m. - - - BILL 041039 - An Ordinance authorizing the Commissioner of Public Property, on behalf of the City of Philadelphia, acquire by purchase, condemnation, or other means the properties located at 314 North 19th Street, 316 North 19th Street, 1932 and 1934 Callowhill Street, 1936-1942 Callowhill Street, 1937 Carlton Street, and 1939-1945 Carlton Street in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, under certain terms and conditions. BILL 041040 - An Ordinance authorizing the revision of lines and grades on a portion of City Plan No. 63 by striking from the City Plan and vacating Carlton Street from Twentieth Street eastwardly approximately 98'4" to a dead end and by placing on the City Plan a certain right of way for public utility purposes, all under certain terms and conditions. 2670 2 portion of such land and certain improvements to be renovated and constructed thereon, including renovations to the existing Central Library of the Free Library of Philadelphia, a library facility expanding the current Central Library and accessory and related amenities, improvements and infrastructure ("Central Library Project") and the payment of certain costs for such library facilities and further authorizing said officers to enter into a Lease-back/Lease Agreement (the "Library Leaseback") between PAID and the City providing for the sub-subleasing of said land as improved back from the City to PAID; covenanting to be bound by the terms of the aforementioned Library Ground Lease, Library Prime Lease and Library Leaseback; and requesting PAID to finance a portion of the costs of the acquisition of such land in connection with the Central Library Project, demolition, site preparation, improvements and infrastructure in connection therewith and any and all other costs incurred in connection with the Central Library Project, and the issuance of bonds by PAID to provide such financing, imposing a limitation on the aggregate amount of bonds which are to be issued by PAID to finance or refinance the project; covenanting to make appropriations in each of the City's fiscal years to provide for rental payments due under the Library Prime Lease; authorizing the Director of Finance and other officials of the City to take all actions necessary to accomplish the intent and purpose of this Ordinance and the Library Ground Lease, Library Prime Lease, Library Leaseback and a Library Lease and Development Agreement between the Free Library of Philadelphia Foundation Inc. and PAID containing the terms and conditions substantially as approved herein; and authorizing approval of all of the terms of the aforementioned Leases and other documents and amendments thereto by the Director of Finance and/or the City Solicitor. RESOLUTION 041046 - Resolution approving a Revised Five Year Financial Plan for the City of Philadelphia covering Fiscal Years 2005 through 2009. 3 PRESENT: COUNCIL PRESIDENT ANNA C. VERNA COUNCILWOMAN JANNIE L. BLACKWELL COUNCILWOMAN BLONDELL REYNOLDS BROWN COUNCILMAN DARRELL L. CLARKE COUNCILMAN DAVID COHEN COUNCILMAN FRANK DI CICCO COUNCILMAN W. WILSON GOODE, JR. COUNCILMAN JAMES F. KENNEY COUNCILMAN MICHAEL A. NUTTER COUNCILMAN BRIAN J. O'NEILL COUNCILMAN JUAN F. RAMOS COUNCILMAN FRANK RIZZO 4 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 - - - P R O C E E D I N G S - - -
Good afternoon, everyone. This is a public hearing of the Committee of the Whole. I would ask Mr. McPherson to please read the titles of Bills Numbers 041039, 041040 and 041041. MR. McPHERSON: Bill Number 041039, an Ordinance authorizing the Commissioner of Public Property, on behalf of the City of Philadelphia, acquire by purchase, condemnation, or other means the properties located at 314 North 19th Street, 316 North 19th Street, 1932 and 1934 Callowhill Street, 1936-1942 Callowhill Street, 1937 Carlton Street, and 1939-1945 Carlton Street in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, under certain terms and conditions. Bill Number 041040, an Ordinance 23 authorizing the revision of lines and grades on a portion of City Plan No. 63 by striking from the City Plan and vacating Carlton 5 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 Street from Twentieth Street eastwardly approximately 98'4" to a dead end and by placing on the City Plan a certain right of way for public utility purposes, all under certain terms and conditions. Bill 041041, an Ordinance 8 authorizing the Commissioner of Public Property and the Director of Commerce, on behalf of the City of Philadelphia (the "City"), to enter into a Ground Lease Agreement (the "Library Ground Lease") with the Philadelphia Authority for Industrial Development ("PAID") providing for the leasing by the City to PAID of certain parcels of land and the improvements thereon owned or to be acquired by the City, and further authorizing said officers to enter into a Prime Lease (the "Library Prime Lease") between PAID and the City providing for the subleasing by PAID to the City of all or a portion of such land and certain improvements to be renovated and constructed thereon, including renovations to the existing Central Library of the Free Library 6 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 of Philadelphia, a library facility expanding the current Central Library and accessory and related amenities, improvements and infrastructure ("Central Library Project") and the payment of certain costs for such library facilities and further authorizing said officers to enter into a Lease-back/Lease Agreement (the "Library Leaseback") between PAID and the City providing for the sub-subleasing of said land as improved back from the City to PAID; covenanting to be bound by the terms of the aforementioned Library Ground Lease, Library Prime Lease and Library Leaseback; and requesting PAID to finance a portion of the costs of the acquisition of such land in connection with the Central Library Project.
Thank you. Before I recognize any of our witnesses, I do have a letter that I received this morning from the City Controller regarding this issue. And I would ask Mr. McPherson to please read the letter into the record. 7 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 MR. McPHERSON: Dear Council President Verna, I write to you today to express concerns regarding the recently introduced Ordinance to enter into a lease and service agreement with PAID for the Central library. Although I have not fully reviewed the specific project, I am deeply concerned about the administration's continued and concerted efforts to circumvent the city's Constitutional debt limit. This library lease and development agreement will cost nearly $100 million over the next 30 years. It is but one of several projects currently being discussed, such as the second round of NTI bonds and financing for a new Youth Study Center, that would add new debt or long-term obligations to the General Fund. While the individual merits of each proposal may be strong, it is imperative that the cumulative future fiscal impact be considered. At a time when City employees face 8 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 layoffs, citizens are being threatened with service cuts, I have reservations about diverting any additional funds away from the direct service delivery. I am attaching for your review the debt threat mortgaging Philadelphia's future recently released by my office. The analysis paints a disturbing picture of the increasing ratio of debt and other long-term obligations to the General Fund. Rarely is there any public debate surrounding the affordability of new borrowing, unlike the scrutiny that tax reductions and new spending initiatives face. A dollar spent on debt service is a dollar that cannot be spent on other priorities, and it is important that the costs and benefits of each form of spending be analyzed. We have a responsibility to future generations of Philadelphians to ensure that their tax dollars are sufficient to ensure that public safety and other core services 9 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 needs can be met. As Budget Director Diane Reed wrote in the most recent quarterly City Manager's report, City managers, municipal union leaders, local elected officials, members of the media and the populace at large should be skeptical of proposals to make recurring multi-year spending commitments. I hope that the enclosed report is useful to you, as you evaluate the Library Lease and Development Agreement and other proposals. If you have any questions about this issue, please feel free to contact me.
Thank you. Councilman Nutter, your light is on. Did you want to be recognized?
Yes, Madam President. I read the letter, and I listened to Mr. McPherson. What I'm trying to determine is, was there any contact, other than the letter, between yourself and the City Controller, about the comments of the letter? 10 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04
We did try to call him this morning. We were told that he was at a graduation, I think, for what, the correctional officers. I think they had two classes. I was informed by his office that he would be there practically all day.
Well, I guess what I'm trying to understand is, what is the meaning or bottom line of this particular letter, as it relates to the proposal regarding the library? Is the Controller for this or against this?
We don't know. We did not solicit the letter. We received it at approximately 9:10 this morning.
Thank you, Madam President. 11 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 I believe in the second sentence of the Controller's letter he actually states he has not reviewed the project, but wanted to make some very generalized points about debt limit in general. I'm not sure whether he wants to invest or not invest, and not sure what investments we should or should not be making. And I'm pretty clear that he's not saying that we should not be investing in the future at all. He's just raising some general issues, without having reviewed the project at all.
No; and I appreciate that, Councilman. I think that when you look at a letter like this that comes in on the day of this kind of hearing that makes specific reference to a Bill in front of us, it might be helpful, given the Controller's Charter mandated role, if we can clarity as to what 12 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 the position was and what the advice is to this City Council. Is it possible, Madam Chair, to determine the Controller's availability at this point?
Certainly. We will be happy to make a phone call.
Thank you. Okay. Our first witness will be... Oh. I want to make an announcement that we don't have the box, so I will not know who wants to be recognized. So, if you have your light on, I'll do my best to try to see if I can recognize you. Councilman Cohen.
I think the City Controller's history in these matters is pretty clear. He apparently always believes it's his job to give us information but not to make the decision or participate in making the decision which he think is our responsibility and not his. But he wants to make sure that in making our decision, we 13 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 considers factors that he believes are important. So I think you are not going to have any success in getting the City Controller to take a position on whether at this time the loan makes sense or not because he doesn't see that as part of his problem. He sees that as part of our problem. But what he wants to do is make sure that we begin worrying about this overall event that we have now and have into the future. But let's test him and find out. Thank you, Madam President.
Elliot Shelkrot. If I may, President Verna, I would like to ask Peter Benaliel, Chair of our foundation board and Jeremiah White, the past president of the Friends of the Free Library, to join me.
Madam President, I am Elliot Shelkrot, the present Director of the Free Library. 14 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 And I want to say how happy I am that you have taken the time and other Council members to hear about this exciting project. It was on June 2, 1927, that our Central Library building first opened. Today, 77 years later, this Beaux Arts Building on the Ben Franklin Parkway, with its elegant facade is no longer -- and interior is no longer able to meet the needs of the community and the region. The building simply can't meet the information and educational enrichment needs of the people of Philadelphia. When the Central Library -- Let me give you some examples. When the Central Library first opened, it housed a million, two hundred thousand books. It now holds more than seven million items, in formats that were never even conceived of before, CD's, books on tape. They just didn't exist. Now... Oh, I should say also in 1927 the library boasted convenient access to materials and plenty of space for reading. 15 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 Now the books and other materials are crowding out the people. In some areas books are on top of the stacks; in some places they're on the floor. And space for library users is being reduced and reduced. Story hours in our children's department in the basement -- that's where the children's department is currently located -- can have as many as 70 children routinely squeezed into a space for 30. Audiences -- Adult audiences fare no 13 better, where the demand for our programs and the many authors who are coming to Philadelphia to speak at the library frequently exceeds the seating capacity. A. compliant. Space and building constraints mean that library users must climb flights of stairs just to get to the resources and the collections of the library. And the building can't begin to meet the demand for electronic information. I mean, and that is critical to today's 16 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 information based economy. The wires for the 80 computers that we have can't be concealed. They dangle from various places, from the eaves, and make an eyesore out of what was once a wonderful building. And we do have 80 computers, but we do believe we have 1,000 requests a day to use those computers. This overcrowding means that the public computers must be located in hallways. And at peak times we do what no 14 library wants to do, and no librarian, is we send people away. You know, they can be students, they can be youngsters, or they can be adults. The plan that we are talking about today is as follows -- and it's not unlike, I wanted to mention, the issue that we faced eight years ago with our branches. You may recall that in April of '95, we launched a successful campaign entitled Changing Lives, and the Library Foundation raised over $40 million in private money. 17 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 Because of your support and Council's support, we were able to use City Council -- City Capital funds to renovate and provide cutting edge technology in 53 branch and regional libraries across this City. Four years ago we began to study the needs of the Central Library and the needs of the people who use that library. We developed an exciting building program that is both bold and embracing the future, in an attempt to preserve the past. A process to select the best possible architect for the central library began a year-and-a-half ago. It was led by Gary Hack, Dean of the Graduate School of Design at the University of Pennsylvania. The selection committee included library board members, community leaders, including design professional Noel Mayo and Maxine Griffith, who, of course is head of our Planning Commission. Submissions were received from around the world, causing Dean Hack to say, "The world's greatest architects are applying 18 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 for this commission.
" A public forum was held with the four architects -- with the four finalists, I should say, and public comment was also solicited via the internet. The clear choice... The clear choice was Moshe Safdie, an internationally renowned architect, with major buildings around the world, including the design of two major urban libraries in Vancouver and the other in Salt Lake City. And the proposed renovation and expansion will transform our library into a model urban library for the future. It calls for the restoration of the magnificent existing building, and the seamless addition of 160,000 square feet of innovative space, to relieve the desperately cramped and inadequate conditions. Specifically, the project will dramatically expand the space for people, collections and technology. It will double our children's 19 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 department and bring it up out of the basement. It will bring our hidden collections out to the public, such as the automobile and the theater collections, which are world class collections that many people don't even know we have because they can't get to them. It will provide 300 public access computers and two internet browsing areas. We will create a new teen center in this space just for the teenagers. It will be soundproof, and it will allow for food, so that the youngsters, who seem at times to be addicted to food and loud music, can have that, as well as, of course, access to the quieter parts of the library when they need quiet study. We will help to build a strong workforce with an improved workplace center which is now up on a balcony, where people don't even know it's there. And this is for job searches and resume writing and training activities. We will develop a world class 20 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 architectural structure, the first to be completed on the Ben Franklin Parkway. And most importantly, we will make available to Philadelphians once again a light-infused, exciting space in which to read, to learn, and to grow. Now, many people have asked me: All right. This is good. Who could be against the library and the expansion? But they're saying, why now? Why do we have to do this now? I want to remind you that the Central Library is the last of our libraries to be renovated, and one of the few major urban libraries in this country which has not undergone renovation and reconstruction. As a matter of fact, in almost every other city it was the central library that came first. In Philadelphia, we did the branches first. We are committed to our neighborhoods; we are committed to our branches. But the Central Library is the core. We need to renovate and expand it, and 21 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 we need to do it now. This is an investment in the children, the families, and the work force of Philadelphia. We know, of course we know -- do I know -- that there are issues with the Operating Budget, and the City is facing some very serious issues. But we also know that we must build for the future. We must invest in improvements for the citizens of Philadelphia in the areas of education and culture and enrichment. The entire project, it's important to know, has been designed to have a minimal impact on the Operating Budget, in spite of the dramatic increase in space. Self check-out stations, using the new RFID technology, will be used. It's now being tested at the 40th and Walnut branch, which just opened two months ago. And it will soon be used in the brand new Widener Library which will be opened at 28th and Lehigh. This will enable 22 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 us to release many staff to assist the customers seeking books, computer help and information. An open floor plan will allow for fewer service points, along with the combining of some of our departments, to require a minimal increase in any supervisory staff.
