COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Room 400, City Hall Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Wednesday, November 5, 2025 3:18 p.m. PRESENT: COUNCILMAN MARK SQUILLA, CHAIR COUNCILWOMAN JAMIE GAUTHIER
Good morning -- good afternoon, everyone. Sorry for the delay. Today the Committee on Commerce and Economic Development. We welcome us to the hearing. I note that the hour's come and a quorum of the committee is present. For the record, we have Councilmember Gauthier on my left, Councilmember Driscoll and Councilmember Thomas all present for the hearing. A quick procedural note. We're going to hear testimony on Bill Nos. 250888 and 250916. We'll then proceed into a public meeting to consider actions on those bills and then we will go back into a hearing for the resolution on No. 250881. Now that a quorum has been committed, the hearing is now called to order. This is a public hearing of the Committee on Commerce and Economic Development regarding Bill Nos. 250888 and 250916. Mr. McMonagle, please call the titles of the bills.
Bill No. 8 250888, amending Title of The 9 Philadelphia Code, entitled "Regulation of Businesses, Trades and Professions" by adding a new chapter to prohibit third party restaurant reservation services from arranging unauthorized restaurant reservations with food service establishments and to provide for definitions, prohibited acts, penalties and enforcement, all under certain terms and conditions. And Bill No. 250916, granting permission to have Haverford Business Association to install and maintain encroachments in the nature of decorative lighting fixtures attached to existing facilities owned by the City or other entities, subject to the owner's consent, all under certain terms and conditions.
Thank you, Mr. McMonagle. Will you please call the first panel to testify on Bill No. 250888.
Can we please have Sarah Adamo. (Witness approached witness table.)
Good afternoon, Sarah. Just state your name for the record and proceed with your testimony.
Good afternoon, Chairperson Squilla, members of the Committee on Commerce and Economic Development. My name is Sarah Adamo and I am the Director of Zoning and Legislation for the Department of Licenses and Inspections Quality of Life. Today I'm here to provide testimony on Bill No. 5 250888, introduced by Councilmember Thomas which, if enacted, will amend Title of The Philadelphia 8 Code, entitled "Regulation of 9 Businesses, Trades and Professions" by adding a new chapter and prohibiting by adding new chapter 12 to prohibit third party restaurant reservation services from arranging unauthorized restaurant reservations with food service establishments and to provide for definitions, prohibited acts, penalties and enforcement, all under certain terms and conditions. This legislation requires that third party reservation services obtain written authorization from food service establishments prior to charging or collecting a fee for a reservation for a restaurant. This bill also gives the Department of Licenses and Inspections the authority to enforce this requirement. The department is prepared to initiate a complaint- based enforcement system where a restaurant can submit documentation showing that a third party reservation service is in violation of the law and L&I QOL will respond by issuing the appropriate violation. We would request an amendment to the bill requiring third party reservation services to maintain written records of authorizations received from restaurants. This would make it easier for an entity to disprove a violation, and the failure to maintain such records would constitute its own violation and serve as evidence of a lack of authority in enforcing or establishing a violation. Thank you for the opportunity to provide this testimony on behalf of the Department of Licenses and Inspections Quality of Life.
Thank you, Sarah, so much for your testimony. Do you have a copy of the recommended amendment?
I don't have a draft of the recommended amendment, but we could draft something up for you.
Yeah. If you could draft it and get that to us, I think it would be considerate. Councilmember Thomas.
Thank you for your testimony. I just want to go on the record to the members of the Committee that I am open to working with the Administration as long as they're willing to work with the stakeholders who are most impacted by the legislation to be able to discuss further amendments if the members of the Committee agree to vote it out of committee today. So just want to put that on the record as well.
Thank you. We will also be able to vote this out of committee and then amend it on the floor, if necessary, once there is an agreement. Thank you so much. Are there any other questions? (No response.)
Seeing none, is there anyone else here to testify on Bill No. --
Can we please have the members of the Pennsylvania Restaurant Lodging Association?
This is Bill No. 250888 still. (Witnesses approached witness table.)
Good afternoon. My name is Ben Fileccia and I serve as the Vice-President of Strategy Engagement for the Pennsylvania Restaurant and Lodging Association. I'm joined today by Chris D'Ambro of Southwark and Ambra. The PRLA represents tens of thousands of restaurants, hotels, hospitality businesses across the Commonwealth, including thousands here right in Philadelphia. And I want to thank Councilman Thomas for introducing this proactive piece of legislation and for his continued partnership with the restaurant community. This bill addresses a growing issue that many operators face, unauthorized third party reservation scalpers listing restaurants without their knowledge or consent. When a diner books a table through an unauthorized platform, they believe they've made a legitimate reservation, but the restaurant often has no record of it. That leads to confusion, lost revenue and frustrated guests. It then damages the reputation of the business through no fault of their own. These services sell or resell reservations, profiting off restaurant inventory they don't control. And that's unfair, it's deceptive and it's harmful to both restaurants and our consumers. This legislation is about transparency and fairness. It ensures that reservations are made only through authorized systems so that diners know they have a table and restaurants can manage their seating and staffing responsibly. It's a simple commonsense protection that gives small businesses back control of their own operations. Philadelphia restaurants, seen as one of the most celebrated in the country, we are home to James Beard Award winners, nationally recognized chefs, three of North America's 50 best restaurants in 2025, and soon the Michelin Guide Northeast ceremony will take place right here in our city and award our talented Philadelphians with Michelin Stars and Big Gourmands. And in just a few months as we welcome visitors from around the world for the 2026 World Cup and other global events, our restaurants will be the front door to Philadelphia's hospitality. By passing this ordinance now, the City is taking a forward-thinking, proactive step to protect the integrity of our dining experience before the problems grow larger. It sends a clear message: Philadelphia values its restaurants, respects its guests and supports a fair business environment. So on behalf of the Pennsylvania Restaurant and Lodging Association, I urge Council to move this bill forward. This is smart, balanced legislation that benefits everyone, operators, workers and consumers alike. Thank you again, Councilmember Thomas, for your leadership and thank you all for your time and support of the hospitality community that helps Philadelphia become and continue to be a world-class city. Thank you.
