Anyone else on the committee have any questions? Councilwoman?
Always when there is interest or a movement to amend bills that deal with impacting a particular department's budget, the question is what impact will this have on the budget, the revenue that's typically generated from the licensing fees. So 57 11/15/00 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - BILL 000545 could any one of you speak to whether or not this is revenue-neutral?
It's revenue-neutral, it's negligible. It will not impact upon our budget significantly.
Same applies to the Department of Public Health, Councilwoman. Those fees do not appear in the Health Department's budget.
Any other committee members have any questions? Any other Councilmembers? (No questions.)
Seeing none, anyone else want to testify on these bills? (Witnesses come forward.)
We will start on the right-hand side. You go first, I guess, right? State your name for the record and spell it. 58 11/15/00 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - BILL 000545
Good morning. My name is Rebecca Gonzales, and I work for the Philadelphia Early Childhood Collaborative. We offer training resources and support to child care providers throughout the City. I'm the parent of two children in child care in Philadelphia and I'm deeply concerned about the quality of child care available in my neighborhood, let alone the City. Currently, family child care providers must pay a $100 in annual city fees, a $50 family day care license and $50 for the food service and preparation license. Although this may not seem like much to many people, it is a significant drain on the provider whose income does not generally exceed the federal poverty line. Yes, family child care is a small business, but unlike other small businesses, family child care is unique in that there's no room for expansion. A family child care provider's income is limited by the number of children they can care for and by the fees parents are able to pay. An overwhelming number of Philadelphia family child care providers are 59 11/15/00 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - BILL 000545 located in disadvantaged neighborhoods. This further serves to limit their income potential. Also, unlike other small businesses, family child care is an essential service for parents who work and need flexible affordable care in their own neighborhoods. High fees directly affect the availability of quality child care programs in Philadelphia neighborhoods. These fees are a significant barrier to providers seeking to acquire and maintain regulated status. These fees can impose such a financial burden on providers that many choose to operate illegally or underground to avoid paying these fees. Keeping providers regulated is the most immediate way to ensure quality care. Providers who are able to maintain their regulated status benefit from annual fire safety and health inspections by the City. These providers are also eligible to participate in the child and adult care food program which reimburses them for nutritious meals served to children as well as training and resource opportunities offered to them through 60 11/15/00 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - BILL 000545 organizations such as the Philadelphia early childhood collaborative. Underground providers cannot access these important services that help to increase the supply of safe quality child care. Philadelphia annual fees to family child care providers are the highest found in the country. In a 1995 study conducted by the Neighborhood Child Care Resource Program, a partner side of the Philadelphia Early Childhood Collaborative, it was shown that in six cities of comparable size to Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Baltimore, Washington, DC, and Newark, New Jersey and New York City and Hartford, Connecticut, none charged fees as high as those in Philadelphia. In fact, on average, fees equaled much less than half of what Philadelphia currently charges. As a follow-up to that study, Pittsburgh, Washington, DC; Newark, New Jersey; Hartford Connecticut; Boston, Massachusetts; and Chicago, Illinois were recently contacted. Annual fees to family child care providers in each of these cities is zero. What kind of a message is this sending to our providers. Is the quality care of 61 11/15/00 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - BILL 000545 Philadelphia children not as highly regarded as the care of children in these other cities? Anything the City can do to encourage providers to stay regulated is an important step for Philadelphia's children. Regulated providers obtain child abuse and criminal background checks, fire safety and health inspections, ongoing training and various resources. These are all good things for children and families. I urge you to support Bill No. 000545 to reduce for annual food service and preparation license fee for home-based providers in our mutual goal to provide quality child care services to the children and families of Philadelphia. Thank you.
Okay. Good morning. My name is Debra Butler and I work for the Delaware Valley Association for the Education of Young Children. My job as organizer for the Worthy Wage Campaign and the Quality Improvement Initiative brings me to close contact with family child care providers in North Philadelphia. I 62 11/15/00 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - BILL 000545 work very closely with child care providers who have a variety of needs that need to be fulfilled. One of them to is to see themselves as business people who offer a viable service to families in their community. The care they provide is convenient for the parents who utilize their services and offers the parents a smaller child care setting for the children. These providers are committed to providing quality care that nurtures the child's total development. The elimination or decrease in these fees for family and group child care providers would recognize their contribution to their community and that the local government understands the value of the service they bring to families in the City of Philadelphia. I am here in support of City Council Bill 000545 because I understand that the fees charged to family and group child care providers serve as real barrier to those in our city who would like to become part of the regulated system. According to a 1997 survey conducted by the Delaware Valley Association for the 63 11/15/00 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - BILL 000545 Education of Young Children, the average annual earnings for a family child care provider is $9,337. Considering that most of these women work a 60-hour week, their hourly wage translates to less than $3 an hour. And I brought copies of the survey for you today. This bill is an important step in helping business climate in Philadelphia that promotes and encourages regulated child care. I urge you to support it. Thank you.
Good morning. My name is Lola Rooney and I'm the Senior Program Director for the YMCA of Philadelphia Family Child Care Network and in past life was a 25-year veteran of the Philadelphia School System so I understand the impact and the effect of a child's environment on whom that child becomes later on in life. Nine years ago the YMCA in Philadelphia realized that even though they were the largest not-for-profit provider of child care services in the City of Philadelphia, there were 64 11/15/00 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - BILL 000545 still many parents and homes and families within our own services areas that were not making use of our child care because they could not afford it. So in order to meet needs, particular for infant and toddler care, the YMCA looked at doing a family child care network which consists of family day care homes which are totally there to supply the needs of low-income working families and to meet the growing need of family child care in the City of Philadelphia. Because of our Christian principles an values, the YMCA looks at a family child care network in a sense as a ministry where we are creating a safe nurturing environment that supports the development of children and it also supports the needs of parents who may need to work until 9 o'clock at night or until 6 o'clock the next morning. Just to bring out a point, the average family day care provider starts their work day at 6:30 a.m. in the morning and it may not ends until 6 o'clock at night. And during that time, there are many jobs that they fulfill which they are not paid for. Just a few, they 65 11/15/00 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - BILL 000545 become a janitor, a dishwasher, a storyteller, PE teacher, an activity director, a zoo keeper, they can become a therapist, an entertainer, a nurse, a traffic controller, a technician, a diagnician, a beautician, a fire marshal, an analyst, a dentist, a scientist. There are many jobs that they are fulfilling which they do not pay for because on the average a family day care provider who is taking care of an infant or toddler is paid at a rate of $25 a day for 11 and a half hours of work which breaks down to $2.17 an hour. At this rate of pay, you cannot tell me that a family day care home service is not indeed a ministry. Ministries such as this do need our support, and what better way to give them the support they need and to improve the quality and care of our children than by making a change in the fees. In closing, I realize that there are many City businesses that may cry foul or unfair to such a change. However, just to must point out a few things, my husband is a retired licensed contractor. He paid for a license to do 66 11/15/00 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - BILL 000545 business in the City of Philadelphia, but no one limited the number of homes he remodeled the bathrooms he could install, or the decks or the kitchen that he could renovate. My nephew paid for license to own a car repair shop. The number of cars that he has repaired over the years has allowed him to become one of the ten businesses in the city that has the new emission system. My niece has a beautician license. When I talked with her, what type of limitations are placed upon you, and depending on the number of clients she chooses to serve and the number of styles they want, her take-home pay for week can be anywhere from 750 to $1,000 for a week. And last but not least, I have a nephew who is working -- a godson who is working in a barber shop in the midst of the University of Pennsylvania campus. At any given time within a two-hour period, all 15 seats in that shop is occupied. These persons have licenses in the City of Philadelphia and there are no limitations placed upon them by the number of people they can 67 11/15/00 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - BILL 000545 serve or the amount of money they can make. For each of these, there are no limitations placed. I cannot say the same for family day care providers. Thank you.