And except for some guards and some extra maintenance people, our goal is to operate this expanded library with the same public service staff we had when the plan was put together a couple years ago.
I'm sorry, Madam President. I apologize, and I apologize to Mr. Shelkrot. I just wanted to say something before he finishes. I don't think there's anybody in the room that doesn't want to see this happen. I don't think there's anyone in the room who doesn't recognize that this was a legitimate contest and project that we 23 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 selected the best architect. We have the greatest need. It could be a tourist attraction for the City on the Parkway as the New York City Library is. I don't think there's anyone in this room that doubts any of what Mr. Shelkrot's saying and respect the committee and the staff for all the work they've done. The question that we're facing is, how do we pay for -- how do we come up with $30 million? And what the Controller's letter has raised, and what other people within Council and staff have raised is, you know, are we doing the best we can to have the taxpayer pay as little as possible for this money. And for example, as we know, there's money available right now over at PICA. There's about $30 million in interest dollars that are over there that have not been used, that the administration has not requested be used for anything. It's just sitting there collecting dust, as some of the books in the 24 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 library are, that we could use, without putting ourselves in a more precarious situation going forward with our debt. There's $24, $25 million over in Act 71 money, parked in the Capital Program right now. Why are we, you know, talking about using... We all agree it needs to be done. We all agree it would be a wonderful thing for the City and for the Parkway and for everyone. Why aren't we just trying to figure out other innovative ways --
-- that's something that Mr. Shelkrot can answer.
No, no. I know 25 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 he can't. And that's why --
I think the Finance Director should be up here to the table.
And I don't mean to -- And again, I apologize. I don't want to interrupt Elliot. I think it's important that we -- But I think we've heard all this. And we all agree. And as you can see -- and thank you for bringing the model -- it's proof positive that you're right. The question now we have that you can't answer is, how do we pay for it without putting the citizens of Philadelphia into further debt going into the future? I mean, when we're all gone from here --
I believe it is correct. Of course, Council President's correct, that this is something that the Finance Director and the City's Finance and Budget staff can respond to. The one thing I need to make clear, if you will, is that we have to do this, and 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 we have to do it soon, because the planning will come to a screeching halt. We've reached a point the Library Foundation has invested almost $4 million. And this is the City's library. Every City in the country --
And I feel like I'm back in the stadium debate again, on a much smaller scale because it's not as much money. Can't we find the most cost-effective way of doing what needs to be done without putting ourselves in additional debt, that at some point in time could wind up you or your successor having to make a decision to close a branch or to scale down because we don't have enough -- because we're paying debt service out 30 years into the future that we don't even have to pay because there's two pots of money parked right now, one at PICA and one in the Capital Budget 27 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 that we could use, without accumulating additional debt. And again, you can't answer that question; but I just want to say -- I mean -- and again, I apologize for interrupting, but we all agree this has been a tremendous project. It's a beautiful opportunity. It's a wonderful thing for everybody. It's just that I don't know why we have to put ourselves in additional debt in order to do it, when we have money that's parked doing nothing. And I guess that's the Finance Director's question.
Thank you, Madam President. Let me say I do concur with a lot of what Councilman Kenney said. And I agree with the spirit of what he said, and also believe that we probably need the Finance Director to address those issues, that the 28 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 library has done an excellent job presenting its project, in terms of moving this project along. And the issue as raised last term when this project was killed -- and it shouldn't have been -- was the issue of financing. At that point people said, the financing was too tricky and let's try to simplify it. Now it's been simplified, and people are saying, let's now make it creative. And once again the project stands to be killed. And in response to which the Controller wrote his letter, I'll just say that the Controller, when he finds an investment that he likes is a fiscal conservative. When he finds investment he does -- I mean, when he finds an investment he does not like, he's a fiscal conservative. When he finds something he does like, he's an economic visionary. We're going to be spending these dollars one way or the other, in terms of 29 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 operating funds to pay for things we will invest. Whether it's this project or whether it's other projects that are investments in the future, we will spend the same amount of money, in terms of debt service. It's a matter of what we choose to invest in. I think the library has made a great case that this is a project that we should invest in, in terms of the future. I think the administration has not necessarily made the case about whether this is the right financing mechanism, whether the other financing mechanism was correct, or whether there's something else we should do. So, I would call on the Finance Director to come forward, if you so please.
Madam President, I just want to make the record clear. If we need to vote on this mechanism in order to get the money the library needs, I'm committed to casting my vote in favor of it. I think it's an important project, and a project important enough to vote, even if I 30 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 think the funding mechanism is less than appropriate or less than adequate. But I just would like, again, an answer to why we can't use existing money that's sitting somewhere doing nothing. But I don't want anyone in the audience or any of my colleagues to think that in some way I wouldn't be for this. I mean, if this is all we have at the end of the day, I'm voting for it because I think it needs to be done. I just can't understand, again, as we go back to the stadium issue, why we have to spend more taxpayer's money than we need to, in order to do an important project. And I hate to be stuck in the situation all the time -- and it seems like a common theme in projects like this -- that, you know, it's our way or the highway. And it's frustrating. But I want to make sure you understand my vote is committed to doing this, even if we have to borrow the $30 million over 30 years. Thanks. 31 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman DiCicco. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Thank you, Madam President. I don't know if I should just hold back and let the folks at this table finish with their testimony. But I kind of want to jump in on Councilman Kenney and Councilman Goode's comments. And I, too, Elliot... I've had the great working relationship with you. And thanks to you and lot of folks in your staff, we had the Independence Library which is the most used neighborhood library in the City of Philadelphia, outside of the Central Library. And to all the folks that are in this room who are friends of the library, the foundation folks, the volunteers, the Maddleman's, who have their best interest and everyone's best interests. And we really do appreciate that. I think I'm speaking for all the members of City Council. But as Councilman Kenney said, you 32 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 know, it's a budget issue. It's a budget issue all the way around. As Councilman Goode pointed out, you know, we had a deal last year which we rejected. But last year we weren't being told that firefighters and police were going to be laid off. We weren't being told that fire station engine companies and ladder companies may be closing which of them are on the 12 chopping block as we speak. 13 And we weren't being told that the 14 hours of operation -- At least I don't recall 15 that we were being told the hours of operations in libraries was going to be reduced. Independence Library as we talked about earlier, no longer has Saturday hours. So, you know, although I want to look at this, and say this is a great idea and it's a wonderful project, which is it is, we have to deal with those other issues. And I don't know if we're in a position, based on what the administration 33 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 has been telling us about all these other cuts -- How do I explain? How do any of us explain to our constituents in Kensington, my constituents in Kensington, in Northern Liberties, in South Philadelphia, that their libraries are going to have the reduction in hours and operation which some of them have already experienced; and yet, we're going to put this money into the Central Library. And please, this isn't me talking, but I'm expressing --
No; I understand. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: -- what the concern in the community is. People look at the Central Library. And I know it is not what I'm about to say, but there are people who never used it. And they look at it as this elitist facility that is only for people in Center City. And I know you're laughing, but that -- and that's unfortunate, but there are people out there who believe that, well, I live in Kensington. What good does it do me? And why should 30 million be put into a 34 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 facility on the Parkway where all those rich people live, and I'm sitting here in Kensington, and my hours of operation for my library have been reduced or maybe even closed, for that matter. Again, I'm not suggesting --
No; I understand. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: -- that they are correct, but those are issues that we have to deal with on a daily basis. And as we go out into the community for other meetings, those are the questions that arise. And you may not be the right person to answer that, but it's certainly issues -- it's an issue that you have to deal with, you meaning the library, anyway. Regardless of whether I think this is the right thing or not, we have to deal with this.
Council President Verna, you know, I can address the issues of why and why now. I can also address the issues of the branches, and our commitment to 35 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 the branches, and our commitment to get more of them open on Saturday. I can also talk about how I know people don't understand. But without the Central Library, they wouldn't have the branches. I mean, they wouldn't have it. They wouldn't have the resources. They wouldn't be getting the books and the things that are ready to go out. But I would like to know whether you would like us to continue with our testimony or would you rather have the Finance Director at the podium at this time.
Council President Verna -- COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: I would just follow up on that comment, and then I'll rest until later on, if it's all right with the Chair. I understand what you're saying. And maybe we all need to do a better job of educating people about the importance of the Central Library. 36 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 But for me, as a District Council person, who is faced with of the 4 firehouse closures or redeployment, if you 5 will, as they refer to it, 11 fire stations 6 in my District, of the 15 city wide, are 7 faced with redeployment. 8 And that is really... The level of 9 anxiety in my District, from the southern end 10 to the northern end is at its highest it's 11 been. We've had protest rallies. We're in 12 court. 13 It is so difficult for me to 14 convince people that this is the right thing 15 to do, when they're looking at the fire station at the other end of the block or a couple blocks away and the ladder is not going to be there or the engine is not going to be there. So, I mean, that's -- And again, that's not your battle. It's not your... You know, I'm not asking you to go out there and make the case for me. I'm just laying it out there the way -- You know, this is the road map for me, as it is for many of the 37 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 other Council people. And I'm faced with of 15, 11 of 4 15. That's a hard sell for me to say that 5 we're going to invest 30 million for an 6 extension or expansion of the library. 7 And I support it, but I'm just 8 telling you that it's difficult. 9
Thank you, Madam President. I think we are all in agreement this is a great project that we all want to support. I think the key issues that Councilman Kenney raised, rightly, were: One, can we afford it; and, two, whether this is the best financing mechanism. I think the Finance Director should address those issues head on.
I don't believe Mr. Shelkrot -- I think you can respond to Councilman DiCicco's question, if you will. 38 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 What do we tell our constituents who are experiencing the regional libraries being closed on Saturdays, and some of the hours being curtailed?
I'd be happy to respond to that. Just in terms of nomenclature, if you will, the regional libraries -- those are the large, the three large regional libraries and the Central Library -- are open seven days a week. Under emergency situations -- I mean, right now the north -- northwest -- the Coleman Regional Library is having some major work done on it, and so we've opened another library seven days a week in that area. But I believe your real concern is the neighborhood branches.
That's where we have had some difficulty. What I can say is that we -- we are committed to every single neighborhood library. We are committed. We showed that commitment when we renovated them first. 39 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 We did them first. And in terms of the hours of service, we are having some difficulties. We are having difficulty. We have, if I'm not mistaken, 6 libraries that are open on Saturday, 7 including, you know, all of them out of 54. 8 We have been working with the 9 Managing Director's Office. We had some 10 very, very interesting hard-nosed 11 discussions, hard-headed, whatever the right 12 term is, discussions yesterday. 13 We have... With the cooperation of 14 the Civil Service Commission and the unions, 15 and we certainly have the cooperation of the 16 City's HR Department, Human Resources 17 Department, we believe that we can get a significant number of those branches open early in 2005, open on Saturdays. We are committed to children. We are committed to the neighborhoods. And we are committed to breaking through this issue that we have right now of getting the staff in place to get those neighborhood libraries open six days a week. 40 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04
I know that you're committed. What commitment have you gotten from the administration?
The Managing Director... What can I -- The Managing Director himself praised this idea, and was... and said, this is something that we can work together; we can make this happen.
Oh, I didn't know that you were talking about part-time people. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: You talked about that on the side. You didn't say that.
No, no. I'm sorry. I didn't -- You know... No. Part of the plan -- The idea -- The idea is to develop a cadre of people who can help us provide, who will be less expensive. Now, we have not -- You know, you'll understand, we have not talked to the Civil 41 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 Service Commission. We have not talked to the labor unions. We -- We -- This is a concept that we just have approval on --
I don't understand what you're -- COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Madam President --
You know, volunteers -- COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: -- Mr. Shelkrot --
-- over 1500 volunteers. There is -- You know -- COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Point of order. 42 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 Madam President, prior to the hearing, I was speaking to Mr. Shelkrot at the bar. And we were just talking about the closures. And he said that they have been talking or discussing the possibility of doing part-time employees that may keep these libraries open on Saturdays. So, I think, Elliot, what you need to do is explain a little bit more. You're kind of starting at the back end of it, as opposed to the front end, because the Council President, as I'm sure the rest of the folks here, don't know anything about --
Not a part of your conversation. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: -- our conversation.
Okay. You know, I will tell you that I... You know, in a public hearing, to talk about some very delicate discussions that we need to have with the labor unions and through the Civil Service Commission is very difficult to do. 43 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 But we are developing a plan that we believe will allow us to work with the current staffing level that we have, as well as the anticipated layoffs that all departments are facing, and find a way, with a different model, a different concept of branch library service, that will allow us to meet the needs of the people in our communities, with a special focus on the children and a special focus on education. Madam President, because we are in the early stages of this, and we have not had an opportunity to discuss it with some of the principals involved --
I understand. You don't have to say anything more. Thank you. May I just say I told you, I think the day of the briefing, I think this project is absolutely beautiful. And I think it's something that we certainly would like to see happen. I think Philadelphians deserve it. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Brown. 44 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04
Thank you, Madam President. I would offer an amendment to Councilman Goode's request. Prior to going to hearing from our Finance Director, if there's any other additional information the remaining two gentlemen at the table have to offer prior to moving into the whole finance discussion. That would be useful for me.
Yes. Mr. Shelkrot, the addition, while everyone loves it and will support it under some financing arrangement, I think, what will the added operating expense be? Will it double.
I'm sorry. Will it double? Will it increase by 21 percent? What's the estimate? 22
The estimate in the 23 operating expense, which primarily is the 24 staff -- I mean, we have plenty of books... 25
...and other materials. The increase will be -- What we are committed to do, and we did when we began this designing process two years ago, we have committed that we will require no additional staff than we had at that time.
We do know, however, that plan as we might, additional floor space requires additional cleaning. We believe that we will need four to six additional maintenance people. We will need several different -- several additional security people. But this space is designed to combine departments. It's designed to have open spaces, where we can see more broadly. It's designed, as I said earlier, to use new technology, RFID technology that is currently being used at the Walnut West Branch, and will be also used at the Widener Branch on Lehigh Avenue, which will allow staff to do other things rather than standing 46 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 there checking books in and out. I will tell you that if the use of this library doubles or triples, we will have to revisit the staffing issues. But you know, I know it's a challenge, but it is a good challenge to have.
I agree. I would plan on tripling rather than doubling, but I think everybody's going to find this very exciting and going to want to be part of it. But what's it cost you right now to run the Central Library a year?