Good morning, members of City Council. My name is Chris D'Ambro. My wife and I own two businesses in Queen Village, Southwark and Ambra. We want to thank Councilmember Thomas for introducing this important piece of legislation and its ongoing support of Philadelphia's restaurant community. We're also grateful to the Pennsylvania Restaurant and Lodging Association for its continued advocacy on behalf of small operators like us. Until recently, we were unaware of websites such as Appointment Trader were listing and reselling restaurant reservations without permission. When we learned about it, we were shocked. These listings are misleading to diners, making them think they have legitimate reservations at our restaurants when they really don't. The result is confusion, disappointment and frustration for guests and it damages the reputation of restaurants that work so hard to create a personal and intentional dining experience. Philadelphia's restaurant scene is built on trust, trust between guests, restaurants and the city itself. Unauthorized reservation listings break the trust of that. This legislation restores control to the people who actually run the restaurants and ensures that guests know the reservations are real. We want to acknowledge the timing of this effort. Philadelphia is about to host the Michelin Guide in a few weeks on the 18th and we're proud to be invited to attend as the world's attention turns towards our city. This proactive legislation sends a clear message Philadelphia supports its restaurants, values, transparency and protects the integrity of our hospitality industry. We strongly support this bill and urge its passage. It's a commonsense, forward-thinking measure that will help restaurants like ours continue to thrive and maintain the trust of our guests. Thank you for your time, your leadership, commitment to the hospitality community that makes Philadelphia so special.
Thank you. Thank you so much, both for your testimony and willingness to work with Councilmember Thomas to sponsor a bill and the Administration on future amendment, hopefully to be able to get this bill passed before the end of the year. And one question I had because honestly I support this wholeheartedly, but there was another question. I saw some news reports about people even putting fake reviews up there on social media and things like that.
My wife and I, yeah, both of our restaurants we received over 35 one-star reviews for both of our businesses. This was like Thursday or Friday night. Since then, Google's worked to take them down. Most of them I believe are down. But it's a scary thing to have your reputation smeared within an hour and then have somebody to extort you for the removal of such reviews. It's kind of, you know, we know the refrigerator is going to break, but that was a new one for us this week.
And maybe we could work with our sponsor here to see maybe if there's something else that we could do, because these platforms are used by others to search, to go out to restaurants. And like you said, Ben, Philadelphia is known for the restaurant scene. We have great restaurants and you could talk about any other city, but Philadelphia is the top. And to have people go in there -- and why they do it, I mean, I guess they wanted you to take them down and get paid for you to take them down?
We reached out to them. So did Michael Klein with the Philadelphia Inquirer, and we found a gentleman from Pakistan who had posted the reviews or said -- he didn't post the reviews, but he could take them down for $250. And when we were skeptical, he said mark one right now and watch me take it down. And sure enough, he was able to remove that. Unfortunately, it's out of our country, kind of out of our hands, but it's definitely a serious problem. A lot of times, especially when we have visitors come to the city, they're going to be looking at Yelp reviews, at Google reviews, at Open Table reviews, and we want to hope that they are true reviews, you know. But when you go from a 4.9 reviewed restaurant to the next day a 3-star restaurant, when somebody sees that, when a guest sees that for the first time, they skip over. They're not going to your spot. So it is an issue that I think will need to be tackled in the coming years.
Well, maybe we could work with you guys and those platforms to see how we could put better protections in place for them, because again they should be liable for their platforms and having people do this is a challenge. But I know that's not why we're here today, but I just wanted to bring that up, obviously as that could be a future concern moving forward. Any other questions? (No response.)
Mr. McMonagle, is anybody else here to testify on Bill No. 250888?
Bill No. 13 250916, can we please have Richard Montanez from the Streets Department. (Witness approached witness table.)
Rich, state your name for the record and proceed with your testimony.
Good afternoon, Chairman Squilla, members of the Council on Economic Development Committee. My name is Richard Montanez. I'm the First Deputy Commissioner for the Department of Streets. I'm here to offer testimony on Bill No. 250916, introduced by Councilmember Jones. This bill authorizes the Haverford Business Association and its successors, assigned and agents to install and maintain encroachments in the nature of decorative light fixtures in the public right-of-way attached to existing facilities owned by the City of Philadelphia or other entities subject to the owner's concession. No more than 14 decorative lights will be placed on the existing facilities in the right-of-way along the sidewalk frontage of Haverford Ave situated along Haverford Ave between Woodbine Ave and City Ave, as designated by the Philadelphia Office of Property Assessment. The Department of Streets is not opposed to these proposed encroachments and decorative lighting, so long as they comply with the laws and regulations of the city, specifically those of the Department of Licenses and Inspections, the Department of Streets and the Art Commission. This concludes my testimony. I'm pleased to answer any questions you have. Thank you.
Mr. McMonagle, is there anyone else here to testify on this bill?
All right. Thank you. We will end the public hearing at this minute to go into a public meeting and then come back in the public hearing to hear our resolution. Mr. McMonagle, before we start, should we call the roll for the public meeting.
Thank you. A quorum for the meeting is here. Chair recognizes Councilman Driscoll for a motion on the amendment to Bill No. 250888.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I offer an amendment to Bill No. 250888. A copy of the amendment has been circulated to all members of the committee and I move that the amendment to Bill No. 19 250888 be approved. (Duly seconded.)
The bill has been moved and properly seconded that the amendment to Bill 24 No. 250888 be approved. All those in favor will signify by saying aye. (Aye.)