Good morning, Chairman Mariano and members of the Committee on Licenses and Inspections. I am Gerri Swift, President of the Women'S Business Development Center located here in Philadelphia. I want to thank you very much for this opportunity to testify in support of Bill 000545. I commend Councilwoman Blondell Reynolds Brown and her cosponsors for introducing this bill, as well as the Chair and committee for holding these hearings today. The Women's Business Development Center helps women who their own businesses or who are thinking about starting their own businesses. We provide technical assistance, training, counseling, access to capital to primarily low- and moderate-income women. However, since July of 1998, we have also 68 11/15/00 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - BILL 000545 administered the City of Philadelphia's child care provider program in cooperation with six nonprofit child care agencies and City departments involved with child care licensing and regulations. Because of our involvement in this program, we have seen firsthand how needed and invaluable a service family child care is for thousands of families in Philadelphia. We support this bill for many reasons, but in the interest of brevity I will touch on only a few. First, by easing the economic burdens on those who provide this type of child care as well as those who are thinking about it, this Council will be demonstrating its support for an activity that is essential for so many families in this city. Family child care can offer a more relaxed home-like style of care than a day care center with a more flexible and a less formal relationship with parents. Yet family child care providers are much more than just baby sitters. They provide all the safety, warmth, and learning opportunities of centers, but do so in a home environment. 69 11/15/00 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - BILL 000545 Second, lowering the cost of providing family child care will reduce the business start-up costs and will help to increase the number of regular providers of this service. Lowering the cost of doing business provides a powerful incentive for unregulated providers to begin to comply with the regulatory process. That in turn will mean safer facilities and services as well as more peace of minds for parents. Third, Council will be promoting jobs in this City. As part of our oversight responsibilities, my agency conducted economic impact study of the City's child care program. The data that we collected clearly demonstrated that family child care generates significant revenue and jobs in Philadelphia. Specifically, 204 providers who participated in the City's program reported creating 228 full-time and 53 part-time jobs and provided services to over a thousand children. We estimate that this generated $1.7 million in the City's economy in fiscal years 1998 and 1999. Please note that these jobs and the 1.7 million in revenue arose 70 11/15/00 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - BILL 000545 solely out of participants in the City's child care program who respond to our survey. The figures are obviously much higher for all providers in the City. Fourth, family child care makes it possible for thousands of women with no backup child care options to enter the job force. This also serves to boost the local economy in Philadelphia, particularly in an area of job scarcity in many sectors. For all of those reasons, I urge this committee's approval for Bill 000545 as well as adoption by the entire Council. And again, thank you for the opportunity to testify on this bill. And I'll be happy to answer any questions that you may have.
Thank you, ma'am. We'll get you all and ask you all questions when your done.
Good morning, Councilman Mariano and other members of the committee. Thank you for the opportunity to speak today. My name is Angela Logan and I'm the Assistant Childhood Director for Philadelphia Citizens for 71 11/15/00 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - BILL 000545 Children and Youth, the advocacy partner for the Child Care Matters Early Childhood Initiative. I am here today to urge you to support Bill No. 5 000545. This bill would affect over 700 family child care programs and about 90 group child care programs which together enroll about 4,000 children in the City. These community-based programs offer a smaller setting for children that are often preferred by many parents because of convenience and ease of accommodation for non-traditional hours. They afford families reliable and consistent care so parent can work with peace of mind that their children are in a legally operating regulated child care program. In Philadelphia, start-up and licensing fees for family child care are some of the highest in the country. Regulated child care providers operate according to local laws and regulations and they pay taxes. Reducing the fee would you an incentive for potential child care providers to enter the field, and in doing so, add increased revenues to the local economy. 72 11/15/00 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - BILL 000545 The cost of the annual fee is burdensome to child care providers. A study by the Delaware Association for the Education of Young Children found that on average family child care providers earned an annual net income of $9,337. The fee for a food preparation license is high compared to the relative income an resource of home-based providers. On average, a child care provider would have to work two full days free in order to pay for this fee. Lowering the fees would help stabilize these programs. Any progress City Council can make in reducing the cost of doing business is important. We know that much of the family child care in the City is provided informally without the benefit of fire, environmental, or basic health and safety standards and without criminal or child abuse clearance for caregivers. In many cases, the mounting costs to comply with local zoning laws can be barrier to starting and continuing as a business. This bill will be a great start in reducing City barriers for providers to become regulated. We estimate that there are about 10 73 11/15/00 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - BILL 000545 to 20 unregulated providers for every 1 registered child care provider. Making it easier for providers to become regulated would ultimately bring in additional revenue through City wage tax for both providers an parents who are able to work because they have reliable child care. As child advocates, we are pleased that child safety will still be protected through the inspections while providers are given incentives to remain in the regulated system. Eliminating this fee a win-win situation for providers, for the City, and for the community. We urge you to support Bill 000545. Thank you.