Oh. You know, I don't have the figure exactly in mind. I can tell you that we have... I can give you the number of staff. I don't have the dollar figure of their salaries, et cetera, et cetera.
Okay. But 47 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 assuming that you need 50 percent more staff because you get double the attendance, and you have to add the cleaning and security that you mention, what kind of operating increase will we be talking about, in ballpark terms?
Excuse me one second. I'm getting some advice from our Budget Director.
Thank you. Let me mention... I mean I have the figures here of what the entire library system costs.
I also... But I can get that information for you. I don't have it here broken out in exactly that way. But I also want to mention that it's important for Council to know that the debt 48 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 service for this is in the Five-year Plan, I have just been reassured by the Budget Director. So, it is not taking on more than -- That's what I am being told.
So then, just forgetting for the moment, because you're going to get the information, but security and cleaning addition, those number of positions with benefits, about a quarter million dollars? Would that be a fair number?
You know... You know, I'm sorry. I need to -- Just let me check on the number. Then I can quickly do the multiplication.
When this plan -- The plan was just put together a couple years ago. There were 168 people on the central public service's staff.
Now, I will -- You know, we -- the maintenance staff that we have in the budget documents is broken out across the system, as is the security staff. So, I am not in that number telling you that that is the number that includes the maintenance people.
Okay. But I mean, just with... If the people made $25,000 a year, with benefits it would be roughly 40,000. If there's ten of them total, you're talking about $400,000. I'm trying to make these friendly questions.
You've been getting cut. I'm trying to make sure that people are looking forward to having, you know, you increase your operating budget because of this hopefully home run that's going to be hit that's going to require all these extra employees to service your needs. And I think the sooner we kind of get that into the 50 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 system, the better off we are. I want to follow up. I know the City's budget crisis has hit -- or budget difficulties have hit you, but I still am not sure, as many people know, how the state -- I'm not sure they've had the same budget difficulties -- have hit you. And can you tell me: Did you get any state cut in your state fundings? I'm talking about operating monies. In 2003? Not this past budget. The one before.
The one before. Yes, indeed, we did. Although it wasn't a 50 percent cut, as had been projected, we were able, along with libraries across the state, to increase that. But it was roughly a 35 percent cut, which for Philadelphia, brought it would down from about $11 million to, if my math is right, about $7 million.
Now, in '04 you were working on now a $7 million basis instead of an $11 million basis. These are extraordinary numbers.
I know. I know. And we did receive an increase this last year, but we are not...
Okay. They're staggering numbers for me, that the Commonwealth is... Community College is getting the same thing happen to them, but it's a little different. They have at least a reserve, even though they earned it and built it up, but it... I mean, maybe somebody should send the Senate some notes, you know, of information because they're saying the Governor's been doing everything 52 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 for Philadelphia. I don't necessarily think these numbers substantiate that claim or charge. I hope that can be put back in its historical area. So they were the two main things I wanted to mention. One, I think the state really has to come back in as a player; and, two, we've got to get a reading on -- so we're not surprised the year you open or the next year when we really see the massive numbers of users, because I think this is going to be the place where schools want --
-- to send children. I was in the Salt Lake Library Central. It's phenomenal. I think ours is going to top that. I mean, I don't think... They didn't have what we have to work with as a basis. They also don't have our population base.
So, I hope we can work out the finances sooner than later 53 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 and agree. But I think everyone agrees on the spectacular opportunities here.
If you can get that to us. And the Operating Budget is coming up. I'd just kind of like to keep this a little focused more on the Central Library's budget.
But also, you know, our commitment to the branches is firm.
And I know somebody else pays -- I think somebody else pays them, but they still have to be paid.
Point of 54 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 information.
In what you're going to work on, have you developed yet what it is going to cost to operate that? Even like Councilman O'Neill just said, your electric bill is paid by, I believe, the Department of Public Property; am I right?
That's correct. If Public Property -- I'm sure they can -- can break out what the Central Library currently costs, we can then, using industry standards, we will then give you the figures. And so, it's just -- We can do that.
Beyond that, but I think you really need to have a plan on what this building is going to cost you to operate, and can you realistically keep it secure, keep it clean with the staff that you have. It seems to me you're just telling us that, but there's nothing that -- there's been no study to substantiate what exactly 55 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 it's going to take to run that building.
I -- I can -- You know, we can substantiate that. We can get that information to you. The only thing I can tell you is that if use dramatically increases...
The issue of staffing needs to be identified. And we can go to -- We can do all the studies we want, but the only thing we could do, then, would be to do a -- some sort of a straight line projection and take and make an educated guess.
Mr. Shelkrot, I'm not talking about tripled, doubled use. I'm talking about that building -- The last thing I think as a Council member, if I'm here when it opens, that you want to see doors that are locked because you can't have security people, and you're going to have one entrance where people can go in and go out. I think you realistically need to have the architects and a planner look at 56 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 that building and say what you need to operate it, with no additional proof.
Oh, we can -- We have that. That is not -- That is not difficult. We can get that for you, you know, tomorrow morning.
Councilman O'Neill, were you finished with your line of questioning?
All right. Fine. The Chair recognizes Councilman Cohen.
Thank you, Madam President. What efforts have been made to get state aid?
We have been working 57 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 very closely with Senator Fumo. It was John Perzel, Representative Perzel who introduced into the Governor's Redevelopment Assistance Program the authorization for $25 million. It's on the record. But we know that with Senator Fumo's help, with Representative Perzel's help, with Representative Evans help and others, the next step is for the Governor to make the decision to release that money.
Is there any indication as to the nature of the Governor's response? The request. So far you have no 16 state funding?
At this point we have no state funding. But that is not -- But I can tell you that, you know, Representative Evans was very positive, in working with us and in being able to make this happen. I can also tell you that Senator Fumo has been quite interested. This will not happen in one single allocation, but it will -- but their sense is that, working 58 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 together, we can make this happen over three to five years, which is exactly what we need for the renovation. But we need -- This being the City's library -- You know, every other City, as I said before, does it themselves. We are doing it differently. But the City money... No one will talk to us seriously because they haven't seen nickel one of the City's money for the City's Central Library.
Well, I find that kind of hard to believe, but I don't know what you're basing that. But it seems to me that just a few days after its announcement today, the Council voted, I think, approval of 30 million for Comcast. When you put that -- How do the people in Philadelphia take that this rich organization Comcast gets 30 million without a problem, apparently, and --
Point of information. 59 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04
-- the kids -- And it seems to me that real economic development will profit by the library.
Excuse me. Councilman Goode has a point of information.
Thank you, Madam President. Councilman Cohen, I just wanted to let you know that the legislature actually did approve the money for the library. The Governor has not made a final decision, but the state legislature did approve the money for the library.
Well, that's good to hear, but I don't dispute Senator Fumo --
-- how much did they approve? 60 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04
-- or any other legislator's approval. I'm talking about the Governor.
The Governor is the most important man in making these decisions.
So the state legislature has done its job, in terms of approving $25 million. We have not done our job yet as a legislative body.
Well, as I see it, the Governor has not done his job. The Governor, coming from Philadelphia, ought to understand the economic importance of this, let alone the cultural importance, and the signal it tells Philadelphians.
We can't control what the Governor does, but we can control what we do.
Yes, we can control the Governor. We can control, if we make enough noise in Philadelphia. The 61 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 Governor comes from Philadelphia.
I don't understand how he dares on one day to award $30 million to a company rich enough to offer $66 billion to Disneyland, and yet doesn't give us a quick answer, a good answer to meet our needs on economic development involving the kids in Philadelphia.
Councilman Cohen, you know, I don't want it to be misinterpreted. The Governor has not been asked, because we know -- we have been told by the staff, we have been told by the staff of foundations, we have been told by individuals that in their mind it is not a real project until the City dollars are there. And so, I don't want to... I don't want anybody to believe that the state or anybody else isn't doing their job because that's just not the case. As the City library, the City has to be there first.
Well, you know, 62 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 we're always given that line, and I believe it's just a line, like the young man who is meeting a young woman for the first time. We are always told that the City has to move first. And I don't think it's true at all. I think education has been a principal problem for the state, economic development of the state. The Governor talks everywhere about it. Listen to the Pennsylvania cable stations. You'll see the Governor going all over the state talking about how important education and economic growth is. Yet here it seems to me the Governor ought to be out in front finding us more money in the private sector. When the Governor was Mayor of Philadelphia he specialized in obtaining money from the private sector for things, as well as providing government money.
You know, for the City library, the City on the branch projects, during Rendell's administration, and then following up with the first part of 63 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 the Street administration, the City capital money was there first. It was on that basis that we could then raise over $40 million from the private sector.
Yeah. The reason you go -- you go to whoever is more answerable to you, and from whom you can get success.
-- doing fund raising, isn't it the prime method to go to the people who are going to contribute easily? You don't save the people who are going to contribute easily to the end. You use them at the beginning. And we're always told -- Whatever the project is, we're all told, Philadelphia has to give a stamp of approval. And we're told that yearly, and you're advised to make 64 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 that request and make that statement, thinking it will help you. Sometimes maybe it does. But I think you ought to understand that the Governor has a real obligation here. And in my judgment he's not meeting it. A week ago Saturday I got a telephone call at 3 o'clock in the afternoon from the City Hall operator, telling me Governor Rendell wanted to speak with me. It kind of shocked me because during his eight years as Mayor I think that happened only once. So I got on the phone. And of course it was not for me. It was the other David Cohen, David L. (Laughter.)
Because I can say if it was me, you'd have the money for the library. But instead, David L. got the money for Comcast.
Well, I can share with you, Councilman Cohen, that I, too, when he was Mayor, got a phone call on a weekend 65 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 when I was on vacation. And I needed a book. At any rate...
It's either two Dave Cohens, one known to one group and one known to the other. When he asked the telephone operator to get David Cohen, the one she knew was apparently me. But when Comcast... They would know who else he was getting. But I think seriously we've got to increase the efforts of the state. I appreciate the efforts our state legislators make. I think Fumo and Evans and all the Democrats and most of the Republicans work seriously and hard in the interest of Philadelphia. But the main guy that we ought to go after hard and ought to send delegations to see, in order to send letters to, is the Governor. He makes the decision. And don't always follow the advice you're given. I mean, sometimes act on your own, and you get better results. The library -- 66 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04
The library did it in its last effort to raise money. When they went on their own they did a great job. Library's got a wonderful history. Who could be against the library? It's a very active organization. It enriches communities, as well as the whole City, and everybody is affected by it. And like everybody else here, if we had to, I would vote for this expansion, no 13 matter what we had to do to get the money. But the money is there, and it ought to be provided by the state. And I don't know these two bundles of cash that my colleague, Brother Kenney is talking about. But if they exist, he's absolutely right; that money ought to be made available, rather than running up our debt service. And then the City controller will rest more easily.
Thank you, 67 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 Councilman.
Could the chair of our board, of our foundation, and the past president of the friends offer testimony? I'm happy to consider mine complete, to help move things along.
Thank you. Thank you, Councilman. Mr. Shelkrot, who will the developer of the project be and how will the MBE/WBE opportunities be insured?
The project manager for this project is the firm of Becker & Frondorf. They have done many projects in Philadelphia, both commercial, such as the Lowe's Hotel total redevelopment. And they have done nonprofit work with the Franklin Institute and the Pennsylvania Academy of Fine Arts. They are our managers. They are our consultants. Already at this time the project in Moshe Safdie's team, working with other Philadelphia firms and others, already has a 68 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 percent minority participation. I believe it's a two or three percent women's participation. And similarly, with the L.F. Driscoll Company who has been hired with pre -- They are construction managers, but they've been hired for pre-construction work so that we get good estimates on what this is really going to cost when the shovels go in the ground. We have also worked with Mr. Williams in the MBEC office, and have had several conversations. And we are committed, just as we were on the branch renovations, to meet the City's goals for minority and women's participation.
Thank you. 19 Can we very, very briefly talk about 20 the parking? I think you should touch on 21 that, if you will. I know you indicated that it would be underground parking. Is that cost above what we're talking about today?
Yes, that cost is 69 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 above what we're talking about today.
Well, I can't answer that because I don't -- I don't know. The City Planning Commission is looking at parking issues throughout the Center City area, and they will be getting special attention to this. And their recommendation of the amount of parking that is necessary for this part of Center City is what we are waiting for before we go ahead and before anybody goes ahead, and determine how much parking and how much it will cost.
President Verna, thank you. I want to mention one other thing, that I think you're treading on dangerous 70 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 ground, and I just suggest wide caution, and a lot of preparation. When you talk about volunteer work at reduced rates, you're getting into areas that are going to be of great concern of the labor field. And I suggest that you ought to begin thinking that through. You ought to begin talking to the unions that are involved before you run into a situation where they will say, how come whenever it's anything for service for the people, suddenly you want to cut our salaries. You'll frighten every City worker that he will become a volunteer at some time in the future. So, I'm just cautioning. In the beginning, do your homework carefully, and indicate precisely to the labor groups what you would like to talk about, and incorporate them in your planning. Because if you incorporate them in your planning, you may find the way much quicker that all can agree on, to help solve the financial problems. 71 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04
A point of information on the parking issue, Madam President.
I'm sorry, Mr. Shelkrot. Did I understand -- In response to the Chair's question with regard to the parking, what was your answer with regard to the cost of that?
My answer to the cost is that the cost of the parking depends on how many spaces are built, and the City Planning Commission is evaluating that. So that what that cost would be can be understood, and the plans will be made accordingly.
The construction 72 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 costs are $120 million. There is a $10 million program endowment that the board also is committed to raising.
Within the $120 million, is there money for this parking? Is that factored in?
Well, don't you have to build the parking before you can build the building?
Well, you know, that's certainly a good question. Let me help clarify it. The architect has designed this structure so that we can determine -- so that the addition of the parking will not cause a redesign of the structure. The foundation, the basics of it, the way the structural elements are determined are exactly the way it will need to be if, when we start digging, we dig down "X" number of more feet to accommodate the parking. 73 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 In other words, you know, in a building, as I have learned, you know, you have to have your structural elements in the right place.
I understand that. But you're saying at the moment, because you're over at the Planning Commission, you don't know how many parking spaces you're going to build or need to be required to provide, right?
Each space... Little bit I know about structured parking, whether above or over ground, each space has essentially a cost to it, right?
At what point in this process will you know how much parking you either want or would be required to have, to then determine how much that will cost? And at what point in the process do you build the parking? Do you build the parking first? Do you start working on the building and build 74 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 the parking subsequent under the building? How is this going to work?