The ayes have it and the motion carries. And the amendment to Bill 10 No. 250888 has been approved. Chair recognizes Councilmember Driscoll for a motion on Bill No. 250888 as amended.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I move that Bill No. 17 250888 as amended be reported from this committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended to permit first reading of this bill at the next session of Council. (Duly seconded.)
Chair notes for the record that Councilmember Gauthier seconds the motion. It has been moved and properly seconded that Bill No. 7 250888 as amended be reported from this committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended as to permit the first reading of this bill at the next session of Council. All those in favor will signify by saying aye. (Aye.)
The ayes have it and the motion carries. Chair recognizes Councilman Driscoll for a motion on Bill No. 250916.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I move that Bill No. 5 250916 be reported from this committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended to permit first reading of this bill at the next session of Council. (Duly seconded.)
Chair recognizes Councilwoman Gauthier seconds the motion. It has been moved and properly seconded that Bill No. 18 250916 be reported from this committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended to permit the first reading of this bill at the next session of Council. All those in favor will signify by saying aye. (Aye.)
The ayes have it and the motion carries. We will now go back into a public hearing to consider Resolution 250881 and we do have a quorum back for the public hearing. To my left, Councilmember Gauthier. To my right Councilmember Driscoll and Councilmember Thomas. Could you please read the title of the resolution.
Resolution 20 No. 250881, authorizing the Committee on Commerce and Economic Development to hold hearings on the disposition policy regarding the Polish American Cultural Center and Museum located at 3081 Walnut Street. Can we please have Michael Blichasz.
Thank you, Mr. McMonagle. Mr. Blichasz, you can come to the table. I just want to read the testimony. (Witness approached witness table.)
Before you start, Mr. Blichasz, I just want to read testimony into the record for the PRA, Philadelphia Redevelopment Authority and the Administration. This testimony is coming from David Thomas, Chairman of the Board of Directors; Angel Rodriguez, Deputy Executive of Philadelphia Development Authority. It says, Good morning, Chairperson Squilla and members of the Committee on Commerce and Economic Development. This is written testimony regarding Resolution No. 250881 submitted by David Thomas, Chairman of the Board of Directors; and Angel Rodriguez, Deputy Executive Director of Philadelphia Redevelopment Authority. It has come to our attention that the PRA and Michael Blichasz have reached out to Councilman Squilla for assistance in obtaining ownership of 308-10 Walnut Street, the property in Philadelphia, Pa which is property owned by the PRA. Mr. Blichasz's account of the events that has transpired regarding this property is inaccurate and the PRA is compelled to correct the inaccuracies presented to Councilman Squilla. As further details below, the PRA's ownership and writ of possession of the property has been fully adjudicated by the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas. Following years of long attempt, the PRA to negotiate a resolution with Mr. Blichasz on an effort met only by Mr. Blichasz's refusal to negotiate in good faith. Mr. Blichasz's refusal has imposed substantial cost to the PRA and its ability to keep the property in good repair and safe conditions. Now that the court has resolved the issue of the ownership of the possession in favor of the PRA, the PRA is in position to deal with the property in accordance with the PRA's statutory obligation, and therefore respectively request that Councilman Squilla and the rest of the Committee not pursue the counterproductive course of action proposed by Mr. Blichasz. The factual and legal history regarding the property is as follows: In 1987, Philadelphia City Council via ordinance 12 authorized the PRA to issue a bond for up to $3 million to finance the transfer of the property to the Polish American Cultural Center, PACC. The ordinance provided that the PRA and PACC enter into an installment contract dated August 21, 1987. Pursuant to which, PACC would purchase the property through installment payments in an amount of sufficient pay debt service the bonds. To install the contract also set forth, PACC's maintenance obligations with respect to the property. Over ensuing decades, PACC continued to occupy and operate within the property. PACC failed to comply with the payment obligations under the installment contract. 687750 million debt service, principal and interest, and the balance paid by the City of Philadelphia as the grantor of the bond. Records also indicate that PACC never paid the PRA annual administration fee of $1,500 from '88 through '95 totaling $12,000. The City has no records of evidence anyone in the city ever agreed to pay the balance on behalf of PACC to obtain ownership of the property. The PRA and PACC also do not have any records that established the city's agreement to pay the balance on behalf of PACC. Had that been the reason why the city paid the balance opposed to its responsibility as the grantor of the bond, the city would have advised the PRA of such and directed the PRA to complete the transfer of the property to PACC and that PRA would have transferred the property to PACC decades ago. In addition, PACC's failure to satisfy its payment obviously under the installment contract, PACC also failed to actually maintain the property, resulting in structural issues, dangerous structural issues. The PRA over the years has met with Mr. Blichasz in his capacity as President to discuss the property in June of 2019. PRA toured the property with Mr. Blichasz based on concerning conditions observed during the tour. The PRA engaged Hill International to inspect the property and produce a report.