Thank you. Let me throw this question out to whoever wants to answer it. My main concern is the poor woman that has two, three kids and it's a choice between working and not making a lot of money or staying home and watching their kids. Maybe she decides, you know, she's off of welfare and she's going to go to work but this child care thing a big expense. Having been through it 74 11/15/00 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - BILL 000545 myself, I know it's a big expense. So you dump it on one of these unregulated ones. Do you really think this will help them come above ground become legitimate where they can be regulated by the City and the State? Whoever wants to answer that. Go ahead, Ma'am.
Councilman, I would like to answer that in reference to what we have seen with the start of the City of Philadelphia child care program, that the City itself along with the agencies and many of the people who have testified here today and the City departments worked long and hard to put together, that was one of the reasons, the key reasons, why it was put together is to make sure that women who want to start family day care will have an opportunity to do so. Part of that program currently, what the City does is it actually pays for the business privilege license, their food prep, and their child care license. That has enabled them to begin to start the business. What we'd like to do is take a look at all of those fees and see how we can really either reduce them or eliminate them. And we know from the women that we see 75 11/15/00 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - BILL 000545 because they actually come to the center and we meet with all of them and do technical assistance with them that this is giving them an opportunity that they would not have had an opportunity to become self-sufficient through entrepreneurship.
Now, I would imagine, and youse can help me with this one, too, this is a big market from a business standpoint that the bigger child cares in I could say Allegheny because I've had great success with them in my district. You know, you can cringe but they seem to hit the target. Their audiences that I need like the Latino moms in Kensington that I represent and they offer jobs to neighborhood people, but eventually these people that we're keeping from being in business and keeping underground by passing this bill, and I'm sure it's going to pass, they'll be able to be legitimate. You think they will eventually rise to the size of being bigger child care or do you think -- because I don't see any of the big guys down here complaining so this must be such a big market that they figure the constitution -- I haven't even gotten a call about it, so it must 76 11/15/00 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - BILL 000545 be so lucrative out there they're not even worried about this.
Well, I don't really think it's going to impact the established child care centers. What we're experiencing with the women that we see is that they would like to go from the four children to six children to group. And what we're really seeing is that there's a lot of issues within the City of Philadelphia from a licensing and regulation perspective that is stopping them from even taking that growth. I mean, a lot of the women who are doing this want to do this within their community. It's community economic development, and they want to be able to help the women in their community and they themselves have dreams to move forward and to build, some of them, bigger day care centers. Other people, like any other business, you know, people decide how big business what they really want. Others, they're fine with exactly where they are. But we want to be able to provide the opportunity to those who want to grow.
Another issue is that 77 11/15/00 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - BILL 000545 with family day care, it's particularly good for infants an young toddlers. The larger child care centers, even for the YMCA, we do not do infant care in our centers because it is not an economic boom for us. The requirements from the State side as far as the ratios prohibit us from opening up our rooms and the requirements of having to set up the room to care for the infants and toddlers. So it's much more easier for an infant who is six months, nine months, even thirteen months to be cared for in a family day care home where it's critical where they have that relationship of trust and building that one-on-one attention that they need that is so critical rather than being warehoused, which is what some of our largest centers for profit are actually doing. It's like warehousing children because it is lucrative out here. But if you've got a commitment to seeing that a child has the right start in life and the critical time between the ages 0 to 3, then you're going to look at a family day care home.
Thank you. Go ahead. 78 11/15/00 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - BILL 000545
I just want to respond by saying that to your question of do we actually have issue here if we're trying to reduce barriers to family and group day care home operation competition with the centers. And the answer to that is very squarely no, actually, because we don't have enough regulated supply in the City as a whole. We actually, if count up the number of young children we have, about a 100,000 --
We're constantly having new 0 to 3-year-olds. It just keeps going.
Right. So we're a very, very long way from saturation. And I think actually the task before us still is to be really focused on figuring out as creatively as we can what strategies we're going to use to create enough supply. As people here have testified, that supply has to be family day care homes, group day care homes and centers. Parents are 79 11/15/00 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - BILL 000545 going to have different needs and different preferences. And really what we have to figure out is getting enough in each category in the neighborhoods that are convenient and accessible to the families and the kids who need to be using the services. But we are light-years away from a conversation that actions we would take for either family day care, group, or center would somehow set off one of the other groups and say "Hey, this is unfair to my group." All of them need a lot more capacity and a lot more support.
Correct me if I'm wrong. My youngest is 16, but there's got to be a lot of factors where close to home, the age of the child, the money, if you like it or not, and there may be somebody down the street who you've known years that has one and that's 19 even better. 20
The perfect one was my mother, God rest her soul. I was comfortable knowing my 20-year-old when 4 months old that it was my mom. I trusted and knew her. 80 11/15/00 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - BILL 000545 That's not available for everyone, unfortunately, so this is good.
In fact, this issue you raised of the grandparents available is increasingly less an option for families, that's increasingly less available to them as means of actually providing care for their kids so that that issue of finding other safe, reliable, quality settings is critical. The other piece, again, with family an group day care homes and centers, too, is that families place a very high premium on convenience. They're using the services to facilitate work, and so that issue is also critical to us in terms of looking at this from a neighborhood perspective; what are we doing close by to where people are living or working to get these services available to them.
Thank you. Any other questions from the committee or other Councilpeople, Nutter, or anybody? Michael? You sure? I like his questions. He's very intelligent. I want everybody to know, and I don't 81 11/15/00 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - RES. 000555 want to embarrass her, I think this is Councilwoman's Blondell's first bill as a Councilwoman. This is a great thing and she needs to be commended for this. She did a good job on this. This is good. (Applause.)
I'm looking forward to more of these types of days. I wish that I had a bill on the agenda today.
Councilwoman Krajewski's going to punch me. (Laughter.)
Resolution No. 000555, a resolution authorizing the Committee on Licenses and Inspections to hold hearings on vacant, abandon and blighted property in Philadelphia and to take testimony on improving the process of vacant and abandoned property code disposition, 82 11/15/00 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - RES. 000555 property enforcement, and demolition of dangerous properties in Philadelphia.