Okay. No; the... We will need to know within the next six months, assuming things move along. We will need to know in the next six to eight months whether there will be the parking under the library or not. Because obviously you cannot start construction. However, what I was saying is that whether there is or whether there isn't, it will not change the basic configuration and elements of the library. It will affect how far down one goes and how -- you know, that kind of thing.
I understand that part. So my last question is: Let's assume for the moment that you are going to have underground parking.
And it will be whatever the number of spaces are. How are you going to pay for it? 75 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04
That is a question that we have been looking into. We know that we have had great interest because of the high demand for parking in this part of Center City, that we have already experienced, that we know that there is interest from some of the private sector developers. And we are pursuing -- We will be -- When we know what the City Planning Commission believes is appropriate, that's when we will go ahead.
So you're not expecting to raise any money or use any of your estimated $120 million in project costs or your $10 million... I think you called it an endowment?
Madam President, 76 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 point of information.
Point of information. The Chair recognizes Councilman Rizzo.
Mr. Shelkrot, could you provide to the Chair -- I don't pretend to know a lot about architecture or construction. But it's hard for me to believe that we could build that facility and build it the same with underground parking; and if not, build it the same without the underground parking. Could you get a letter for the Chair from the architect stating --
-- stating that? Because, believe me, it's hard for me to believe that you could build that building and in one breath say you're going to put underground parking, and the next breath cancel that and continue with the same plan for a building that would have underground parking. 77 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 Again, I would love to see -- Is the architect for the building here?
I don't know. I know that Mr. Becker is here, who is our project manager. They may be able to discuss --
I'd like to hear from the person that's responsible for that model. Is anyone here from them?
Now. Right now. 78 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04
Okay. Right now I think that -- I think Mr. Becker, Bill 4 Becker, who is the chief, the C.E.O. of the Becker & Frondorf Company would be willing to come to the podium.
Because I'd like to hear an estimate of what the parking would cost.
I have to ask permission of the Chair. Madam President?
I would hope that the two gentlemen with me right now could... Okay. Well, whatever Council would like would be fine; will be fine.
Madam President, could we hear from the architect or the design firm, in reference to this parking issue?
All right. There are Council members who have had their lights on for. 79 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04
All right. I'll wait for my turn and ask that question.
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Brown.
I thank you, Madam President, very much. I wanted to do a follow-up to hear a question regarding MBE/WBE participation and be clear that I understand what's currently in place. We have consultants currently on board who will have the principle responsibility for the oversight and monitoring of the brick and mortar portion of this project, correct? Is that correct?
What process or procedures will be in place for the handling of professional contracts, the legal work, the marketing work? 80 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04
Okay. The legal work and the marketing work, this is already started with the... under the direction of the Library Foundation. And it is all of those things together that I'm saying in that professional work we are already meeting the goals, as established by Mr. Williams at MBEC.
Okay. That's encouraging. I need specifics. When you say of those professionals currently engaged, in any way, on any level are any of them MBE/WBE?
Yeah. The total -- The numbers percent. 20 But Mr. Mayello, Kelly Mayello, is a 21 minority construction firm. The... Or not construction. Excuse me. Architectural firm.
We know that... 81 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 Okay. Chilton Engineering is a minority firm.
You know, we have at this time two percent of the professional fees going to women. I would be happy to identify -- Is it six? Okay. I'm being corrected. Six percent. I will be happy to provide a breakdown of those firms for you, and we can do that when this adjourns. We can do that.
I'd certainly appreciate that, because like the stadiums and like Microsoft that we heard in great detail today, major new building initiatives jewels that are coming into our City, we want to get it right the first time around.
And what we don't want is to be back here 24 months, 36 82 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 months, 48 months from now reexamining issues around MBE/WBE participation or not.
Oh, absolutely. As I said earlier, we did that with the branch renovations. We are absolutely committed to doing that on this project as well, with the professional. And then when we move into the work force, the construction work force, we are doing the same thing. But we will get the details of what we have right now in front of you very quickly. We just have to circle the wagons --
I would appreciate that. And I thank you. Thank you, Madam President.
Welcome. The Chair recognizes Councilman Clarke.
Thank you, Madam 83 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 President. Good evening. I wanted to follow up on the parking issue. Having represented the Parkway for some time, it's increasingly clear to me, based on discussions with a number of the institutions, that we have a parking problem and have had a parking problem, regardless of the expansion of the library. And my concern is that we're talking about potentially, or more or less probably, a very expensive parking garage, wherever it may be, not taking into the context of the larger parking problem. Does that make sense for us to look at only parking for the library? I'm assuming we're going to pay premium dollars and not address the overall parking problem to accommodate all of the various institutions that we currently have, and hopefully a couple of new ones that we're --
That's right. That's exactly why the Planning Commission is working on this. 84 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 It isn't just an issue for the library, but it is an issue for... If the Barnes Foundation moves to the lot across from the -- across 20th from the library, if the Calder moves along -- And as you indicated, there already is a shortage of parking. But we at the library do not want to -- We can't do that. It needs to be a coordinated approach. And that's why the Planning Commission is looking at it.
So your earlier response to one of my colleagues about being able to have the parking accommodated in this particular building may not even come into play.
I'm kind of getting mixed signals. One, you're saying the building was designed to accommodate parking; but the reality is the parking may not go there, based on your recent statements.
So I mean, are we looking to do it there? Are we not looking to do it? Do we have various options? I'm just trying to...
That is similar to the question that was asked earlier. And Mr. Becker, who is here and who is our project manager, and is a trained -- Did I say that? He is an architect, and is our project manager for this project, I believe can explain that to you in words that I just -- You know, it's just not my area of expertise.
Well, okay. That's fine. I mean, I understand. Councilman Rizzo asked earlier for specifics about the parking in the building. But I guess I'm kind of... I don't quite understand it. Are we looking at a parking plan generally to accommodate all the institutions or are we looking at parking to accommodate the library, or are we doing both?
What we're looking at 86 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 is -- What the City Planning Commission is looking at is parking for the various institutions along the Parkway. They're looking... And this needs to be a coordinated effort. Whether all -- Let's pretend for a moment that the Barnes moves right across 20th from us. It doesn't make sense for them to have a little bit of parking and us to have a little bit of parking, when it should be a parking facility that is useful to both. There is also the developer of the Whole Foods Store and the land surrounding that, who present -- who showed me yesterday a concept that he is working on that will involve -- that could provide substantial parking, as they are looking for ways of trying to expand the Whole Foods Store. I mean, those are -- You know, from my -- Those are speculative things, but those are the kinds of things the planning department has to get engaged in, and weigh in and say, this is what we believe needs to be done. We would prefer that this -- you 87 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 know, that the library... that there be parking available under the library. We would prefer that there's parking along with the Barnes. We'd prefer that -- You know, those are the kinds of issues, that we are awaiting their perspective and their planning on that. In terms of how we can build the building from... How we can design it from the ground up and have that design be adaptable to digging three or four, whatever levels of parking underneath, I have to defer to Mr. Becker for that.
Mr. Becker, I think -- If you don't mind, Councilman Clarke, I'm very confused. I don't know how we construct a building and then talk about underground parking.
If you can explain that. And I think that you have to try to give us a cost estimate. I think underground 88 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 parking becomes very, very expensive. And I think you would agree with me on that.
Madam President, since I -- Could I just add to that before he answers the question, please?
-- add to mine, that's fine, and Councilman Clarke's.
What I think I would like to know is, based on this design, what are the maximum numbers of parking spaces that could be in that building? And how much would that add to the cost of the building? That's all I want to know.
I'll be happy to answer all that. I'm William Becker. I'm a principal 89 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 of Becker & Frondorf. We are the project manager for the library. We recognized from the beginning that we had a timing issue because the Barnes and several other factors are in motion. But the library urgently needs the project to go forward. So our instructions to the architect are to design the addition and lay out the grid of columns in such a way that if we add levels below the library spaces, the column grid is set up to accommodate parking. Now, we have this beautiful conceptual design. It's called schematic design. It will take another year, another whole 12 months, for the architect and the engineers who are working with the architect to finish technical drawings that we need in order to start construction. So, the way we set this up -- That's why Mr. Shelkrot said, in about another six months we're going to have to make a commitment as to how many levels below our lowest level of library space would we need 90 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 to give you an idea of cost. For an underground parking garage, it costs approximately $40,000 per space to build underground parking. That's the construction cost. And if you add design fees, and so forth, it may be a little more. But in round numbers, that's a useful order of magnitude. So the answer is that to meet our needs, we've got a building design, total cost, including the endowment is $130 million. To the extent that we sink those columns lower and excavate more to accommodate parking, those costs are in addition. I hope that clears up the question. So it's not that we would start construction and not know. It's that halfway between now and the time we finish all the technical drawings and specifications, we need to decide. The architect has done a layout that shows what the garage level would look like. 91 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 So, we know it works, and it fits on the property.
Councilman Clarke. Oh, I'm sorry. I think Councilman Clarke originally asked the question.
Sure, on that particular aspect. That wasn't really what I was focused on. But I just want to follow that up by saying that I'm a little concerned that... Let me change that. What I would be interested in knowing at what level -- And the Philadelphia Planning Commission is involved in accommodating the parking needs of all of the institutions in a coordinated way with you guys, potentially the Barnes, potentially the Calder, and --
Well, we've had several meetings with the Planning Commission. And I 92 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 think to know what they're doing, they're the ones who should report to you. All I can tell you is that in our conversations with them, they recognize the need for parking. They recognize that the library is only part of the number of institutions that create demand, and that they are... And we know that they are undertaking a Center City parking study now, and that they are specifically taking a very close look at this area. They know what our timetable is. That's why we've met with them. They know when we need to determine how many levels, if any, of parking would be part of this project. They, like everybody else in the region, I guess, is waiting to hear what the Judge rules because that's a huge variable in any planning exercise. To get any specific information about how they're conducting their study, I think that's something that representatives of the Planning Commission should answer. 93 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04
I would just like to ask a question on that. Could the cost be prohibitive, and that they would not be able to build the underground parking or would not be able to accommodate both visitors to the library and also others, like from Barnes, for instance. Where will people park? I think that's your question.
Yeah. I mean, we have a problem. I mean, every time I meet with the Parkway Council --
-- they want to know, you know, because it has infringed on the adjacent community for quite some time, not to mention a time when we have a function on a Parkway. I think right now we have like close to 20 functions during the course of the summer. 94 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 You know, I'm just really concerned about our ability to accommodate those needs, the current needs and the future needs. But you say you're not the one to respond to that. And I truly understand that. But you need to understand I'm concerned about that.
Madam Chair, just on this parking issue, one last question.
Becker. I'm sorry. At the $40,000 space price -- and 95 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 you said that there are actually some add-ons to that, so let's have a conversation at least in maybe a 40 to 50 thousand dollar space price, when you add it up. You're now at $4 to $5 million for a hundred spaces.
Do you have any estimate at the moment of how many spaces you would either build or would be needed or might be required by this Planning Commission analysis?
No. That's why we're working with them, and we're waiting for the results of their study. So, we don't have that answer.
All I can say is that when we met with them last week, I think -- Is this on? Yeah. We met with them last week, and they're aware of our timing. They know that the library design team is proceeding. 96 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 I think they are waiting for a Barnes decision before they --
A decision about whether the Barnes will come to Philadelphia.
And if so, whether it will be located on which particular site on the Parkway, before they can come up to their conclusions, in terms of the demand analysis.
Well, I mean, look; I know you're working with the District Councilman, but I mean, it would seem to me, Barnes no Barnes -- And we certainly would like the Barnes to come -- I mean, won't the library have its own needs anyway?
Our charge as a professional team, working with the library, is to direct the architects and the other consultants to come up with a design for the 97 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 project that meets the library's program needs for space. And that's what we're doing. We've also directed the architects to --
But their program needs for space... I mean, unless you're going to tell us otherwise, there will be more people coming just to the library, right? I mean, isn't that a part of the point?
And whether people want to check out a book, or look at the structure, or sit on the outdoor area and look up at the sky, I mean, they have to get there. Many of them will park.
I think that the library team is eager to work with other interested parties, to see if there are additional sources of money available to provide the parking. Everybody wants the parking there. 98 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 As several people said earlier, everybody wants this project. That's what we've designed for. We're trying to describe in this project a design that will meet the library's... its own functional needs, but to create a physical design that will accommodate parking, which will require additional funding.
Just a quick question for Mr. Shelkrot. Elliot, you mentioned earlier that the Five-year Plan included the debt service for this project. My understanding is that it includes debt service for '8 and '09 but not for 0'05, '06 and '07. Do you have any comment on that?
No, but I believe the Finance Director can respond to that. 99 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04
I just want to finish up my thought on this parking issue. Based on the design of that building, with anticipation of doubling and tripling, why today can't you pretty much say that you're going to build a garage? And I'm sure there's limitation on how deep you can go, how many levels down that you can go. How many spaces can you build right now, based on what you know about the site? How many spaces? What's the maximum number of spaces that you can build on that site?
I'm trying to answer your question as directly as we can. It's approximately, in round numbers, 200 spaces per level. So, if we go down two levels, we can build 400 spaces. If we go down three levels, we can build 600 spaces. 100 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04
If you go too far down, you might hit oil. You'd have to be careful.
The challenge... The desire is unanimous about providing parking. The challenge is whether we can work, our team and with the help of others, to find the funding to build it.
What I think you really need to do, and I think my colleague mentioned it, you know what your needs are. You know what your projection's going to be. We need to know what your need is, and if there's room for accommodating whoever may need parking, I think your concern is the library. And your... your... What word am I looking for? Not your guest. Your customers, whatever. You know what I'm talking about.
That library parking be exclusive to the people that come to the library. They should get first shot at it. So, I think you really need to come in with with a plan that says, we need to build 250 spaces, 400 spaces, and that's what the needs of the library is, and know the number. Because you're going to start a project and run out of money before you've got the roof on.
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Blackwell.
Thank you, Madam President. Just on another matter. I've heard the dialogue and certainly agree with it, with regard to neighborhood recreation centers. Walnut Street west has been mentioned several times.
Libraries, not 102 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 recreation centers.