Hill International issued the Hill report on January 2021 identifying numerous dangerous conditions at the property and long-term maintenance of the property and neglected the property. 8 million to bring the property into safe condition and in compliance with The Philadelphia Code. When PRA met with Mr. Blichasz regarding the condition of the property and finding of the Hill report, he advised that the PACC did not have sufficient funds to pay for the necessary repairs. The PRA attempted to negotiate with Mr. Blichasz offering various options, including remaining in a portion of the property pursuant to a lease, but Mr. Blichasz refused to cooperate and repeatedly requested outright ownership. I'm going to summarize the rest of this. I'll submit this to the record. But the PRA respectfully requests that the Committee recognize that the PRA properly pursued its legal rights in the court of law and established its ownership. And thank you for your time and consideration. Before I read the Administration's testimony, I just want to say that I was at several of those meetings with the PRA. And unfortunately, they're not here to testify today and receive written testimony, but I always believed back in 1987 when I received the information that an ordinance was introduced to have the City purchase the property on behalf of PACC, the organization to own that property. From what I further understand and from evidence that we have received even here today from applications for HUD grants that were sent by the Mayor at that time, Mayor Goode to receive the money to pay off the balance of that and therefore turn the property over. I do believe the intent was there. We don't have any proof that I had seen that the grant was ever fully given to the City of Philadelphia, even though they applied for it. The only letter I did see was a letter to the City of Philadelphia saying that they could use discretional HUD funds to pay off that debt if they so chose. I would always ask for an amicable solution and a compromise to figure out how we could work out a deal to be able to keep this property in the hands of the Polish Museum and PACC. That unfortunately did not happen. You heard most of the testimony from the PRA. And now, I'm just going to read testimony from the City of Philadelphia. Good afternoon, Chairman Squilla and members of the Committee of Commerce and Economic Development. My name is Jesse Lawrence, Director of Planning and Development. I'm submitting written testimony on Resolution 20 250881, introduced by Chairperson Squilla. The Department of Planning and Development of the City of Philadelphia works closely with the Philadelphia Redevelopment Authority, and we support their mission to eliminate blight and planning and developing balanced, mixed-use commercial activities, thriving well-served neighborhoods. E. Initiative to produce and preserve 30,000 homes. Despite our close working relationship with the Redevelopment Authority, the City and department have no legal ability to direct the sale of their assets. However, we share their goal being responsible stewards of the property. The Redevelopment Authority is a Pennsylvania state authority and legally independent of the City of Philadelphia. The PA Urban Redevelopment law specifies the PRA shall in no way be deemed to be instrumental of such municipality or county or engaged in performance of municipal function. See the Urban Redevelopment Law 35PS regarding the subject of today's hearing, Resolution 250881, the City does not own the property located at 308-10, Walnut Street. Therefore, the City cannot transfer this property it does not own. The authority sits solely with the Redevelopment Authority as authorized to sell, lease or otherwise transfer its real estate property. The Administration supports the PRA's action and decision, the court process and the court order issued based on the evidence of the court regarding ownership of 308-10 Walnut Street.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify. I just wanted to read that into the record. We will submit this written testimony to the record. And I want to give the opportunity to Mr. Blichasz. State your name for the record and then proceed with your testimony.
Wonderful. Thank you so much for allowing us to have this opportunity and thank you, Councilman Squilla, who's constantly been with us through this whole process and, of course, Mike Driscoll, who I've known and worked with for many years. He's been an unbelievable champion. He's now in the seat that was occupied by the board, one of the board members of the Polish American Social Service Agency, and that one of the people who really suggested that this whole project come about. Before I start, let me just tell you that this was an opportunity welcomed by the Council, not by the Polish American community, to bring a new historic feature to the City of Philadelphia. And Joan and others who are very instrumental --
Councilwoman Krajewski was very instrumental in getting these things involved. And we had a committee, a Building committee at that time who worked very closely with her. And we had different people on the committee, Cardinal Krol, Ed Piszek, Irene Schmidt and Gene Pasymowski, who were part of the Building committee with other individuals. I was not on that committee and I attended no get-togethers on what they should do and this and that. But the Mayor of Philadelphia, having been through some tough times in '85 and '86, was very open and recommended this kind of a property. Remember, Polish American Social Services was a social service, a human service agency, not an exhibit hall. Our original name of the building we were in, in Fairmount was Polish American Center. It was a Polish American Center mainly because it was a place where groups came to coordinate events like Folk Festival, Polish American weekend at Penn's Landing, the Pulaski Day Parade. We were not an exhibit hall where the people, the great people of Council, thought this would be a wonderful opportunity to bring something new to historic Philadelphia and allow people to get a new group of people to promote historic Philadelphia. In 1987, it was proposed and it was proposed in '86 at the time of a very difficult situation going on in Philadelphia. And of course, they thought it was a wonderful idea, a new opportunity to outreach the people. And this, the board of the social service agency made it crystal clear, abundantly clear, let me say, that they could not take on such a project on their own. We were a human service agency, not a museum. This was a new thing. The Building committee from the city, they located several properties. One was at 308 Walnut Street. We went there and took a look. And of course, everybody thought it was wonderful and they thought it was a great opportunity. It was sold. If it was me, I would have had a lot more questions and I would have documented even more. You know yourself, Mark, Councilman Squilla, when they came to have a meeting at our place, they were baffled with the amount of records that we had. Luckily, our people were the kind who held onto records and they wanted our stuff more than anything. And I said, fine, I'll give you whatever we have as long as you show us what you have. That never happened to date. Let me just give you a quick rundown. I made this quick and I'll give you a copy of what I have. In '87, they asked us -- Councilwoman Joan Krajewski suggested this would be an opportunity for Philadelphia, not for the Polish American community alone, but for Philadelphia to be able to outreach to Polish people to come to Philadelphia because we had many events in Philadelphia. And so, we did that at her suggestions and many of the good people who I mentioned before did great unbelievable work, not only great but unbelievable work, trying to make it happen. But we made it clear there is no way a social service agency would take on this kind of obligation without it being totally funded. I mean, Joan was talking about the Mummers Museum, the Black History Museum, the Swedish Museum, all these things, but it never got to the point that we were going to say yes, unless it was totally funded with some kind of public grants. Bearing that in mind, our good Mayor, who we regard as an outstanding friend and endless participant of everything that we did in the community, filed -- first of all, we raised money after we went to the building. Yes, they did put this ordinance in City Council with the understanding, and it was agreed by everybody that the City of Philadelphia would generate the money to pay for this property. No dancing around, there was no 12 dancing around. The thing is the City Council was very involved at this time.