I will, Councilman. Good morning, Councilman Mariano and members of the committee. To my left, you know Otis Haigler, Dan Quin who is the chief of contractual services, and Eileen Evans who is the director of contractual services, newly appointed, which is the forefront of the demolition program in Licenses and Inspections. My purpose today is to provide testimony on Resolution 000555, which addresses the Council and communities' concerns relative to vacant and abandoned properties and the department's treatment of them. Joining me today -- as I already said this. On behalf of the department, I would like to commend Councilman Mariano and the members of the committee for facilitating a dialogue to discuss the issue. Background. As shown in the chart below, the City through the Department of 83 11/15/00 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - RES. 000555 Licenses and Inspections has expended approximately $115 million to demolish 14,185 abandoned and imminently dangerous structures throughout the City for the last fiscal years. 6 I might add that of that number, within that 7 number, we demolished 243 -- it's not in my 8 testimony. 243 commercial properties at a cost 9 of $21,409,000. 10 Additionally, we have expended 11 approximately 1.5 million on encapsulation. This is a process that allows to us stabilize properties by sealing all openings, making sure the roof is weather-tight and the drainage system is not clogged and water can flow out through the sewer system. This allows the property to maintain its integrity and the integrity of the neighborhood. To date we have treated approximately 342 properties at an average cost of $3,094 per property. Beginning on August 22, 2000, the City experienced an increase in the number of imminently dangerous building collapses. In response to this increase, under the direction of the Managing Director's Office and with the 84 11/15/00 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - RES. 000555 cooperation of the Philadelphia Police Department and the Philadelphia Housing Authority, we began reinspecting the 100 census tracks with the most imminently dangerous buildings. The purpose of this was to find the buildings that could collapse and identify any additional imminently dangerous buildings throughout the City. We spent, since August 22nd, over $2 million to demolish 211 dangerous buildings throughout the City, Not just in the 100 census tracks, but wherever there was a failure or a need for immediate demolition. To date, we have completed 95 percent of an aggressive neighborhood reinspection program to identify all vacant buildings throughout the City of Philadelphia, using 18 two-person teams of Philadelphia Housing 19 Authority inspectors along with the Department of 20 License and Inspections inspectors to count the number of vacants in the City of Philadelphia. We are presently 145 census tracks have been completed. When we are done this, we expect to be able to map and give to Councilpeople by Council districts the vacants in their areas in 85 11/15/00 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - RES. 000555 the Council district along with the breakdown between vacant lots and imminently dangerous buildings. We've also, with the aid of the police department, have been able to use a police helicopter that was arranged by the Managing Director to identify buildings that were failing at the roof level but weren't obvious from the ground. We have found an additional 450 properties using this method. We have completed about 60 census tracks to date. At the present time, the department -- this survey will be the most comprehensive survey we've ever performed anywhere to identify vacant buildings. And when we're done, we'll have an accurate good count of the buildings that are vacant in the City of Philadelphia which will help the Administration plan how they deal with the blight program. Thank you.
Mr. Solvibile, this census track, can we get that? I'm tired of hearing that, not a shot at you. Can I get the abandoned buildings in my census track? 86 11/15/00 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - RES. 000555
When we had that blight briefing I asked, and I'm sure the rest of the District Councilpeople a lot of people would like to have it.
We haven't produced one at this point. We're waiting for the completion of the survey which we expect to be the first week in December, if not before. We're ahead of schedule. We've been pretty productive in getting this done. And the data is entered into the computer and then we'll be able to produce a list by councilmatic district. It will be more up-to-date. To give it to you now, it's a-year-old and not as useful to you.
Thank you. Who wants to go next? You got a question? I'm sorry, Councilman Rizzo has a question.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 87 11/15/00 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - RES. 000555 During the course of the survey, and we're all aware of the many buildings that collapsed throughout the City, it was brought to my attention that there may be a need going forward, just looking back, and I think I've asked this question before but I think it's appropriate today, that it's been pointed out to me that many of the initial deterioration or the failures in the structures were at the roof level and it was pointed out by a few contractors involved that the way we do business, the way we allow multiple roofs to be placed on a residential structure, one, maybe two, in some cases three or more, that the weight of that additional roof has contributed to the actual collapse of the building and it just caved right into the building. Do you think we need some regulation or do you think we need some education? I don't know regulation is necessarily the way to go, but when a building's designed, it's designed to carry a certain amount of load. And I bet after you put the second, the third roof on, you've added a tremendous amount of load to that 88 11/15/00 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - RES. 000555 structure. And I also understand the rationale why people want to just place a second roof on an existing roof; it's a matter of money, it's a less expensive way to repair the structure. But, if you're violating all the engineering principles and just allowing more load to be put on the building, something's got to give.
I believe that the public -- the need to educate the public on this is really important and I also believe that any contractor that would have integrity would not do that to somebody, would tell them that, you know, you can't do this that it has to be replaced. Just because you want to do it doesn't mean you should do it. And I agree with you, Councilman. And I believe we don't need legislation 'cause the building code could deal with the situation on what load the roof can carry. We can deal with it through our present building code. And there is presently a permit required if you -- a $55 over-the-counter permit that we would get out of the district for replacement for a roof and you would need a permit -- if you went and took the roof down to its rafters, you would need a 89 11/15/00 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - RES. 000555 different permit that you would get from Center City.
So you're telling me that I call a contractor and I want a new roof put on my home and I don't want to remove the existing roof, a permit's required for that?
Yes. In the district, $55 permit. It's right in the district offices. They don't have to come into Center City. That's called an over-the-counter permit.
Do the inspectors when there's a roofing truck parked out a particular house ever check on -- is that something that's done in the enforcing process for permits?
We ask them to check and make sure that if see work to and if they don't have a permit to inquire as to why.
To end this, two very, very critical contractors indicated that many of the structures that they visited, they attributed the collapse of the roof based on the fact that there were multiple roofs on the building. I see you shaking your head there. 90 11/15/00 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - RES. 000555
I believe that the roof is the problem in a lot of cases, that it leaks and they're old. Our problem with roofs that we're finding is a lack of a roof. The reason we ask for helicopter to help us, at 29th an Cecil B. Moore, the first collapse or maybe the second, but a big collapse with Councilman Clarke and the Managing Director, the Managing Director said to me, "Well, why couldn't we see this?" And I said, "Director, the building was all sealed and we could see the roof. That when I was on the ground we saw the holes in the roof, we saw the grass growing on it, so it's a matter of the roofs are the problem. The number of roofs on it, I don't know if that was the problem, but definitely the holes and the water penetration into the building is what was causing a lot of these collapse. 99 percent of buildings that collapse other than fire and cars running through them is caused by water damage to the building somewhere.