I'm sorry. Libraries. Sorry. Sorry. Walnut Street West Library. And certainly we do agree it's a lovely, lovely place. People have contacted me asking me about making sure that the library hours are still there. And I believe that between the Friends of the Library, and all of us, and the administration, that we should be able to find a way and can. They've asked me if that branch, for example, on some days, like maybe a Tuesday when the hours are minimal, couldn't they work it out where it's not open then, but open on Saturdays or on evenings? Because it is so widely used. But I believe that well-meaning people can work it out. We need this wonderful new central branch library. It is certainly a vision that has come to light. And we also need our neighborhood branches 103 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 operational. And I believe that with committed minds, we can have both. So, I speak for that, and certainly appreciate the opportunity; am available to work with you and any other person and/or organization who would like to. And thank you for your commitment to both. Thank you, Madam President. (Applause.)
Welcome. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Brown.
Thank you, Madam President. Let me underscore Councilwoman Jannie Blackwell's sentiments, and add as we go down this road, the level of commitment expressed by the leadership here around MBE/WBE participation is encouraging as well. I need clarification because we know this is an issue that will not go away, given the City's track records. The goals that you shared with me, 104 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 the names that you're going to share with me post this hearing, those are individuals and professionals involved for the future?
What we have now are the individuals that are on board currently, but that we have commitment from the architect who is the -- in essence the chief designer, certainly the most costly of the design professionals, to continue and to meet these as we go forward in the design of this building. Furthermore, we have a commitment from the Driscoll Company that if -- You know, and they are here for pre-construction, and they already are meeting those goals. If they are the ones, as we move ahead -- and we don't know that -- we have no 21 commitment that they are the company. But any company that is the... in charge of the construction will have to meet those requirements. And we will not back down on that. 105 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04
So it will be the consultants who are in regular communications with the minority, with MBEC and President Verna's staff person on this issue or will it be a point person on your staff that's in regular dialogue with MBEC and President Verna?
Okay. The point person on that will be Mr. Becker, but if there are any questions that Council were to have or MBEC that need my attention if they're not satisfied, this is an issue that I am committed to and our boards are both committed to; and, you know, it will happen.
I thank you. I needed that clarification. And I'll look forward again to the document you share with us post hearing. Thank you. Thank you, Madam President.
Thank you very much. 106 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 Mr. McPherson, who is our next witness? MR. McPHERSON: Will the Finance Director please come forward.
Good evening. My name is Ray Zies, and I'm the acting Finance Director for the City. Would you like for me to go through my testimony or would you like for me to start with questions?
I think that you have heard what the concerns are of the members. Maybe you could really consolidate your testimony and really address some of the issues of concern by Council members.
Okay. One thing, when we talked about the increase in operating costs for the... if we double or triple the number of people that use the library, there will also be a corresponding increase in revenue that should help offset some of that... some of that increased expenses: Rentals, fines, things like that. 107 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 So, we would have to take a look at getting -- you know, working with Elliot, to come up with estimates for the revenues and expenditures. As far as... Trying to remember all of the questions. It is in the Five-year Plan for '08 and '09. There is nothing for '06 or '07. Under the current plan, where the library asks us to issue $10 million now, we are looking to do that on a short-term basis through a bank loan, some type of short-term borrowing. And the cost for '06 would be minimal. We're estimating less than $350,000 for '06. So we would have to make arrangements in the plan for that. For '07 the debt service would be, depending on how long the bond issue goes, anywhere from $2.1 million to $2.7 million. While we're working on the '06 to '10, which we will start shortly, we will have to come up with a funding for that. We believe that we can cover that funding under our current, with using our 108 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 current cuts, departmental cuts, we believe that we can cover that. We believe that this is a viable alternative for financing. We would be glad to, in addition, continue to explore other avenues. But I think, given the time constraints, we would not want to hold these bills up while we're exploring those alternatives.
I'm glad you said that because we only received this Ordinance last Wednesday evening.
It was after 5 o'clock. I think that you were here and heard about the issue about looking for alternatives.
There was the issue about PICA having approximately $27 million in interest earnings. 109 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 Has anybody looked into the possibility of contacting PICA, to see if we could use some of those funds or all of those funds to appropriately do this project, without going out for the bonds?
No, we have not, but that is an alternative that we would be glad to explore.
Also, the City currently has $24 million in the Capital Projects Fund. Could some or all of that money be used...
Sorry. We would have to -- We believe that there are current projects that those monies are earmarked for, and we would have to determine whether we'd need to do those projects. It's a matter then of, you know, Peter robbing Paul.
Would you be using monies from the Act 71 reimbursements?
There would be state reimbursements. I don't know what Act they are. We wouldn't -- I'm sorry. We wouldn't use Act 71 money.
But wasn't that money specifically earmarked for Youth Study Center? And if we're not using it for the Youth Study Center, what are we using it for, and why couldn't we use it for the library?
All right. Let me see if I have any other questions here. Can you please walk us through the transaction so I guess we could better understand it. 111 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04
Yes, ma'am. If it would be possible, I have kind of a cheat sheet.
This handout will walk us through the financing lease structure.
First there will be a ground lease where the City leases to PAID the library ground. There will be nominal rent associated with that, and the term of that lease would be the same as the length of the bonds. Then there is the prime lease where PAID will lease the facility back to the City.
That's okay.l. Then there will be a prime lease where PAID will lease the facility back to the City. The rent that the City would pay would be equal to the debt service. And 112 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 again, the term of that lease would -- of the prime lease would be the same as the length of the bonds. Then there is a leaseback lease from City -- from the City back to PAID. There again, that's a nominal rent. And that's... The term of that would be coterminus with the bonds. And that allows the City to operate the library like they have in the past. And then in addition, there will be a lease and development agreement between PAID and the foundation, the Library Foundation. And the rent for that would be the land acquisition. And the term of that is the same as the length of the bonds. As you can see, the City retains ownership and all responsibility for operation, repair and maintenance of the existing and new facilities. PAID would issue $30 million in non-recourse conduit debt, repaid with rental revenues from the City, and provide proceeds to the Library Foundation for the development 113 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 of the project. The foundation, Library Foundation, would develop the project, including holding contracts for all design and construction. Did that help?
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman Nutter.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Mr. Zies, let's go back to a couple items. First, your testimony was that if there were additional personnel costs as a result of the expansion of the library, and additional people working there, based on what we all would hope would be significantly increased usage or patronage in the -- Patron use.
Not patronage. That your first recommendation was that as a result of increased rentals and fines?
I said it would help offset the increased personnel costs. 114 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04
Well, how much would you estimate the increased rentals and fines would be for an expanded library?
I -- I believe I said I would be glad to work with Elliot to develop those. I don't have any numbers right now.
Okay. But, I mean, it would -- For the moment, I mean, it would be hard to imagine. I mean, two or three public employees, I mean, you're easily with salary and benefits, I mean, you're somewhere in the sixty to a hundred thousand dollar neighborhood, easily.
Right? I mean, three employees at 18 apiece; 60. Add on the benefits at, you 19 know, 40 percent of whatever that number is, 20 and I mean, you're up close to a hundred.
All right. So, I mean, I just don't know that we can fund this on rentals and fines.
Well, I meant to say it 115 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 would help offset the cost. If I didn't say that, I apologize.
I understand. I understand. Let's go back to the $27 million that was raised earlier. When the Council President, when the Chair asked you about that, I thought you responded that there had been no contact with PICA with regard to those funds; is that correct? Did you say that?
No. I haven't contacted PICA regarding those funds. I said I would be glad to explore that possibility with PICA.
What is that 116 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 money for? Why do we have $27 million -- I'll rephrase the question. Is there $27 million in interest earnings over at PICA?
Okay. So we have $27 million sitting over at PICA. We've not talked to them about it. We have no 22 presently designated project for it. And we have $30 million that the City would like to support the expanded library, which I would certainly like to do 117 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 as well.
Did anyone think that maybe we could use the $27 million for this?
No, sir, we did not; but it's an opportunity that we would be glad to explore.
Never mind. I withdraw the question. I withdraw the 118 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 question. Never mind. Never mind. (Laughter.)
If you're going to attack me that way, forget it. Okay? (Laughter.)
Gees. We were having such a nice dialogue here, and then you go and bring out the hammer.
I understand that. You're a smart man. Why wouldn't this be explored, just as part of the options?
Why I haven't explored it? I didn't think about it. I would be glad to.
All right. That's honest. Knowing... Never mind. Lastly, $27 million in capital project funds possibly available from this Act 71 reimbursement? Is that accurate as well?
24. 119 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04
24. I'm sorry. It's 27 with the other. Is that accurate?
We'll be glad to get you that information tomorrow. We don't have it with us.
It was, like, ten questions ago. I think the question was, are the dollars allocated for specific projects? I think your answer was, you're going to let me know.
Right, we'll let the 120 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 Council President know.
-- of whatever the $24 million is designated for, that would be helpful.
So, this is my last question. Is the possible use of the $27 million for the library a viable option, in terms of giving immediate funding to the library from this particular source, to move this project along?
We'll be glad to explore that possibility. Until I have opportunity to talk with, you know, all the parties that are involved, I can't give you an answer right this moment.
Well, I understand that. But I think your previous response was, it could be used for this purpose.
Okay. The $10 million in the up-front which is, I guess, a 121 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 match against the foundation's $10 million?
Is there a certain immediacy for the $10 million? And where exactly would we get it from? And what qualifies as short-term?
On the $10 million. Okay. And we would just borrow that from a bank?
Okay. All right. Let the record reflect that I did 122 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 not take advantage of the Chair's absence, and I now relinquish all of my remaining time, which expired about minutes ago. 5 Thank you, Mr. Zies. It's always a 6 pleasure. Thank you. 7 Thank you, Madam Chair. 8
Thank you. 9 Mr. Zies, if you'll just stay where 10 you are, it's my understanding that we do 11 have people here from the Streets Department 12 that will have to testify on Bill Number 13 041040. 14 And I believe we do have... Do we 15 have someone from Public Property here, too? If you don't mind, these gentlemen do have community meeting that they must attend this evening, so we would just hear their brief testimony.
Good evening. Thank you for your patience. Please identify yourself for the record, and summarize your testimony, please.
Yes. Good evening, Madam President and members of Council. 123 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 My name is Bruce Rader, acting Survey Bureau Manager of the Department of Streets. And the Department of Streets would like to offer the following testimony on Bill 7 Number 041040. This is an administrative Ordinance requested by the Commerce Department. The purpose of this Ordinance is to strike from City Man 63 and vacate Carlton Street from 20th Street eastwardly approximately 98 feet 4 inches, to a dead end, and to reserve in place on the City Plan a certain right of way for public utility purposes within the bed of Carlton Street, proposed to be stricken under authority of this Ordinance. This Ordinance is supported by the Department of Streets and is recommended to you for favorable action.
Thank you very much. Are there any questions from members of the Committee? 124 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 (No response.)
Thank you. And again, I thank you for your patience.
Okay. Can we have the representative from Public Property? Again, I thank you for your patience. Kindly identify yourself for the record.
My name is Ken Sipos from the Department of Public Property. The Commissioner of Public Property supports Bill Number 041039 and 041041, and recommends that the rules be suspended so the Ordinance may be passed upon the second reading of Council.
Thank you very much, sir. Mr. Zies, would you mind coming back to the witness table. 125 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 It's really a shame. I think this will probably be the last time you will be appearing before us for a public hearing.
I guess it would be inappropriate to say I hope so. (Laughter.)
Thank you, Madam President. Let me start with the fact that I think several of my colleagues have raised the issue of using PICA capital funds which is something you did not consider. The use of those funds would not affect Bills 39 or 40, as far as you know; is that correct?
We would not have to do the... We would not have to do the bond issue. 126 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04
I guess my specific question is, is it language within Bill 41 that precludes the use of PICA capital funds?
The Ordinance says the City would provide up to $30 million through the bond issue. So, if there were other sources, we could use those sources.
So that under the current language of Bill 41 we could, in fact, use PICA funds, as opposed to what you were considering originally.
Okay. I guess my next question is, I guess in very simple ways my colleagues have asked a question: One, can we afford this and how can we afford this; and, two, is this in fact a good financing mechanism. Of course, we've already probably resolved the last question, that if PICA is a better financing mechanism, then we can employ any financing mechanism up to that amount of indebtedness. 127 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 So simply put, one, can we afford it? And two, is our flexibility, in terms of financing mechanisms, sufficient that we are, by passing this Bill, not using a -- not tied to a financing mechanism that is not the best option.
By passing the Bill, you are not tied to using a financing method that is not the most optimum. Can we afford it? It is in the current Five-year Plan in '08 and '09. We would have to find the money, and -- If we issued the debt, we would have to find the interest for the short-term, the $10 million short-term piece in '06 and for the debt service in '07, which would be somewhere between 2.1 and 2.7 million. We would have to find that funding when we put the plans together.
Okay. Lastly, how long have you been working on this project?
Do you mean this iteration? 128 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04
This library project. Not just these three Bills that are before us; but when the project was introduced last term, did you work on that project?
I was the Deputy Finance Director. I wasn't as involved as Deputy as I am now as Director.
So you were familiar with the fact that this legislative body is very much in favor of the project, believes very much in the work that the paid library staff and the voluntary organizations that support that paid staff support all the great work that they have done; but last time around last term had some problems with the financing mechanism and this time around might have some problems with the financing mechanism; yet, the bills were sent to us last Wednesday. Why is that?
That was when we had the information forwarded to us from PIDC and the Library Foundation.
That's the only 129 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 reason why the Bills arrived late?
You're quite welcome. And absolutely, we understand Council supports the project.
Just for the record, Mr. Zies, there's no question that an alternative like those that have been mentioned, whether it be PICA funds, Act 71 funds, something that's already sitting in a pot somewhere, would be in the City's best interests financially than going this way, even though this may be the way we have to go.
Okay. Thank you. I just wanted to make that real clear, that that's the Finance Department's position as well and the administration's position. 130 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04
I know the Finance Director wouldn't want to leave. Do we have any other questions of the Finance Director?
I do have part of my -- If there are no other questions, I do have part of my testimony... As I mentioned in the Council briefing, there was an Exhibit 1 that was omitted from the original Ordinance 11 that was transmitted to Council. And I would like to ask that the...
Madam President, I have one other question I forgot to ask for the Director.
On the issue of the parking garages, if they become part of the project, the underground, has there been discussion within the Finance Department as 131 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 to whether or not they would be revenue bonds, supported by the parking fees that would be generated, whether they would have to be supported by another source of general obligation type revenue?
We would explore those alternatives. We haven't had a chance to do that yet.