Councilman Cohen, Councilman Rafferty, there were several other Councilmen who were very involved in this process and sold the idea as a very positive thing for Philadelphia. Everybody went for it. Next thing that happened is the people agreed. They all went to the settlement and our attorney at the time was George Mechetto(ph). He was there and everything went through as it should have been. We then moved our offices after the settlement to 308 Walnut Street and the Social Service Agency was to be the main recipient of the grant, not the Cultural Center, because it was Polish American Center. There was no culture name in there. It was Polish American Center, 804 North 24th Street in Fairmount. The next thing is Mayor Goode appoints Edward Schwartz, the Director of Housing and Community Development, to be the main contact for him. Done. He came, they went to him. They went to 222 North 24th Street for various meetings. Luckily, I didn't attend but I wish I was there. But the thing is all of this went through. Council totally approved this ordinance, as you heard and you saw. I sent all of you copies of it and I will give you additional information and copies. I'll fax it to all of you, if not fax, but email it to all of you today. Ed Schwartz was extremely instrumental in helping to get that thing through Council. The next thing was the settlement. The settlement was done and there was a grant that was supposed to be included to help the building to be repaired. The building needed a good amount of funds, so I have this in the package. And Wilson Goode sent this off under the name of the Philadelphia Department -- wait, the Housing and Community Development under the direction of Edward Schwartz. We had nothing to do with the Philadelphia Redevelopment Authority. I'd never heard of them until afterwards when George started to say, well, yeah, they were involved through the processing of the thing this, here you have copies of this and how it was sent directly to Washington to then Secretary Pierce, when Pierce, when the cultural center was opened on August 9, 1988. Then Vice-President Bush came to the Cultural Center for the ribbon-cutting of the new exhibit hall. He went in, he got a beautiful tour of the place and he totally agreed to make this a priority in the HUD administration with Samuel Pierce.
I don't want to cut you off here but just a quick question. So you moved into the property in '87?
We paid 100% of our own. We've never received a penny from the city for any kind of operational cost of the museum or anything, no. The agency may have received some grants for agency-type social service work but never the museum.
Did you ever have a lease from the PRA or never had a lease from anybody?
No, there is no such document like that. In fact, Mark, let me just say a few more things and we'll go right to that, what you're talking about. When Vice-President Bush came, four months later he became President of the United States. He appointed Jack Kemp as the Secretary of HUD. Jack Kemp asked Wilson -- by the way, let me just say this. Joan Krajewski and her group prepared a letter that went to then Chairman of the Finance Committee for the City of Philadelphia. You have that in that packet that you have. Lucien Blackwell, who we knew very well too, he was a great supporter of everything Polish. He on June 27, 1987, he was asked to move forward, it was at that time they were adjourning Council, I guess for the summer or whatever, to put that into every possibility as the building was being settled, to get this thing through the HUD, push the Goode Administration and Ed Schwartz and anybody who was involved with the HUD grants from the federal government. That was that. We moved into the building. The Vice-President comes. He becomes President. He then appoints Jack Kemp. When Jack Kemp became the person who became the new Secretary of HUD, he requested that Ed Schwartz forward a new application for federal assistance, and that was then sent on March 28th of '89. That was going to be for a grant without the repair funds included. Anybody who has that copy of the grant you can see it, without the repair funds. Because he said that the Social Service Agency was 100% eligible to receive that grant, which it did. Then what happened? Then he and John Heinz got very involved in the project. You have a copy of the letter. John Heinz followed this very closely because John Heinz and his family were very involved in the Heinz Museum in Pittsburgh and he was really unbelievable. He came to visit us at the Cultural Center, and he had met with Ed Schwartz and he agreed with Senator Schwartz, Jack Kemp. In view of the limited funds remaining in the fiscal budget in Washington, the City of Philadelphia may wish to consider optional resources for the funding of the project, such as local reprogramming of the Community Development Block Grants they already have secured in their treasury in Philadelphia or take a loan against a future community development entitlement to pay it off. It was totally to pay -- it's listed in the letter, you all have a copy of it -- for Polish American Social Services, not for the Cultural Center, but to Social Services. This here was submitted through Mayor Goode, signed, sealed and delivered by Mayor Goode, acknowledged by Mayor Goode, acknowledged by Ed Schwartz, acknowledged by Senator Arlen Specter, acknowledged by Senator Heinz. Everything was smooth. How the Redevelopment Authority took over everything only -- they were supposed to be the processing agent. They were supposed to be the processing agent for this grant when it came through. They have on their records Polish American Cultural Center, not Polish American Social Services. Social Services is the 501(c)(3) organization. Okay. Let's go to the next thing. For 30 years, it was total silence. In late 2017, we were looking to do -- we did a lot of repairs on that building, side wall. You can look at the permits in the city. We put on brand new towers. It cost us $100,000-plus the cranes and all to take that tower to the roof and all this sort of stuff. Permits are all listed within the City of Philadelphia. What was done paid for by the Polish American community, no one else. Not one penny from Philadelphia. Okay. The next thing, 30 years passed and we go to get the deed. Unfortunately, the lady who would be caring for the deed and they're all gone. They have a person looking through the files, can't find anything. So I said, call the Department of Records, see what's going on there.