To end this, what would you suggest we do as a city to educate or at least let many of our citizen know that when 91 11/15/00 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - RES. 000555 they have a leak that necessarily just putting an additional roof over an existing roof or a third roof over a second roof, what do you suggest we do to maybe deal with this problem so years 6 from now we don't have -- 7
Councilman, I would 8 like to get back to you in writing and have David 9 Perry who is the chief of our construction 10 section or deputy commissioner in charge of 11 construction section put together a little 12 briefing paper for you to better answer your 13 question. He's much more qualified to deal with 14 this than I would on what to do with homeowners 15 how to educate them and or the point where it 16 becomes critical that you not put an additional 17 roof on. 18
Thank you, 19 Commissioner. 20 Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Good morning. 92 11/15/00 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - RES. 000555
Mr. SOLVIBILE, can you tell me how much money we are budgeted per year for encapsulation?
We presently use the grant from the Office of Housing and Community Development, and that grant is for actual contractual work, $500,000, which we use for encapsulation and we can also use some demolition money if run out of the $500,000 grants that we receive from the Office of Housing and Community Development.
Realistically, approximately how many buildings would you be able to encapsulate per year?
3,000 average divided into 5 -- some of that money is used heat abatement and drainage abatement. Let's say $3,000; 3,000 divided into that is -- I'm not -- how much? About 150 buildings, Councilman.
Mr. Wetzel may 93 11/15/00 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - RES. 000555 want to respond to this to some degree a little later on when he testifies. Is there any correlation between the development strategy and the encapsulation strategy? Because I know often I've asked you to encapsulate a building and it was not necessarily part of any short-range or long-range development plans.
The idea behind encapsulation is to save a property before its cancer spreads to the rest of the block. Then you go into the structure itself. Is it falling, is it collapsing? By sealing it and putting a roof and doing the drainage system we can preserve the property. If you look at the top of our testimony, we call it vacant property treatment program. It's always when we've come here and people call it the demolition program, the blight program is being worked on by the Administration and the part that I'm involved with the Managing Director is looking at property treatments. Instead of just saying everything would be, quote/unquote, demolished, we're looking at how we'll treat that block. When we begin the 94 11/15/00 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - RES. 000555 process of demolishing buildings under the blight program, we would probably demolish more at first. Then at the end, we would probably be more into the encapsulation process. I think that might answer your question.
No. Let me give you an example. Right now we have the Home Start Program in the City of Philadelphia. It's pretty much citywide where PHDC goes out they either acquire through the Redevelopment Authority or it's a publicly-owned property and they rehabilitate it for home ownership.
And my question is, would it be more prudent, given the limited number of dollars we have for encapsulation and Home Start when you determine that you're going to do an encapsulation which is normally on a relatively stable block, and I understand that is also the criteria for Home Start, that if we do any encapsulation, then that should automatically become a candidate for a Home Start like program or a HRP program where the City would then go in and acquire the property if it's privately owned 95 11/15/00 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - RES. 000555 and rehabilitate it for home ownership as opposed to -- do you understand where I'm coming from?
Now I understand. Every building -- I mentioned that the funding comes from the Office Housing and Community Development.
Every building we encapsulate, we first ask them if it's an area that we can spend their money in because they have rules and regulations to where you can spend it. And also, the system was set up and I believe still is set up that where the building after we encapsulate it would be washed into the system knowing that this is a good building that's been preserved and to get it into the system. And it's a candidate for our other to use our lien to acquire it from the encapsulation, so, yes, Councilman. That was originally the intent to be used in that regard.
Right. That's 96 11/15/00 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - RES. 000555 why I think it's prudent to do something with it since we're making such an investment that we quickly get that property rehabilitated and into somebody's hands. Mr. Wetzel, a little later can you kind of respond to that when you testify because I'd like to know what that system is and how it effective it currently is. Mr. Solvibile, with respects to demolition contractors, and you and I have had numerous discussions over the years about some of our illustrious contractors, what's the capacity right now with the existing contractor list for demolitions?
The existing -- I would say that the existing we have could probably go to about 3,000 a year with the we're doing it now. But the way it's planned and the plan that's being developed as we said at the blight school I think everyone was calling it, we intend to have eight areas at approximately 1500 buildings an area and have a contractor and a two- to three- to four-year period -- three- to four- or five-year period, I'm sorry. Have that 97 11/15/00 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - RES. 000555 area and work their way through it.
One contractor per area, eight different contracts. 1500 a year times would be -- 1500 times 8 is 12,000. And 7 if we do it in three years, that would be roughly 8 4,000 a year. If go to 4 years, it's 3,000 depends on the length that we decide that we'll run the demolition in that area. But there will be eight different contractors with the capability of producing at least 3,000 demolitions a year.
Do we have a sense of who those contractors are currently?
I anticipate, Councilman, that when we go public with the blight program -- it will be an advertised bid, it will be different than our regular bids that we do now on a daily basis -- that contractors will be coming from all over because it will be a pretty big game and we'll be getting a lot of different contractors. Our intent there is that contractors need to be pre-approved by the department and this committee the Managing 98 11/15/00 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - RES. 000555 Director and the Mayor is setting up. There will be a committee that will manage or at least review and help us manage and run the program on a daily basis, and by "us," I mean the City. That the contractor will have to be pre-approved and show references and qualifications. And also any sub, and I think this will been important to you.
Any sub must approved by us. If we're going to get hurt, we're going to get hurt with the subs doing little-er jobs than with the bigger contractor with the machines.
So will there be subs for that one contractor that has that targeted area?
He'll be allowed to have subs, yes, but not without our approval. If we find them using contractors that aren't approved by us, then it will cease right then and there. I intend that Mr. Quin and Miss Evans will be very busy when this starts. They'll have 99 11/15/00 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - RES. 000555 a lot of field time that we'll really be on top of this. Another improvement I think that will help some of the problems you experienced in the district is that each area of the eight areas will have its own inspector dedicated only to working with the contractor. As we presently now have one inspector at two or three council districts at a time. This will be one person dedicated to being in that area knowing the problems, working with the community, and working with the contractor to make it gets done right.
Is there currently any written set of criteria for large-scale demolition contractors and small-scale subs.
It's being developed as we speak. There's going to be standards in that some of it we put down on paper and we're waiting. In discussion is that the contractor has to be in the area every day. It's a big complaint that we have with contractors that once they start the job they're going to stay there and finish that job. We're hoping the time to 100 11/15/00 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - RES. 000555 finish a hand demolition in a row home in a typical row home in Philadelphia will be two and a half days under this program.
And last question during this round. Are you also developing a neighborhood participating strategy?