Madam President. I'm sorry to belabor this, but Councilman O'Neill's question prompted another one in my mind. I noticed some discussion about parking garages. There's been no 18 determination on the use of the Parking Authority as the developer for those garages or we haven't determined that yet?
One of the issues that I think we face when it comes to the cost of parking in Philadelphia is the fact that the Parking Authority probably for 132 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 a long time wasn't doing what it was supposed to do in developing parking lots and being a competitor for private parking operations, therefore kind of facilitating a reasonable price when it comes to parking charges. If the Parking Authority were in the business more than it is in now, with structured and surface level parking, their pricing would be subsidized would naturally by market, through market effect, bring down the cost of parking overall. One of the problems that we face in Center City in short-term parking for visitors is the exorbitant amount -- I mean, it cost me $20 to take my son to the doctors at 8th and Chestnut the other day for, you know, an hour and a half parking stint. Would it make sense to make sure that the Parking Authority is involved so we don't have, you know, these exorbitant gouging prices when we have our visitors come to visit our new, improved and expanded library?
We would be glad to have 133 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 discussions with the Parking Authority on that.
But you're not going to be having discussions with anybody. You're going to be gone. You say, yes, sir; yes, sir; yes, sir; that's right; whatever you say, Jim. (Laughter.)
No. I said would it be inappropriate if I said I hope so. I didn't say I hope so.
Thank you. Any other questions? The Chair recognizes Councilman Ramos. COUNCIMLAN RAMOS: Thank you, Madam President. Only maybe a point of information. Would we be... I know we have Joyce Wilkerson -- I don't see her in the chambers -- coming up for something else shortly. 134 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 Will we be able to ask anyone of the administration, outside of the Director, on whether the idea that some of my colleagues have floated, tapping into the PICA fund is something that the administration looks at as favorable?
Unless the Director is speaking on behalf of the administration, on behalf of the Mayor.
Well, I mean, I believe the Finance Director always speaks on behalf of the administration.
So the answer is yes, that this administration would look favorably at us tapping into or presenting the PICA fund as an alternative source of funding.
But I'm sure Miss Wilkerson would be glad to answer that also when she gets here. 135 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04
So you're saying that although you think that you're speaking on behalf, that that could still change.
I also think I understood the Director to say that he would certainly look into it, and he would be very happy to look into the possibility and potential of this happening.
Yes. I understood that. I'm just wondering whether, since we're here tonight, if we can hear from someone else in the administration if they have had any thoughts, Joyce Wilkerson or anyone else, have had some thoughts about tapping into the PICA fund.
Councilman, I think you're free to ask any question you would like of Joyce Wilkerson 136 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 when she comes up. Thank you.
Thank you, Madam President. Reel briefly, since you're here speaking on behalf of the administration. The parking issue, can you communicate to the administration very clearly that I would have grave concerns about my support for this parking issue, particularly if the parking garage only addresses the needs of the library, understanding the need if not the potential development of the Barnes and the Calder. But the real problem that we had with parking, as it relates to the existing facilities. So, I mean, I want you to communicate that in clear terms that unless there's some understanding that we're going to address everybody's parking issues, I would be somewhat reluctant to support parking just for the library. 137 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04
The administration does share your concern. I think Mr. Shelkrot mentioned that our planning department is looking at the master parking plan for the Parkway, and would take into account all of the needs of the Parkway, not just the library.
Thank you. Any other questions or comments. (No response.)
You have always been a gentleman, very courteous. And we really appreciate what you have done. Thank you so much?
Thank you. Do we have anyone else to testify on 138 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 the bills before us? (No response.)
No one? Last call. Okay. Since we don't have anybody else to testify, I would ask Mr. McPherson to please read the title of Resolution Number 041046. MR. McPHERSON: Resolution 041046, Resolution approving a Revised Five Year Financial Plan for the City of Philadelphia covering Fiscal Years 2005 through 2009.
Okay. We do have your... I believe everyone has a copy of the prepared testimony of Miss Wilkerson, circulated. Kindly identify yourself for the record and proceed with your testimony.
My name is Joyce Wilkerson. I'm Chief of staff to Mayor John 139 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 Street. And with me I have Diane Reed, our Budget Director, and Ray Zies, the acting Finance Director. Good afternoon. Good evening. Thank you for this opportunity to present testimony in support of the administration's revised FY 2005 to 2009 five-year financial plan transmitted to PICA on November 15, 2004. I know you've all received copies of the Resolution which contains the revised plan, and in a narrative describing highlights of the revision. I'll therefore keep my testimony brief by addressing only major changes to the plan from the version approved by PICA on July 7th. More explanation of these changes is available in the narrative included with Resolution Number 040146. The PICA approved plan involved severe expenditure reductions, numerous new deficit-cutting initiatives beyond those already being carried out from the FY04, FY08 140 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 plan, and a series of revenue-generating actions, in order to avert a potential FY09 year end fund balance deficit of $905 million. The expenditure reductions included five percent cuts for most budget line items in both FY05 and FY06 and a total workforce reduction of approximately 1,700 employees over the planned period. Among a number of management and efficiency initiatives, the plan assumed the City would respond to a population and service needs that have changed significantly over time, without corresponding changes in the City's approach, by restructuring the Fire Department, resource allocation and operations of the City's recreation facilities, saving a total of nearly $8 million annually. The plan also assumed that these would continue to be updated to reflect the City's current actual costs and that the City would invest to more aggressively pursue delinquent tax collections. 141 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 The myriad of actions and initiatives assumed in the PICA approved plan were necessary to overcome revenue growth limited by tax reductions and the dramatic growth in the City's benefits costs, including an increase in the City's FY05 pension costs of $55 million or 40 percent. The increase in the City's benefit costs assumed in the plan completely absorbed the projected growth in tax revenues, requiring sustained staffing expenditure reductions to balance the plan. The revised five-year plan was prepared against this backdrop. The major changes in the revised five year plan, when compared to the PICA approved plan, include differences in the City's actual FY04 financial results compared to what was included in the plan, as well as changes in the assumptions for FY05 and beyond. The major differences in the City's actual FY04 results include lower than expected FY04 receipts from other 142 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 governments. The City received $116 million less in revenue from other governments in FY04 than projected in the PICA approved plan. The majority of this revenue, $103 million, was revenue from the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania for Act 148 child welfare services, and county health services. This revenue was expected by the end of August, when the City closes its books on revenue, but not collected until September and October. There's also higher than expected FY04 tax revenue. The delays in reimbursements from the state were partially offset by strong receipts from the City's major taxes. 7 million more from tax revenues in '04 than budgeted in the PICA approved plan. Higher than expected FY04 operating deficit, and lower than expected FY04 year end General Fund balance. 4 million worse than projected in the PICA approved plan. Most of this negative variance is attributable to the lower than expected revenue from other governments which was offset by higher than expected tax revenue, as well as lower than projected obligations.
8 million, the first negative year-end fund balance since 1992. The major changes for FY05 through FY09 in the plan include lower than expected beginning fund balance. 8 million provides a lower starting point for FY05 and future years. Stronger tax base and projected tax collections. The strong FY04 performance of tax collections for every major tax provided a higher beginning tax base for FY05 and future years. The revised plan maintains prior 144 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 year growth rate assumptions which are applied to a higher tax base. 6 million over the life of the plan. The impact of state gaming legislation is also reflected in the legislation. As you know, the state passed gaming legislation in July, created two sources of positive revenue changes. The City's entitled to a local share of any gaming revenue generated within Philadelphia. The plan, therefore, includes $55 million in projected revenue from this source between FY05 and FY09. In addition, this legislation is projected to enable the City to be relieved of its current obligation to fund the Pennsylvania Convention Center debt service and operating deficits. This change, which is also projected to take effect in FY07, would save the City $42 million from FY07 to FY09. The pension fund loss amortization 145 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 is also changed. A change in state law allowed the City to reduce its General Fund pension payment by a total of $50 million over the life of the plan. The plan also reflects changes as a result of the labor contracts. The FOP, Lodge 5, was awarded a four-year contract in August through arbitration. District Council 47 approved a new four-year contract in October. And District Council 33 agreed to a new four-year contract this month. The cost of labor agreements increased projected expenditures by $331 million from FY05 through FY09, compared to what was in the previously approved PICA plan. Finally, the PICA approved plan assumed that the number of General Fund positions would be reduced by 1700 from FY04 to FY09, including a reduction of 787 positions from FY05 to '06. The revised budget -- The revised plan budgets an additional reduction of 300 146 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 positions in FY06, for a total of 1,087 positions from FY05 to FY06, and a total of 2,035 positions from FY04 to FY09. In order to reach these sharp reductions in time to achieve necessary budgetary savings and avoid projected deficits, the City anticipates that layoffs will be necessary in FY05, and we have begun that process. And pink slips will actually go out in January of next year. There are other smaller changes in revenue expenditures, some that are described in the body of the Resolution. I'd like to thank you for the opportunity to present the testimony in support of the amendments to the five year plan. And we ask that you approve this Resolution on the revised five-year financial plan.
And I'll be happy to answer any questions. 147 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04
I don't know why I'm going to ask this question, but I am. In the Recreation Department, I see that you are proposing to move the $10 million for the luxury box rentals from FY04 to FY05. What action has the City taken to collect these funds? And why would you think that we're going to collect it in '05?
The City is involved in litigation on that. And I'd like to get the Law Department to prepare a statement for you. I can have that for you tomorrow morning, so that I don't misstate.
That money has been owed us since what, the '90s? sometime in the '90s?
It's an old obligation. And rather than misstate where we are, because it is in litigation, I'll ask the City Solicitor to prepare a statement.
Okay. That's fine. Just hope we get it, and then we wouldn't have to worry about $10 million 148 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 to the library. What is the status of the reimbursement by the Police Department for patrolling the highways? What revenue are you projecting in the plan for this initiative?
Good evening, Council President. I'm Diane Reed, Budget Director. This is something that the state needs to move on before the City can proceed. There are several initiatives that we have that require prior state action.
I'm sorry. You're going to have to talk into the microphone. I just didn't hear your last sentence.
Sorry. This requires state action, and we are waiting on the state.
The state has determined not to give us cash. Instead, it's going to assume responsibility for 149 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 patrolling the highway. We're in ongoing conversations about when that's actually going to start. But we don't anticipate that there's going to be a cash --
Why are we carrying it as revenue in the revised plan?
We probably moved it into '06. Let me just check on that for you.
Let me check on that. If you just wait a couple minutes. Or I can get back to you tomorrow.
I'd appreciate it. We'll wait for your response.
Miss Wilkerson, when did you get this information that the state police were going to assume the patrolling of I-95, 76?
I think I had -- If 150 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 my information is the most current information, it was back in, I think, the summer. It was part of the negotiations we had with the state. I'll check to make sure my information is correct.
Because I just spoke with the Police Commissioner. And he said he spoke with the State Police Commissioner, and there was no commitment to do that. So I think we better check our facts here. I've heard, similarly, that they are not going to give us the money; that they are going to assume patrol. I'd prefer to get the money, and let us do it. But that's their call. Thank you. Thank you, Madam President.
You're welcome. Did you want to -- Do you have your schedule there, Miss Reed?
I do have my schedule here, but probably we need to clear that up 151 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 before we get back to you, if you could wait for another day.
Very well. You'll get back to us. As I understand it, the administration continues to carry the $30 million of asset sales for FY05. What assets have been sold? And how much have we generated? What do we expect?
We have a committee that's been dedicated to keeping track of where we are on the asset sale. And that committee meets weekly. We have identified $35 million of properties that could be sold in excess of what we might realize from the J.F.K. Plaza garage, which has a quite high valuation. We have appraisals for about 14 and a half million dollars of those properties. And one of them has been sold is in the process of being closed and sold. And it's worth about a million. I don't have the name of it with me right at the moment.
Thank you. 152 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 I received a letter yesterday from Fleet Management, and they enclose signatures of employees at the Office of Fleet Management, who are appealing to City Council for assistance. I don't know if other Council members received a copy of the letter. They go on to say that we need your help to maintain our employment with the City, and to stop the closing of our Center City repair facility at 26th and Master Street, and contracting out 500 vehicles for service, starting with City Council vehicles. Can you enlighten us as to what's going on with that issue?
Yes. I think that as part of the management initiatives for this fiscal year there has been a consolidation of fleet shops. There's several around the City. And this was a cost effectiveness initiative. 153 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04
A point of information. Madam President, I spoke with... I have some information that I can provide. The 26th and Master shop is not going to close. The only facility that's going to close in Fleet Management is what they call the car barn. It's an old facility over in the park that was never meant to be an auto repair facility. The 26th and Master shop is not closing.
Well, the administration is looking at consolidating Fleet Management operations. We also are taking a look at what savings might be realized from privatizing -- from sourcing out the maintenance of the fleet. There are other organizations in the City, the Housing Authority, for example, contracts out the maintenance of its fleet. 154 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 We're undertaking the analysis to determine whether or not there are potential savings for the City as a result of contracting out some of the maintenance.
It appears that the only department that you were proposing to cut beside fringes in FY05 is Public Property. Why are you reducing their budget? It's the only department that we save.
I'm sorry. I didn't hear the beginning of that question. Did you say fringe benefits?
Beside fringes in FY05. Do you have that, Charley? And it would appear that Public Property is the only department.
Good evening. Kay Van Dell. I'm the Deputy Budget Director. We had several initiatives in the '05 budget that have been delayed until fiscal year '06, our custodial consolidation and maintenance consolidation. And as part of the original budget, 155 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 we had reduced departments Class 100 personnel expenses, and put that money in Public Property's Class 200, assuming we would contract those services out. That's been delayed, and so we needed to take the money out of Public Property's Class 200 and restore it to the departments. It is not cut out of the Property's budget.
Looking at the figures, we really can't tell what class has been cut.
Thank you, Madam President. Anyone at the table. This question's for anyone at the table. Can you explain administration's rationale for increasing your principle based taxes by $256.8 million over the five year 156 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 plan?
The FY04 base revenues were actually stronger than expected by about $62 million, and this was straight across the various revenue sources.
Would this be a tacit acceptance of supply side tax cutting?