Get a copy of the deed from them because the grants from Harrisburg and foundations wanted two pages of the deed to show that this was not a city property, a religious property, or anything other than a 501(c)(3) property, done. They said then contact the Department of -- Redevelopment Department because they're listed on there too. Okay. We went to the Redevelopment Authority and that's when all hell broke loose. That was in 2018. We went to the Department of Redevelopment. When I contacted them -- I contacted them -- I had another person contact them too from the board. They didn't know anything about it. It must have been shoved in some file or whatever. But then I found out, I went through the process of finding out what the hell was going on all this time. So I said that we had a meeting, if you remember, in your office. They said we had the meeting first at the Cultural Center. That was in March 2019. Do you remember that meeting on the fifth floor, Mark? You'll never forget that meeting on the fifth floor. But anyways, their attorney said to me, I want to come and we're going to copy all your information. I have tons of information. Irene and all those were great hoarders. So after that, it went silent again. I called, no 21 response. I called, then the pandemic came. Imagine March of 2019 to March 2020. Silence again. The pandemic came, nothing, zero. Couldn't get anything. I asked Susan at that meeting in March of 2019, Susan Varesco, the attorney for the Redevelopment Authority, I said, here is what is needed. I need a sheet of paper. If you go to buy a property -- I said, this can be settled very quickly. Do you remember my words? This can be settled very quickly. I need a bill of sale or something. I will take it to Harrisburg. I will take it to Washington and ask them to do what is right for something that has not been properly done. Unfortunately, it wasn't properly done. And 30 years is very questionable why anything could be not touched in 30 years. Really makes me wonder what the hell was going on over there. When John Heinz -- let me backtrack one second. 1, million, that was in May of 1989. They agreed. We'd be done. We'd be signed off whenever the budget signed off. Done. That's where that stood. Unfortunately, our buddy John Heinz was killed in that helicopter crash, that plane crash. Otherwise, he's the kind of guy who would definitely come and be part of this hearing today. All those people, people like Cardinal Krol, if you go on the front page of Google and put in Cardinal Krol and his involvement with the Cultural Center, it's all there. He regarded this as a very important part of what he did for the community and to help Philadelphia. After all the stuff that happened in Osage and everything, he was very involved with that. So the story is this: They needed that bill of sale. In order to resolve this, we need a sheet of paper. I couldn't get it. It's seven years. Something that could have been solved in seven weeks, seven months, it's seven years and nothing happened. They thought they could push us around. Unfortunately, it hasn't worked. There's something else I want to say that, and you have this in your packet, Councilmember Street met with the board of the Center and the board of Polish American Social Services. And at that meeting, these are his words -- there's Councilmember John Street and Councilmember James Tayoun held a personal meeting and where he said, we wrote the ordinance -- I didn't write the ordinance so I have no idea even how that process works. We wrote the ordinance so no matter what, the City would help you to maintain or pay for this property and get it off the books. He said, Don't be worried, stop concerning yourself. I had a very nice lady involved, Irene Schmidt. Many of you may remember her. She was a realtor and she liked to get things -- she called this thing down. And he said, Don't worry about it. One way or another it's a done deal. Stop already being concerned.
Well, with that unfortunately, volunteer board members tried their best, they did their best. And I will tell you no 19 one has done better to make a project requested by members of City Council, not only Joan Krajewski, it was Councilman Cohen and others that came forward. Lucien Blackwell, he was overwhelmed. He said, we have never done anything like this, not even one time for the Polish American community. Of course, we're going to move forward full steam ahead.
So real quick question: You never had a lease in the building. You're in there years?
Did you ever receive anything in writing or letters from the Redevelopment Authority?
Did they ever give you a number or an amount that you owed to the Redevelopment Authority?
Was it owed to the Redevelopment Authority? I have no idea.
Well, you had showed me information and papers from the OPA that had Polish Cultural Center as the owner of that property.
But who is supposed to owe that money too because that's why I asked for that piece of paper from Susan Varesco. I asked her and Greg Heller. I said, Give me that piece of paper. Otherwise -- even when I went more recently to Senator Fetterman and his people, they said, Michael, where's the paper? If I'm -- by the way, Scott Heppard, you remember dealing with him about this. He said to me, Where's the piece of paper to tell us exactly what you need if we put in an earmark or some kind of a grant and get the caucus to back it, where's the piece of paper. We need this, not this, and we never got it. They never sent it to us. I regard that as very unfortunate that they did that. Very, very sad that they did it. So the thing is that whatever they did should be resolved. Now, here is one more thing I have to say. We did not find out until the meeting that in 2019 City Council has no 13 involvement in the HUD funds coming to Philadelphia, as John Heinz thought was still coming in, Senator Heinz. Senator Specter said, You have the City Council work together with them. They handle it. Now, under Mayor Goode, there was a closer relationship with this. Joan Krajewski, Councilwoman, sort of ruled a lot of these things. And that's all I'll say.
Okay. I mean, we do approve the City budget that has federal dollars in it. So we do approve the budget, but we don't direct HUD dollars.
Well, I know. They give you a budget that says you have $50 or whatever. You just approve it. You know that they got $50 from the federal government, but you don't have any way to administer those dollars; is that correct?
Mike, I know this has been an anxious part of the last couple of years with you. We've had many conversations on this. And I'm not asking you as a lawyer. The question I'm going to ask you is, have you explored legal action against the City and/or the Redevelopment Authority? And do you possibly have a claim of adverse possession?
Well, adverse possession is not done or able to be done, from what I'm told, because it is owned by or was owned by the City. And until the City officially turned it over, it's still real property of the City. And I know that Councilman Squilla mentioned that and stated that loud and clear, and others have by the way. And I think --
Point of information. Adverse possession can be granted in the court with city-owned property. It has been done in the past. It can be granted.
Good. Okay. Let me just say this, and I want to say this without any problems and I want everybody here to understand why this took a very strange turn too. When this first came up in 2019, I called the Mayor's office, that's when I found out that the Mayor governs all the money from the federal government. I didn't know that. I had no idea. No one from the Redevelopment Authority who I've never really had any contact, period, with never said that we are the only ones and the Mayor -- I had to research that on my own. I found out through Harrisburg when that all came about, the whole deal. The thing that is very strange, very, very strange about this is no one at the Redevelopment Authority said, do something about this, in what would it be, 1990, I guess 1991, nothing.
Point of information. When did the Redevelopment Authority go to the courts?
