeah. Well, I'm just concerned because some of these police stations are, I think --
-- you know, more than years old. Some of them are 25 probably 50 or better. 204 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 And I'm just wondering about what happens if there is a problem in any of these stations. There's nothing allocated for the maintenance or the refurbishing of these police departments.
My name Rick Tustin again, with the City's Capital Program Office. Maxine is correct. What we have in our office right now is a list of every police station, what the age of the facility is, how many -- how many staff are there, what work was done there, when it was done, what type of work. So we've done a complete matrix or spreadsheet of all police facilities. I'd be happy to share that.
-- maintenance program? In other words, what happens in the future? That's what you did --
This is also... We use this sheet every year as a basis of developing the following year's Capital Program or Capital Budget. We meet with the Police Department representatives each year when we put together their budget, and we use that as sort of a starting point each year. It's updated on a yearly basis so that we know what we've done each year, and what we plan on doing in future years.
Mr. Tustin, could we see a copy of that, please?
I'd like to know what's going to happen in the 12th District and the 17th District. As buildings are so old, they're in deplorable condition. And I don't see...
Anybody 206 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 getting any money --
I'd be happy to send a copy right over to you. We have it in our office. That's not a problem. We do -- As I said, we do every year a comprehensive list of all -- look at all the facilities with the Police Department, who are responsible, with the Department of Public Property for maintenance. So if in fact we find a Police District that has an ongoing HVAC problem, that project or that facility gets put on the list for a new -- new installation, based on how old the system is and how much maintenance that's been needed ongoing. So, I'd be more than happy to share that list with you, and even, you know, sit down with you and explain how we go through it.
And with 207 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 that, I don't mean to interrupt you. But I think you've brought up a very good point. Would those monies come from the MDO's budget? If there is a problem, for instance, at the 17th District, there's nothing in the budget that indicates the monies are allocated.
There's no 12 emergency. Where does that money come from?
The money is in the Police Department budget line for -- for the work that we see coming up this fiscal year.
Looking at . So, it's all for Police Headquarters and State Road. Can you hold? Just wait a minute, 208 Whole - Bills 040257, 040258 - 4/5/04 please. We are changing stenographers. (