Okay. Well, I mean, it seems that -- I mean, for all the doom and gloom we heard about tax cutting, we are projecting now a $256 million increase over the five year plan. Doesn't seem to affect our tax revenue. As a matter of fact, it may have improved our tax --
I think when you look at where a lot of the strength is, it really is in the real estate transfer tax. And we think that that probably is more driven by what's going on with the interest rates. But, you know, I think all of us have embraced some level of tax reduction, 157 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 anticipating that there would be some upside to it. I think what the caution has been over time is, you know, not to spend it before it's realized. That's when you get into trouble. That's what, you know, the experts have told us. That's what, you know, the rating agencies have told us. That's the guidance we've gotten from almost every quarter. And so, you know, we're glad to see, you know, the revenue, but...
With all due respect, I mean from 2003... When was -- 2003 was the first year? 1999. From 1999 till now, we've spent $300 million of a surplus, $150 million in debt. I mean, we're kind of spending money before we realized it then, which has kind of put us in this position. The administration's now proposing to include approximately $55 million of gaming revenue in the plan. Can you explain how you arrived at that number? 158 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04
The state law that put gaming into place made special provisions for the City of Philadelphia, both for... out of general proceeds, and also some that was just dedicated especially for Philadelphia. And we have assumed conservative yield from that. We would be entitled, based on what the expected proceed level of gaming would be, that we would get $25 million a year starting in '07, but we are phasing that in at 12 and a half, 17 and a half, and then 25 in the fifth year.
Would it be fair to consider those funds speculative? I mean, is that a fair description of it?
Yes. So, we are not really trying to balance the budget on the basis of the gaming revenue, yes.
So speculative dollars, speculative gaming revenues of $55 million is okay to put in the five year plan, 159 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 but the $30 million of supply side revenues we talked about when we were trying to do the tax cuts, that was irresponsible.
I mean, it's the administration's position that we didn't put those in when we were simply talking about gaming. We waited until there was legislation. The legislation anticipates a time line for those facilities to be up and operating. Like Diane says, we've been conservative in estimating when we begin to realize that revenue. I think one of the problems with supply side is, you know, you don't know the companies that are going to come in. You don't know the kinds of jobs; and, you know, it's our sense that that type of revenue is too speculative.
Well, I mean, even if a lot of the $256 million is anchored in the real estate transfer tax, there's got to be some increases in the other taxes and 160 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 some of those taxes we cut or attempted to cut. We didn't think at the time that $30 million in supply side revenue was that outrageous. But $55 million in gaming revenues, when we haven't had even the Executive Director or legal counsel or any awards given to companies to do the gaming... We don't even know when they're going to be up and running. And $55 million seems to be obviously more speculative than 30. I just wanted to touch on what seems to be, you know, a reversal of position on speculating on revenues. I hope it's correct. That's all I have for now. Thank you. MR. McPHERSON: Councilman Clarke.
Thank you. Good evening. Couple of quick questions. Where are we at in asset sales? Have we pretty much sold everything that we could possibly 161 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 sell or do we project having the ability to do some additional asset sales any measurable way?
We could do a lot more asset sales. The Public Property Commissioner is looking at what would be a responsible plan for asset sales beyond what we would have budgeted for in FY05. And there are interested parties coming forward to acquire properties all the time, and this just needs to be planned out carefully. And that is in the very early stages right now.
What are we bound to, in terms of requirements of sales of property? Are we bound to the appraised value or do we have flexibility, depending on the end use?
We are using an appraised value, like you would do for any sale. In some cases a buyer has come forward, such as the School District, in which case we get a couple of appraisals and use that as the basis, to make sure that we're getting, you 162 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 know, a market rate for that. In other cases we have an appraisal, and then take it to the market and market it; PIDC is marketing properties for us such as the Mercantile Library right over on Chestnut Street, which has been closed since I've been in the City. And people are walking through that property right now. And we'll see what the market will bring.
I'm sorry. I didn't hear the last part; feedback. People are doing what?
They are walking through that property right now, and we'll see what the market will bring.
So if there's... Give you an example. If there's a parcel of land that someone has expressed an interest in, there's the potential of that company, for profit, to develop the site to a job producing, revenue producing entity, increasing the number of jobs from the current location, and the problem associated 163 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 with the, quote unquote, appraised, slash, market value will prohibit them from developing that site, do we have the wherewithal to take that into account, the upside of creating those additional jobs, additional revenue, or... I mean, is there a form -- I guess I'm just trying to say, is there a set form on asset sales or is it based on, you know, case by case.
I think that if, you know, if we wanted to negotiate a transaction, you know, we first convey it to PAID and do the negotiated sale through PAID. If we're just disposing of it out of the City, you know, it's got to be a bit out. We can sell to the highest bidder. As a policy matter, the administration has taken the position that we want the appraised value. You know, we're trying -- One of the things that came out of the Tax Reform Commission, one of the things that certainly came out of the last cycle of budget hearings is, we ought to take a look at asset sales, you know. 164 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 And so, we're selling assets. We are expecting fair market value on a case by case basis. If there's a compelling reason, you know, we're not going to turn away an opportunity to create jobs, but as a general proposition we're not discounting the properties. We're selling for fair market value.
Okay. On in your testimony, a couple of issues. One is a reference to a gun bill, 2.1, understanding that it requires state authorization. What is that? What does that reference?
Right. And the administration has a number of initiatives that it was moving, that would require state legislation. We had good results on a number of them. We will be increasing or submitting legislation to City Council to increase the 165 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 short dumping fees. We'll be introducing legislation in City Council to increase the overall general fees.
Yeah, stepping it up in, I think, $500 increments. So there are going to be a number of bills that we bring to City Council in order to increase fees. We have legislation that we're working on in Harrisburg that would increase substantially the gun registration fees. That was not enacted by the legislature before it recessed, but we're still working on that.
I can get you an update or a copy of the legislation that we're working on.
All right. Well, can you, through the Chair, get... And 166 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 you said -- you indicated you're going to be submitting legislation. I didn't know, you know, if you were going to be submitting it in dribs and drabs. But you're currently lobbying efforts in the state to increase various fees. It would be helpful if we understood what those were.
I'll get you a copy of what it is, you know, that we've accomplished and what's still on the ledger for us in the coming session.
Okay. Last question, same page. Increase in NTI debt service to close out FY05 programming. What is that?
We had been funding, I think, the NTI program debt service at $18 million a year. We're looking to do $19 million in debt service for the next traunch that we put out. And so that would be a $1 million annual increase in the amount of debt service, towards the last --
Why are we doing 167 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 that?
We've been bringing to City Council annual budgets for NTI. We didn't issue all the bonds initially. We didn't issue the whole $275 million initially. We just draw down the money as we need it. And so, this is the last bond issue that will roll out in support of the NTI program that's presented to Council that was presented to Council -- It was presented to Council last June. The bonds we're getting ready to issue will fund those activities and activities in '05.
So, is there an increase in our ability to finance bonds, based on our delay? We had this done the entire two... whatever... 250, 290.
We didn't want to issue the debt before we had the ability to spend the proceeds. And that's why we did it in 168 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 two traunches.
Some of the bonds have a three-year spend-down requirement. And if you recall, the demolition part of the program had a slow start because we weren't sure, you know, what the roll-out was going to be on that. You know, we didn't go at it at the same time.
Are you suggesting that we weren't able to spend money?
No. We've caught up, and we're actually spending those dollars more aggressively than we had projected initially when the program was first brought to City Council. So, you know, we've recovered from what had been a slow start. But, you know, because there was -- you had to have the money, the tax exempt dollars, spent within a three-year window, and you didn't want to have the money out there, and you didn't want to be paying debt service on the, you know, dollars you weren't using, we staged it. 169 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04
And when you ask if we had done it then, would we have been able to raise more money than going to market now, I'll just track the interest rates...
The interest rates have gone up a little bit, but not substantially. So I don't think there would be a material difference. I could get you that number, though, if that would be helpful.
One last question, somewhat related to NTI. My understanding is that we are closely approaching the termination of bond proceeds to demolish buildings in the City of Philadelphia. And to a large degree I understand we're using basically the L & I's budget to pay the debt service. What are we going to 170 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 do after we run out of money?
We began programming demolition dollars again in FY06. I think we have $8 million in FY06 and years moving forward.
That's right, out of General Funds revenue, as opposed to bond proceeds. You know, we had initially anticipated that we would have more bond proceeds for demolition. You know, the collective decision was made to reprogram some of the money that initially had been targeted for demolition, and to move it into acquisition and some home improvement line items in the NTI program. And so, you know, while we... So probably earlier than we had anticipated initially, we're having to go back to the General Fund to support NTI, to support demolition. I think, you know, we've been 171 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 successful in moving through some of the backlog. You know, it's a lot like tree trimming. You know, we were able to work through a lot of the backlog, but we are back into the General Fund beginning in FY06.
Thank you, Madam President. Good evening. On the discussion of asset sales, I want to raise one of my new favorite topics, our lease with SEPTA. Has the administration began to seriously look at the fact that lease will expire next year?
We're looking at that. There are a whole host of SEPTA issues, you know, that are on the table, but we're looking at the lease that expires in December of '05.
But without going too heavily into it, everything is, in fact, 172 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 on the table as of December 2005. And there are both franchising rights and infrastructure that we will take ownership of. To go through the deal that was transacted back in '68, properties were acquired from Philadelphia Transportation Company. There was then a bond sale to pay for that. Those properties were assigned to either SEPTA and/or the City. We paid rent to each other, as we leased those properties from each other. The City leased SEPTA's properties. SEPTA leased the City's properties. At the end of the lease we actually owned the Broad Street Subway, half of the el, significant infrastructure that essentially could be bought from us, if SEPTA chose to or if someone else chose to. But that's probably not even the greatest benefit we can reap from it economically. The franchising rights are just a 173 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 tremendous opportunity, particularly if those franchising rights in part or as a whole are not given to a quasi-public entity.
I think this last several weeks has made the significance of SEPTA front and center for everybody. And, you know, we have to take a look at all the potential opportunities out there. The Mayor has raised a lot of concerns. You know, we pay a disproportionate share of the local share in support of SEPTA, that there is no one in control of SEPTA. The governments are so dispersed, that there's -- you know, in these times of crisis, there's nobody to really go to. Everybody can kind of punt and look the other way. But when you look at the potential ramifications for the local economy, regional economy --
I just want to underscore there's a multitude of opportunities there, that as of next year we actually do not have to look at SEPTA as the 174 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 entity. It was an entity that was created when PTC was going out of business 37 years ago. There in fact -- 36 years ago. There, in fact, was only one member of this Council who was actually here then. Councilman Cohen, I believe, was a freshman.
We get to blame this on Councilman Cohen. Councilman, they're blaming SEPTA on you now.
He actually voted for the lease agreement which was a very bad lease agreement, but he voted for the lease agreement. But what I'm saying is that it's something that was done so long ago, that -- and I think a lot of people don't understand how SEPTA is structured. In fact, we did own that infrastructure, that it's not just a matter of whether we renegotiate, it's not just a matter of whether we try to bring another system in, but even pieces of the system, pieces of the franchise rights, pieces of the 175 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 infrastructure that we can possibly sell, lease are tremendous opportunities, in terms of turning fiscal problems of the City around.
I look forward to following up with you on that because, you know, it is critical to the City and the region. One of the things that we always promote with the City is the transportation infrastructure we have. And we can probably make better use of the resources that we do have.
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman Cohen.
Thank you, Madam President. Let me give you something more to blame on me. (Laughter.)
In the Daily News editorial which was highly critical of my 176 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 position on the matters before City Council, particularly with what they call ethics, they pointed out one point that I agree with. And that is that a clean city, a city can be more economical than a City that is not clean because it can be more efficient. Now, I'm going to direct this to you, Miss Reed, since you're a newcomer to City Council. Do you think that campaign contributions have something to do with the cost of City contracts? What do you think -- You were with the Pennsylvania League of Cities for a long time. What do you think would happen to the cost of government of Philadelphia if there were a rule adopted that there were to be no 19 campaign contributions at all? Let's say that. Do you think that would have impacted at all on the cost of doing business or do you believe it's a fiction of mine and perhaps of other people that businesses consider campaign contributions as 177 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 investments, and therefore in the contract offers they make to cities, they're making them with the hope of recovering at least the amount they give and probably in multiples of ten times or a hundred times more? Which policy do you think exists correctly? And I raise it for the simple reason it seemed to me that the quickest, fastest way to raise money for the City of Philadelphia -- and I regard saving a dollar as the same as increased revenue, because at the end of the day you have a dollar more than you would have had otherwise. But it would seem to me we could enormously decrease the cost of government by eliminating campaign contributions, even if the businesses only recovered one-fold, if they only recovered the actual investment. In the Mayoral race it was indicated that businesses may have contributed as much as seven or eight or nine million dollars in one year. And if they recovered four-fold or five-fold, that was an awful lot of money. But even if they only recovered a hundred 178 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 percent of it, that was seven or eight million. What do you think the impact would be on City finances, if the Mayor announced tomorrow that there would be no more contributions to the City, to any City officer?
Well, Councilman, you're right. I am new. And we have not -- I have not looked at that kind of an analysis since I've been here. We also did not look at that kind of an analysis the whole time I was at PEL. I think that's a very complex thing to take a look at. As someone who has come from a consulting firm, I would say that when you're doing a proposal, you do it on the basis of how much time you think it's going to take, even with the cost of your people is. And to me, there's no relationship. But you've asked a new person. So, this would have to be examined. And I really can't tell you anything more than that about 179 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 that concept.
Is there any other member of the panel appearing today that would have an answer? Because it seems to me that would be an easy solution, not to all of the City's problems, but it would certainly make the cost of government in Philadelphia much less costly. Joyce, do you or the acting Finance Director have an opinion?
Well, my opinion would echo what Miss Reed said. I think it would -- It's complex, and we would have to take a look at it. I wouldn't want to venture a guess one way or the other.
All right. Well, may I ask that you all think about that and maybe be ready the next time you appear before Council to answer that question? Because it seems to me to be unrealistic in the business world to expect businesses to put money in places and not seek to recover them. 180 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 I have difficulty in accepting that notion, where, for example, there was a businessman from Germantown that contributed $165,000 to the Mayoral campaign three weeks before the election, and immediately thereafter renewed his strong request for City benefits to be awarded him in the Rittenhouse Square, with respect to his efforts to create a ten-story theater complex. And to me, businessmen are investors. They invest in their business. But they've got to get their costs back, at least, and usually like to maximize their investment. So that oftentimes I think the return is much more than simply a return of the investment. I think it may increase dramatically. So I'd be very much appreciative of your answers, because until I get something very solid showing no relationship, it will be my opinion that the quickest fastest way to cut heavy expenses off of the City is to 181 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 announce that the climate of pay to play no 3 long exists. No sense paying because you're not going to be able to play, except by competitive bidding or something like that, and that you're going to play whether you've contributed or not, and you'll have the Mayor's strong statement against contributions. I'll appreciate your analyses and how that fits. Thank you, Madam President.