Oh, no, after the pandemic. We had a meeting in your office in December of 2022. Do you remember that meeting? In fact, I think a couple people were in there. They said to us that no action whatsoever would be taken unless you, as Councilman of the First District and Michael Blichasz as President of this organization was notified in advance. You remember that?
Yes, okay. Instead, a few months later I get a letter in the mail that it's been taken to court. I ask a few people what they thought. To me, I would have gone to the court. If it was me personally, oh, yes, I would have done it because I could speak my mind. And of course then I'd have to be represented, which would then probably be George Mechetto. At that time, our former Mayor was in office. I had contacted the office and his staff said -- he said, Well, tell us -- you went to meeting about this, this and that. And I said, Yes. And who else would be in the meeting? First I said, Councilman Squilla. And then I said, our friend, the attorney, who's a longtime friend and members of ours, George Mechetto. She got back to me, such a meeting can't happen. And I said, Why? And she said, Well, it's nothing to do against the Polish community, but you have two people who have done things to the Mayor, and he will not meet. Do you remember that, Mark?
On the record, that was not said to me from the Mayor.
Not the Mayor. The Mayor's staff. Not the Mayor. He never said that to me either. The Mayor's staff said we couldn't do that and any additional attempts for a meeting would have to come from you. Do you remember that?
And they directed it to the PRA to meet with the people.
Hold on. And then we did set up a meeting with the Redevelopment Authority.
That's right. When this Mayor came to office, everybody said -- by the way, courts, a lot of those people who were involved in this project are gone long before any court case. I'm not about to go and act on their behalf. I could act on my behalf, but I can't give you the details that they could give you. They should have taken this to court 30 years ago, but they didn't. They should have, and that should be on the record of the city, that anything that is sitting around for four, five, six years must be directed to the proper department to take action. Where were they sitting for 30 years with these files, with that building, never entering the property. If they owned a building, why didn't they come to see if the roof was okay, and where's your lease. There was nobody that came. The thing you read today from the Administration, that's like lollygaggy dreams as far as I'm concerned. It doesn't mean anything because, number one, they didn't follow through with the piece of paper that I asked for from day 1 and consistently asked for. Brendan Boyle asked me to get that a few years ago because he said, in order to get a federal grant, we would need what it's exactly for. When I talked to Fetterman, he said same thing. When I talked with the staff of the new guy, McCormick, he said the same thing, where's the paper, what are we putting in an earmark for, what are we putting in. We have to have a paper that has something on it, not conversation, and it has to come from the people who say they own the building, not from you. I called Dave Thomas recently again within four months. And I asked him, will you get that. You know what he said? Go on the front page of our site and fill the sheet in. They don't do that kind of stuff. An elected official wants to know that this is what you're able to generate, not them.
Okay. So after we had these meetings, there were a couple offers that were made to me to present to you. Those offers from what I understand were not accepted, and correct me if I'm wrong, it's because the Polish community believe they own the building. Therefore, why should they take an offer to lease or sell the building and move out and other things.
Would there be any means of making an agreement if an offer was made similar to those offers in the past?
Well, here is something which would be interesting and we discussed this before. When Joan Krajewski was involved, Councilwoman --
Mike, a lot of those people aren't here anymore and it's hard to get information. And --
One second. I would agree with you if they would have did this years 13 ago, those people who were involved 14 would be alive and they might have 15 been able to address those issues. 16 We can't go back on what they did. 17
But here 18 is something I want to tell you. 19 Councilwoman Krajewski was asked, 20 why can't we do something like the Black History Museum has, like the Mummers Museum has. And she said, because we're now doing this kind of situation, this kind of deal. The Councilmen at that time wanted it to be a one-and-done deal. Once you get the property, you take care of it. That's your obligation.
And from looking at historic facts, I think it was Bicentennial time is when I think Mayor Rizzo at that time --
-- had organized and supported the building of the African American Museum and the Mummers Museum, the two museums. So they had done that. And this happened afterwards as a different type of -- those buildings were built by the City of Philadelphia, owned by the City of Philadelphia and leased to those organizations.
The property that you were involved with and the legislation that passed for the Polish Museum was done differently in that the organization would own the building, which is what you believe the intent of the legislation was.
That's what the intent was. Based upon all the political people who received letters from Washington. In fact, in your packet too you have another letter that came recently from HUD. It's on this blue paper. It's in the packet I gave to you where it says, On behalf of the new Secretary under Trump, Scott Turner, thank you for your letter for funding the Polish American Cultural Center Museum. This is possible through the Community Development Block Grant Program, which may be able to assist you. What they were requesting that we contact this gentleman in Philadelphia, Mark Dodds. He's the Policy and Planning Program Manager, which I did. They said that the City received in that particular Community Development Block Grant program, $44,299,000 and I should be in touch with them. I did speak to Mark. And of course, a lot of this stuff is based upon all this stuff with the hearings and all, how is it going to turn out? It could still be something. Mark, if there was a deal to do what they did with the Black History Museum, the Mummers Museum, the Swedish Museum. I mean, nobody owns this property individually. This could stand and live forever. One of the things that Wilson Goode --
Are you saying if there was a deal, you would consider it or --
That kind of deal, but not with the Redevelopment Authority. That goes to the Department of --
That's who owns those buildings. I can't sell that building and benefit from it. You can't sell it.
They can sell property. PRA can sell property. Public Property can sell property.
But if there were other opportunities to look at other options, the Polish Museum, Social Service organizations would consider them because previous offers for some offers were not accepted?
No, those were insane. If you look at what they said, you can stay there while we're looking for a customer or you can have one floor and we'll rent the other floors out. It was insane. The building, the reason --
One of the offers was to sell the building outright and then give you proceeds to relocate to another.
There was a number. That was the number because I asked point blank. And they said, well, based -- about 150. I said that is totally -- it's not even something anybody would even think about.