I'm not, but the blight -- Pat Smith, Joyce Wilkerson are definitely putting that package together as to how neighborhood will participate. We intend -- I know one of the things that we're going to require a contractor to do absolutely is to notify that block where he'll be working several days before the demolition starts. And then the Councilperson being notified.
Oh, that's being developed by others. I'm not a part of that. I know that we've met with MBEC, had meetings with them. And as far as the community workforce, I'm not involved with that part of it, Councilman.
Who is? Who's involved with that? Who's developing that 101 11/15/00 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - RES. 000555 aspect?
The whole package is being developed under Pat Smith's guidance, so I'm really not sure who's working on that part of it. I know I'm working with trying to develop contractors and how we'll get them. And when the bid comes out, the participation will be worked on at that point or decided what needs to be done.
Okay. Before we go too far down the track on this train, can you get me some information and to the Chair and the members of the committee information on neighborhood participation? And not necessarily through MBEC, but just neighborhood in general because we will be demolishing properties throughout the City of Philadelphia and I'd like to find out if there's some sort of outreach to include -- because we're going to be spending a substantial amount of money and I'd really have that.
I will ask the Managing Director's Office that I've been working with and Pat Smith to give you some input into 102 11/15/00 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - RES. 000555 that as to what their thought process is.
Commissioner SOLVIBILE, I want to point out an observation and I think I may have addressed it to some of the executives of L&I, but maybe you weren't there. This question is right down your alley or this observation's right down your alley. In Roxborough I passed a service station on Ridge Avenue that happened to close.
Exactly, that's why I'm pointing it out to you. It's closed, and the day that it closed a few days after it closed the company came and boarded the facility up, put boards on the windows, put boards around the pumps, and it stuck out like a sore thumb. It really looked terrible. A few days later, they came and they painted that plywood a neutral color, a color that just blended in. 103 11/15/00 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - RES. 000555
A gray, it's an off-gray. Obviously, you're getting home late at night. (Laughter.)
My family prefers it that way, Councilman; they don't have to put up with me.
But with this racheted up, this wouldn't apply to the demolitions, but with the encapsulations and the ceilings, I don't think anything worse when you drive down the street and you look up and you see boarded up windows. Is there anything that wouldn't add to the expense of the process to do what I just described at that service station near your home that we could buy a construction material that blends in better that doesn't come across as being like there's another boarded up building?
We in the encapsulation program, the wood is painted, absolutely.
It's painted? 104 11/15/00 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - RES. 000555
It's painted. When we encapsulate a property, I insist the wood is painted because I agree with you, it looks horrible raw wood plus it really doesn't serve as a good protector because the wood would get saturated and start to rot. I would have to bring that back and discuss it with the commissioner if we would paint the wood on the houses we seal. But to answer your question, it is required to do for the encapsulation program.
Maybe there's an alternative material. And I don't want to solve the problem here.
There's a plastic out there that I saw is a sample of and it looks like a house that's dark, it's like got blinds in it like a window, but it's a cheap plastic and, you know, I got my pen and got the point in went like that and it was gone. That won't even last a minute on the wood so we have to come up with something a little bit better. I think painting will make it blend in. I think the secret with painting, Councilman, is if you look at the rest of the block and see like the colors they have in 105 11/15/00 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - RES. 000555 the block or how it would be more neutral to blend in so you wouldn't notice it as you drove by would be a success.
I know we're trying to accomplish in sealing the property, but I think we also have to take into consideration the environment and how it feels to have four or five boarded up homes in your block. You feel bad enough about it, and then just to have them stick out like I described. So maybe there is an alternative material that could be investigated and is as sturdy as you'd like it to be. I'd appreciate you following up with me because that's something personally that I see and that I'd hike to suggest that you try to resolve that problem.
Thank you Councilman on our aesthetic values of the paint and plastic.
And, Councilman, I might add that just because it's up the street 106 11/15/00 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - RES. 000555 from my house is not the reason it's painted. It surprised me like it surprised you.
Did you notice the difference? The whole appearance of that property changed the minute they painted that.
Absolutely. When I went by the first time with unpainted wood, I noticed it. And then I didn't notice it, it didn't stand out.
Thank you. Anyone else who want to testify here? Nobody? All right. Any other questions for this little panel here? We still have a lot to go. (No questions.)
Okay. RDA and PHA's is up next. Mr. Wetzel's itchy, I can see him jumping around. Come on, Herb. (Witnesses come forward.)
Good morning, Mr. Chairperson and members of the committee. My name is Herbert E. Wetzel, Executive Director of 107 11/15/00 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - RES. 000555 the Redevelopment Authority. I'm here to provide testimony on Resolution No. 000555. The role of the Redevelopment Authority in local government is unique. We are charged with partnering with other government entities and communities to create urban renewal in its various forms which really includes the new construction of housing, rehabilitation of existing structures, and very often facilitating creation of urban gardens and side yards in residential neighborhoods. Through all of this, we are routinely and vigorously engaged in acquiring, disposing and in the interim maintaining large numbers of lots and structures. With regards to improvements in the way government acquires and disposes of properties, I should indicate that I've been appointed chair of the Administration's Vacant Property Transactions Task Force which is comprised of the agency executives who are critically involved in each aspect of the five different types of ways that the City acquires properties and the four ways in which the City disposes of properties. This task force is 108 11/15/00 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - RES. 000555 currently meeting twice a month with the subcommittee meeting alternative weeks. And this is a newly created process to review and provide reform for the Administration's Neighborhood Transformations Programs with regards to the acquisition and disposition of real estate. There's a large number of lots and structures, as I mentioned previously, that are owned by the Redevelopment Authority and we take that ownership responsibility seriously. When we're, as government, either the property owner or the landlord, there's a special obligation that we believe to make certain that we behave in harmony with the best interest of the communities in which these properties are located. Though we function under substantial fiscal restraints, we endeavor in all cases to respond to any complaints or issues that arise out of the real estate that the Redevelopment Authority owns and do exactly that, we get out there and we try to correct the situation. With regards to community gardens, the Redevelopment Authority manages the New Kensington Fishtown side yard program where 109 11/15/00 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - RES. 000555 vacant lots are acquired for citizens and neighbors in it. And if you recall a couple weeks ago we were here for a resolution to dispose of 63 more properties under that program. The total now is in the hundreds that have taken place under the new Kensington Fishtown side yard program. Also, the Authority is proud of our well-established relationship with the neighborhood gardens around the city in which the authority provides leases to local neighborhood organizations to use the land that it currently owns for gardens. I think it's more than fair to say that that there are substantial challenges that confront us, but it is equally fair to say that we are seriously engaged in a comprehensive and, in my experience, an unprecedented effort to substantially improve the way the City does business, how business is conducted, and as a result, to have a better effect on the lives of the citizens who live in our neighborhoods. Mr. Chairman, I would be pleased to respond to any of your questions or members of 110 11/15/00 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - RES. 000555 the committee.