You're welcome. The Chair recognizes Councilman Kenney.
Thank you, Madam President. In the narrative, the administration mentions lower receipts from other governments in FY04 amounted to $116 million, of which $90 million was in Act 148. One would then expect to see a significant reduction in FY06 in Act 148 as a result of the one-time bubble of the $90 182 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 million. Yet there is no drop-off in the original FY06 estimate, in this revised version. Can you explain why? And can you also elaborate as to why the FY05 amount is only being increased by 21.5 million for Act 148, and not the $90 million you mentioned in the narrative? There seems to be some money floating around in there somewhere from the '04 drop-off, to the '05 increase, to the '06 estimate that stays the same regardless of the additional money.
Every year the Department of Human Services interacts with the state on what services will be performed, and the level of funding is responsive to the services that are going to be provided. And the way the numbers flow from '04 to '05 has to do with accounting rules of when the proceeds... Or I shouldn't call them proceeds. The...
Reimbursements were received in relation to when our cut-off date 183 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 had to be for counting revenue from one year to the next. But really, it isn't a change in the funding level. It really has to do with the recognize of revenue.
But there was a change in the funding level. There was '04's funding level was lower. '05's is higher. '06's is the same. Wouldn't there be some reflection in each of the years, out years, from the '04, '09 plan, that would indicate that there has been that either reduction or increase? Why would '06 be the same? Wouldn't it reflect some action, either in lowering of receipts or an increase? I don't know what accounting rule would require you to put down the wrong number.
The bump-up that we recognized in '05 is really what didn't get counted in '04.
And then we are assuming 184 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 a flat level, until we know -- in the future years, until we know what the demand level is going to be, and that it will be adjusted each year if we know what the service level is going to be.
Right. We got the $90 million bubble. Got that little bubble. Why are we only reflecting $21.5 or $21.7 million of that in the '06 line? I mean, wouldn't you -- If you got the money, you don't get it back. If you had the money, you're going to reflect what the actual number is. Why the difference? Why the $68 million difference in not reflecting it? It's not reflected in '06. It's only reflected $21.5 or $21.7 million worth. You didn't bump it up to the number --
Well, it's -- To the '05 number is the 270 plus the carryover. And then it's -- You know, the number is really kind of constant. If you look at the 240, the 210 185 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 number, that's kind of -- 210 to 270 is kind of the real progression there, and the rest of it is just what year it got recognized in.
The Finance Director says we'll take a look at it, and we'll get back to you.
Okay. And hopefully PICA will, too. This is a pet peeve of mine, and I'm going to beat this dead horse again. We're looking at asset sales, we're looking at layoffs, we're looking at service reductions, we're looking at not plowing snow when it's below four inches, we're looking at firehouse cuts, we're looking at police layoffs possibly, we're looking at recreation and library hours shortened. And I know it's not a lot of money, but we have some assets that we don't necessarily need to sell, but we could lease. And we have what are known as City suites at the Lincoln Financial Center, at Citizens 186 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 Bank Park, at Wachovia Center, and at the Spectrum. Now I know it's nice when we have a lot of money and we're sitting on a $300 million surplus, to be able to have that luxury. But when we have the ability to take very highly sought after amenities, and be able to take those which we own or we at least have control over, without having to pay any debt service on -- so all the money that we make as a result of leasing out those facilities is profitable, profit on the food, profit on the rental, profit on the alcohol, and profit on the money it takes to rent the facility. It is estimated, I think conservatively, that considering the success of the Eagles, the success -- well, partial success of the Phillies, but the new ballpark that's attractive, the Wachovia Center which could be rented out for Sixers, special events, Flyers when they ever come back or if the NHL ever plays again, concerts. 187 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 There are an innumerable number of dates that those facilities could be used for, and conservatively estimated at about $2 million a year could be generated, and that $2 million is an increasing figure, considering the way in which ticket prices and the cost of sporting events increase. It just befuddles me to think that we're not even considering taking that kind of possible interest that companies might have. And you know what? The City could -- You know, the City could use that money right now. Maybe I can't afford to have a luxury suite myself as a company. I'd like to rent it out for my customers or for my employers, and to take those facilities for the all those very attractive Eagles games, playoffs; you know, NFC championship game possibly, and to rent those facilities out like any other of those companies, rent it out, and those four facilities, and to make $2 million a year or more, I don't understand what why we're not 188 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 looking at it, when we're looking at selling our assets, and when we are looking at laying off people. I could tell you how much $2 million or $3 million a year could save in firefighter layoff or police layoff or Public Property Department layoffs, while we're using those facilities to entertain and to be like, you know, big deals in a City that's broke. I don't understand it. I wish you would look at it again. I know what the answer is going to be, but I think it's unconscionable for City officials or for people who are raising funds for campaigns or for anyone to be able to take what's known as a City suite, which is the City's asset, use it for personal use, and not be able to turn it around to create revenue in a City that's sorely in need of revenue. So I will make the dead beaten horse request one more time, to please look at the possibility of doing that. I would very much appreciate it. 189 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04
I don't know whether... I know Councilman O'Neill's light was on earlier. I don't know whether he wants to be recognized. While he's concluding his conversation, I'd just like to ask a question. Self insurance on health medical benefits, $61 million over the life of the plan. Could you explain what this initiative is, and how you arrived at the figure of $61 million?
The initiative is that on the City sponsored or the City plan, the non-union, that the City would self insure their medical claims, as opposed to currently we use Blue Cross Blue Shield Insurance. That would save the $61 million.
How about with utilization, if utilization should rise? Wouldn't that be more costly.
It would -- If -- 190 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04
Aren't we paying more now? Because I thought the utilization was such that that's what caused our costs to rise.
The cost would rise. What you save is the insurance. You would have to manage the claims, without a doubt. You would have... What you save is the profit that the insurance company adds on to the top of the claim.
Now, I think that at a future date we have to talk about this because I don't know who would determine what you would be eligible for. Who determines that? Joyce, I think you've been looking into it, haven't you?
It would be the third party administrator. You would have -- We would always have somebody that... Because we're not -- we're not doctors. So, we would have someone, a third party administrator, that would handle that.
I think 191 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 this is something that we should really be discussing because I don't think -- I don't understand it fully. And I don't know that any of my colleagues do. And I think it's a very, very important issue.
The revised five-year plan, is there anything in it that requires transfer ordinance to be approved by City Council, from the approved plan to the revised plan?
Yes. We have, for one thing, increased revenue that we need to appropriate. So, just on the basis of the appropriations, yes.
Well, there are going to need to be authorizations for expenditures to expend... I mean, really the cost of the contract in arbitration.
Have those Ordinances been prepared? 192 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04
No. We were expecting that these would be rolled into the mid year transfer ordinance, as has always been in the past.
PICA doesn't require any approvals of those things before they pass the plan, since it presumes the passage of an ordinance?
Okay. All right. Thank you. So we won't get them for quite a while.
I'm being told by Mr. McPherson that he feels very strongly that this is a variance. Can we get some opinion from the Law Department if in fact it is?
We'll get an opinion from the Law Department stating the position on that issue. 193 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04
Thank you. Are there any other questions from members of the Committee? (No response.)
Seeing none -- Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't see your light on. The Chair recognizes Councilman Ramos.
Thank you, Madam President. It's not on the revised plan, but on the Central Library expansion, Miss Wilkerson, did the administration consider other ways of getting the $30 million that is being requested through issuance of bonds, that you look at other places where you might have $30 million stashed?
The administration proposed previously a different financing model that was, you know, rejected. It was roundly rejected. But we did not look at, I believe, funding it out of PICA dollars. No, we didn't.
Would you look at 194 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 that now? I know, not to undermine the good director here, but is that something that you would realistically take a look at and possibly, you know, decide not to float this bond?
What might be helpful is if we get a clarification on the uses of those PICA dollars. They're not just capital dollars sitting out there. There are special constraints on them. We can get you something from bond counsel or the Law Department that explains the use of those dollars.
Did you want to also ask about the $24 million in the capital projects fund?
We'll get an explanation of those dollars and their availability for use. 195 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04
Thank you. Any other questions from members of the Committee? (No response.)
Seeing none, this will conclude our public hearing. m. - - - BILL 041039 - An Ordinance authorizing the Commissioner of Public Property, on behalf of the City of Philadelphia, acquire by purchase, condemnation, or other means the properties located at 314 North 19th Street, 316 North 19th Street, 1932 and 1934 Callowhill Street, 1936-1942 Callowhill Street, 1937 Carlton Street, and 1939-1945 Carlton Street in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, under certain terms and conditions. BILL 041040 - An Ordinance authorizing the revision of lines and grades on a portion of City Plan No. 63 by striking from the City Plan and vacating Carlton Street from Twentieth Street eastwardly approximately 98'4" to a dead end and by placing on the City Plan a certain right of way for public utility purposes, all under certain terms and conditions. 2670 197 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 portion of such land and certain improvements to be renovated and constructed thereon, including renovations to the existing Central Library of the Free Library of Philadelphia, a library facility expanding the current Central Library and accessory and related amenities, improvements and infrastructure ("Central Library Project") and the payment of certain costs for such library facilities and further authorizing said officers to enter into a Lease-back/Lease Agreement (the "Library Leaseback") between PAID and the City providing for the sub-subleasing of said land as improved back from the City to PAID; covenanting to be bound by the terms of the aforementioned Library Ground Lease, Library Prime Lease and Library Leaseback; and requesting PAID to finance a portion of the costs of the acquisition of such land in connection with the Central Library Project, demolition, site preparation, improvements and infrastructure in connection therewith and any and all other costs incurred in connection with the Central Library Project, and the issuance of bonds by PAID to provide such financing, imposing a limitation on the aggregate amount of bonds which are to be issued by PAID to finance or refinance the project; covenanting to make appropriations in each of the City's fiscal years to provide for rental payments due under the Library Prime Lease; authorizing the Director of Finance and other officials of the City to take all actions necessary to accomplish the intent and purpose of this Ordinance and the Library Ground Lease, Library Prime Lease, Library Leaseback and a Library Lease and Development Agreement between the Free Library of Philadelphia Foundation Inc. and PAID containing the terms and conditions substantially as approved herein; and authorizing approval of all of the terms of the aforementioned Leases and other documents and amendments thereto by the Director of Finance and/or the City Solicitor. RESOLUTION 041046 - Resolution approving a Revised Five Year Financial Plan for the City of Philadelphia covering Fiscal Years 2005 through 2009. 198 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 PRESENT: COUNCIL PRESIDENT ANNA C. VERNA COUNCILWOMAN JANNIE L. BLACKWELL COUNCILWOMAN BLONDELL REYNOLDS BROWN COUNCILMAN DARRELL L. CLARKE COUNCILMAN DAVID COHEN COUNCILMAN FRANK DI CICCO COUNCILMAN W. WILSON GOODE, JR. COUNCILMAN JAMES F. KENNEY COUNCILMAN MICHAEL A. NUTTER COUNCILMAN BRIAN J. O'NEILL COUNCILMAN JUAN F. RAMOS COUNCILMAN FRANK RIZZO 199 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 - - - P R O C E E D I N G S - - -
We will now go into our public meeting. The Chair recognizes Councilman Clarke regarding Bill Number 041039.
Thank you, Madam President. Madam President, I make a motion that Bill Number 041039 be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation; request for rules suspension as to allow reading at the next session of Council. UNIDENTIFIED COUNCIL MEMBER: Second.
It has been moved and properly seconded that Bill 20 Number 041039 be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation; also a recommendation that the rules of Council be suspended so as to permit first reading at our next Council session. All in favor will indicate by saying 200 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 aye. (Chorus of "ayes.")
Again the Chair recognizes Councilman Clarke, regarding Bill Number 041040.
Thank you, Madam President. Move that Bill Number 041040 be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation and request for rule suspension as to allow reading at the next session of Council. UNIDENTIFIED COUNCIL MEMBER: Second.
it has been moved and properly seconded that the Bill Number 041040 be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation; also a recommendation that the rules of 201 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 Council be suspended so as to permit first reading at our next Council session. All in favor will indicate by saying aye. (Chorus of "ayes.")
The ayes have it, and the motion carries. The Chair recognizes Councilman Clarke, regarding Bill Number 041041.
Madam President, I believe there is an amendment to the Bill.
I'd like to make a motion on the amendment to Bill Number 041041 that has been previously circulated. 202 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 It's referenced as Exhibit D. UNIDENTIFIED COUNCIL PERSON: Second.
It has been moved and seconded that the amendment be approved. All in favor will say aye. (Chorus of "ayes.")
Those who are not in favor please indicate so. (No response.)
The amendment is approved. Again the Chair recognizes Councilman Clarke.
Madam President, prior to me making the motion, I just want to indicate for the record that there have been several concerns raised by some of the members about certain aspects of the financing of this particular program, and parking and other ancillary issues. So for that, I'm asking that this Bill be reported out of Committee. But it is 203 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04 our hope that some of those answers can be resolved prior to the final passage of the Bill.
And we could always hold it on the second reading and final passage, until such time as you're satisfied with the parking issue, and other Council members are satisfied regarding alternatives to the funding for the project.
With that in mind, Madam President, I'd like to make a motion that Bill Number 041041 as amended be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation; request for suspension of the rules as to allow reading at the next session. UNIDENTIFIED COUNCIL MEMBER: Second. 204 041039-041040-041041-041046, Whole, 12/8/04
It has been moved and properly seconded that Bill 4 Number 041041 as amended the be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation; also a recommendation that the rules of Council be suspended so as to permit first reading at our next Council session. All in favor will indicate by saying aye. (Chorus of "ayes.")
The ayes have it; the motion carries; and this concludes our public meeting. I thank you all very much. (Public meeting concluded at 7:50 p.m.) 205 CERTIFICATE I HEREBY CERTIFY that the proceedings and evidence are contained fully and accurately in the stenographic notes taken by me upon the public hearing and public meeting of The Philadelphia City Council, taken on December 8, 2004, and that this is a true and correct transcript of same. _____________________________ DAVID A. DEIK, RPR and Commissioner of Deeds (The foregoing certification of this transcript does not apply to any reproduction of the same by any means, unless under the direct control and/or supervision of the certifying reporter.)