Thank you, Mr. Wetzel. Any questions for Mr. Wetzel? Councilman Clarke?
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Good morning, gentlemen. Mr. Wetzel, you have been working with my office recently on some legislation as it relates to acquisition strategies development districts, and I understand that there is some other acquisition processes taking place; one in Baltimore, the quick-take model?
But it appears that every one of those expedited acquisition strategies calls for some State-enabling legislation. Are we currently working with the State, particularly as a part of the suburban sprawl issue? I know that they'll try to discourage development in the outlying counties, in the rural counties, and we're trying to encourage it. Do we currently have a strategy associated with the State's suburban sprawl issue 111 11/15/00 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - RES. 000555 that will allow us to do legislatively what we need to do here to encourage development opportunities?
I think what you could say is that we're evolving the strategy at this point in time. The reality here, under current state law, it takes a significant amount of time for the Redevelopment Authority to acquire properties under Urban Renewal Law. What you speak to in Baltimore is that the Maryland legislature recognizing Baltimore's unique circumstances and, again, in a similar situation, over 10,000 vacant structures provided special legislation for the use of and only for the use of the City of Baltimore to establish a system. And there's sort of unique precedence here in you're dealing with a constitutional issue and that is government taking private property, so there's always going to be a lot of protection in that system. However, in Maryland, they took the view of the best way to describe it is the word abandonment. And that if you own property, you bear certain burdens and those are to pay taxes, to maintain the property, to keep it sealed, to 112 11/15/00 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - RES. 000555 keep it occupied. Those are the burdens of ownership. And when the current owner of the property walks away and transfers those burdens to the municipality, meaning the City now has to seal the property, the City has to clean the property, there's no taxes coming in. They took the position that if you walk away from a property like that, if you walk away from the burdens of ownership and the municipality has to assume them, then the municipality should be able to quickly own it as well as being responsible for it. I think that's going to be a part of our argument. I think the legislation that we will seek will only be to address Philadelphia's problems. There may be other cities who may want to join in, but it is a powerful change in the law that I don't think legislators around the State would want all the redevelopment authorities to have.
So the rule of law should not apply to individuals who have abandoned the property as it relates to property rights constitutionally, is essentially what you're saying? 113 11/15/00 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - RES. 000555
Yeah. What they do and my understanding of is, they give notice and they go before a judge in the City of Baltimore. The intent is to reduce this to a 90-day period. Now, we're understanding right now, and it's a new law, that it's taking about six months, but that's a lot faster than it happens here. And if they can get it down to 90 days, that is exactly where you'd like to be. I mean, ideally to your question is if you go in, you know, the first vacant on the block shows up and nobody can find the owner and gets encapsulated, 90 days or 120 days later --
Mr. Wetzel, Councilman Clarke and I would stand on our head for six months.
I mean, we have some real arcane laws, and most of this is from 1945. I mean, there's not been a lot of reform in the urban renewal legislation, so it dates back to 114 11/15/00 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - RES. 000555 just right after the war.
Who's the point person from the state going to be or who is the point person in the state legislature that will do the enabling legislation? Because I have a newly elected state representative and he's looking to do a bill. I'm sure he'd love to sponsor.
He might have to sponsor it with State Representative Elect Angel Cruz because I think he's he on this one, too.
He's actually the representative that I was talking about. (Laughter.)
Actually, before the neighborhoods transformation initiative, George Burrell is chairing the legislative reform, so my since is that it should go through there. I mean, what we're doing, the various committees are feeding information back to that particular group who needs to translate that in the legislation. And let me just say today, too, that although we don't need to be there today, there's 115 11/15/00 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - RES. 000555 a legislator from Pittsburgh who's actually trying to gut the Urban Renewal Law and make it impossible, including legislation that would state that if property acquired by redevelopment authorities, they cannot be transferred to private parties. So it's the opposite direction of where we need to head, and he's got a little bug.
Yes, and our lobbyists know about it as well. He had a couple of deals in his area that sort of went sour and he's responding to constituents which many of us would do.
Yeah, yeah. But it is very clear that from my perspective there are two pieces to this. Number one, documenting the way we do business now because people are sort of expert in the piece they handle but nobody's become an expert in the whole system. So we're engaged now in the 116 11/15/00 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - RES. 000555 process of documenting every step, who does it, how long it takes, what they do they when pass it onto next person. After doing that, understanding what the existing system is, what changes can we make in the existing system by changing policy, and then what changes to we need legislatively to be able to speed up the process. And then the third element of this is bringing the appropriate technology to the table to manage the system itself.
Can you ask Mr. Burrell to send us a memo documenting what the current strategy is and who he may be working with on a state level?
Jay, you want to testify? You want to testify for PHA?
I'm testifying on behalf of the Housing Authority, but I thought that, you 117 11/15/00 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - RES. 000555 know, because we were working so closely together I would have to interject (inaudible).
I just wanted to be sure that if he needed any information --
We have questions for PHA so do you want to testify? Here's my PHA question. Let me start this out. How many vacant PHA properties do we have? Do you have any idea? Say your name for the record. I'm sorry.
Dan Quimby, Q-U-I-M-B-Y, Executive General Manager, Major Systems Maintenance, Philadelphia Housing Authority. Currently we have approximately 1800 scattered sites houses. Approximately 18 months ago months ago we started a plan to demolish vacant units for which we had received permission --
You've got to pull that closer to you, too, you're speaking softly. 118 11/15/00 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - RES. 000555
Approximately months 6 ago we began a demolition program where we were 7 to demolish 692 vacant structures. To this 8 date -- 9
PHA-owned properties. 11 We're using federal funds. To this date, we have 12 demolished 301 vacant properties. We have 13 currently 21 additional properties on contract to 14 one demolition contractor. We have an 15 advertisement in the paper for demolition 16 contracts for another 50 properties. When the 17 program is done we will have demolished all of 18 the identified properties that have been approved. In addition, in conjunction with Licenses and Inspections, we've met under their direction we began a program what we call string demolitions. As a result of the problems that have surfaced in the City within the last three or four months, if L&I determines properties that 119 11/15/00 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - RES. 000555 are not PHA properties have to be demolished and we have one in the middle or one on the end, we make arrangements for those families to be transferred to another property, then L&I goes ahead and demolishes those properties. Several years ago, we went on a program to address some deficiencies we've had in the maintenance department prior to Mr. Green's arrival. By the way, Mr. Green is presently receiving an award from the National Housing Association as we speak for his efforts in the housing industry in the City of Philadelphia. Upon his arrival, we had 25,500 outstanding work orders in occupied houses. Through their use of structural maintenance and repair teams, we are now down to approximately 3800 work orders today. We decentralized the management and maintenance operations from three areas to ten community-based management offices. Each one has skilled staff in terms of plumbers, carpenters, and electricians and maintenance mechanics to address those needs. Separate from those issues are dedicated personnel to reduce the number of vacant properties that we've had. We're 120 11/15/00 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - RES. 000555 averaging repairs on ten vacant properties each week at scattered sites.
Let me ask you this. This might be off the beaten track. Those tradesmen that you're using, is that the arts program?
No, sir. We do have what they call the arts program. That's now called the Renovation and Training Program. Created with the Building Trades Council, each scattered sites area now has carpenters, plumbers, and we have a general staff of electricians due to a shortage of electricians.
These guys that you're using, though, on these jobs, are they those guys or are they your own actual craftsmen, the ones you're talking about?
The scattered sites are actual trades unions coming from the carpenters' union.
That's that started with that arts program, you just changed the name?
What we did was we 121 11/15/00 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - RES. 000555 expanded upon that rather than keeping just doing the vacant units. What Mr. Green decided, we needed to put more skilled tradesmen in servicing occupied units.
We were so engaged with the glaziers union. We now have glaziers union, we also have cement masons and plasterers.
Save a spot for me. When this is done, I could possibly be back there.
In addition to these, we've also partnershipped with L&I on several fronts. We've supplied inspectors as they're going through and do the census tracks. But for several years now, we've assisted L&I in emergency support services for the building collapses, cave-in collapses, and we've done some encapsulation for them. 122 11/15/00 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - RES. 000555
I've actually seen you guys out there helping on a cave-in collapse about a year ago.
It was very impressive, yes. I just ran into it by mistake and it was really interesting thank. God the guy was fine. Maybe this question may be better for you. State your name for the record.
This is probably a question for Mr. Greene, so if you don't understand it -- my main problem with PHA, and believe me, it's a lot better than it was five, six years ago, I mean, 98 percent better. But it's getting these vacant houses. My number-one problem is someone will come in and say, "You know, there's a house in this neighborhood," and after find out for weeks who it is, we find out, not all the time, but this one's PHA. So some guy comes says "I want to buy that property." 123 11/15/00 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - RES. 000555 He's either a speculator or a neighborhood person. It happens with both groups. You know, whoever, I would rather have neighborhood people, but at least the speculator has an interest in my district in a neighborhood where there's definitely an interest to be need. It seems to be hard to get these properties to these people. It just seems it takes so long. Would this all going to the same idea that Mr. Wetzel was talking about with the RDA getting these properties to people, be it speculators. Speculators a loose term. I don't allow any speculators come to me with anything if I don't know them or don't understand what their trying to do and they're not helping the area.
One of the issues that we're looking at is you've got four public entities that own property in the City. The City itself through Public Property, the Redevelopment Authority, PHDC, and the Public Housing Authority. Part of the problem is, and this will relate to your particular example, is a site in which a developer wants to do a project in which all four entities own a piece of that particular 124 11/15/00 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - RES. 000555 site. And in this case, Public Housing Authorities at one time were prohibitive of disposing of properties unless they replaced each one they disposed of. It was called a one-for-one replacement rule. So if sold a house, you had to buy a house. Public Housing Authorities have been relieved of that, but HUD still controls the disposition. The Public Housing Authority has to fill out a very complicated application. It goes to a HUD office in Chicago, Illinois; they have to review and approve the disposition and then return that to PHA here in Philadelphia where the Board then can vote disposition of it. One of the strategies that may make sense is that all of us go through -- each party that owns public property, if we create a Philadelphia land bank corporation to own it, that PHA if they said we've got 800 surplus vacant lots right now, goes to HUD with all 800 of them at one time an disposes them to this land management corporation. PHDC does it as well. The Redevelopment Authority does it as well. Then there's one entity that owns all of the property and you don't have to go through -- 125 11/15/00 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - RES. 000555 with the capacity to sell that property quickly so that we do the administrative and legislative disposition process up front so the land is sitting there. When somebody wants it, it's available and you can close, like, in 60 days. I mean, that's an objective to get to. But they have their restraints.
That's a good objective. That's what we would like to see. Councilman Clarke.
I just wanted to do add to that issue with respects to disposition of the Philadelphia Housing Authority, is there a current lawsuit that is not allowing you to dispose of properties as a result of, I think, an accessible handicap issue?
There is some litigation now. I'm not quite familiar with it. I can have somebody from our legal department give you the entire break down of it. But there is, I believe, a lawsuit which is influencing the way we handle our properties.
You don't have anybody here that can address that? 126 11/15/00 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - RES. 000555
With respects to demolition, I understand every year you submit a number of properties to HUD requesting demolition. Can you tell me how you determine how many properties? Is there a limit on the number of properties that you can request demolition from HUD Central each year? What is it based on?
What we did is we identified the most severely distressed properties in an area that we wanted to concentrate on that we determined were too expensive to rehab in areas that weren't really viable. We prepared a Hope Six Grant based on a -- HUD has a formula for how much money they will give to you develop and to demolish a property. We prepared a Hope Six Grant similar to what we have done in the past and we were fortunate 127 11/15/00 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - RES. 000555 enough to get awarded two grants. Hope Six is not a sure thing every year, so we have to plan and hope that HUD will give us the additional monies to see demolish these properties.
So you can only ask for authorization to demolish properties where you have a development strategy; is that what you're saying?
No, a demolition strategy. We got funding to demolish -- and this was several years in the planning. This began probably four or five years ago to demolish these properties in the Ludlow area primarily.
So if there's only funding available for 150 properties but you have 600 that you need authorization to demolish, you can't ask for that authorization; when the funding becomes available, you can then demolish 128 11/15/00 - LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - RES. 000555 those properties?