What would be acceptable to the Museum and/or the Polish Cultural --
If it was transferred to Public Property and they helped to repair it, I could get funds from Washington and Harrisburg to do what we were planning to do back in 2017, 2018.
When you applied for that grant to fix the facade or whatever it was that there was some need for work that was done, none of that work obviously has been done to date.
That work hasn't been done. The painting on the building hasn't been done in 6 years. The new wall was put up 7 about 30 years ago. It's in fine 8 condition. There was a new roof 9 put in on there by the Polish 10 American community. That was at 11 the time they were opening the 12 museum. That was all paid for by 13 the Cardinal Krol tribute that had 14 thousands of people at the Civic 15 Center. 16
So 17 again, you would consider if they 18 came up with -- if the 19 Administration or the PRA, 20 Redevelopment Authority, came up 21 with an offer, the community would 22 consider that offer instead of 23 going through this eviction 24 process. From what I understand, they went to the courts, they ruled that the PRA, Redevelopment Authority, owned the property and they started the eviction process.
The option is what we discussed seven years ago, to do a deal, which unfortunately Councilwoman Krajewski did not bring to the table, and don't ask me why because I wasn't involved to that degree other than the fact that they said it would be a one-and-done deal. Let's move forward with it and get it over with. The grants -- Mark, the fact that these grants were sent to Washington to HUD are proof that they worked hard, all the responses that came -
I'm not saying what the intent was. I believe the same intent you believe in my mind.
And other people may not. But it did say in their testimony it was approximately $4 million that would have been owed on that property. If they say that you paid that amount to own the property, is that something that you would be interested in?
Well, the thing is this, let me just tell you, we discussed this and if the property was finalized as it was supposed to be in '87, that would be a $2.1 million deal plus the repairs, and there was something else I'll bring up too. But anyways, that would average to $60,000 a year over 35 years if you look at it that way. We never asked the City for a penny of operational funds. They should just say here. I wrote a letter to Mayor Parker that was on May 12, 2025 -- you remember seeing that letter -- asking her, which was suggested by Senator McCormick, to just transfer the property to Polish American Social Services or sell the property to Polish American social services because they need that piece of paper to say what we can do with earmarks, federal earmarks, and then I would have the job to get the Caucus to fund the place and get it over with. For some reason, everybody wanted this property to be in the hands of the Polish American community, not another property where the City has to worry about leases or whatever. Don't ask me why this continues to come up.
I mean, that might have been the intent. But obviously, we don't have any proof of how it came to be in where we are today, except for the fact that the City did or the Redevelopment Authority purchased a property where they floated bonds for it. They paid off the bonds in 2010, right. And at that time, they then owned the property outright whether -- I know OPA, you said it said Cultural Center on there. But the issue we're trying to get to is, is there a possible way to continue the use of that building as a service or other option that would be considered? We understand -- Councilman Driscoll asked you about an attorney, are you interested. It sounds like you're not interested in getting an attorney. You do not want to go to legal action. You did not respond to the court cases. So you would consider other options if the PRA or the City proposed them to you. I'm not saying that is even the case. I don't know if they're even willing to do that.
Let me ask you this, Councilman. All buildings are owned by the taxpayers. In this case, they're administered by the City of Philadelphia, correct?
Could that property be transferred to Public Property in the way of the Black History Museum and the Mummers Museum? Not to put it into a situation where an organization who has gone out of their way to try to hurt us, what I would say myself, Michael Blichasz, spite us.
Can I just say this. With an agreement, the City could agree to do a lot of different things if they so wanted to. There were offers early on during this process that were not accepted.
Well, there was nothing from the Department of Recreation or Public Properties. It was only by the Redevelopment Authority.
And so, a lease from the Redevelopment Authority would not be acceptable, but a lease from Public Property would be acceptable?
Sure. That's because I know that they are part of the Mummers Museum, the Black -- It's no individual's property. I can't sell it. You can't sell it. None of the people who are still left here can sell it. It's public -- by the way, when this whole thing came about, Wilson our Mayor, Wilson Goode who was a very close friend of ours, said this is what we need. We want to bring people to Philadelphia. And Philadelphia is in the same situation now. It needs to bring people. With all the negative publicity, we need to bring people for positive things. That's what the Polish people are most known for, doing positive things to bring people to the city. As I said, our main goal is social services. Our secondary goal with this new deal that came about in '87 is to also help to bring people to Philadelphia. Get it, move to Public Properties and then it's up to the good people in the community, which we have tons of them, and a lot of them are disappointed that this kind of thing even would go on for 30 years. Mark, if we switched places today, would you like hearing that there was no 8 notification to your organization for 30 years? I don't think so.
Councilman Driscoll, would you like to hear that there was nothing said or nothing sent to your organization for 30 years letting them know that there was any problem, anything with the grants not being processed properly or whatever?
I'm just going to make one point before we complete. The attorney you mentioned has been successful in other cases against the City of Philadelphia. If you would have chose to go in that direction, it may have been a different outcome. Obviously, that's in the past.
Well, I mean would you consider hiring an attorney to address those issues or would you rather make a compromise, deal with the PRA?
I think we can have a good, well-working member of our community take care of that. I don't understand why it couldn't have been taken care of with us.
We understand. We don't know that answer. I don't know that answer.
Their legal recourse was not a decision that the Polish community wanted to take, correct?
Correct. And, Mark, I just would like to add one thing. Because this started out under grants, I think that it might be -- I don't think that -- because so many people are involved in Washington and all now, I have to bring it together. They're interested to help. You're friendly with Brendan Boyle, the Councilman. They said, give me that paper. Alicia says to me, where is the paper. McCormick, where's the paper. Before you know it -- I'm saying this because they can come to an agreement. And I have a very, very reasonable, very good friend of ours who is an attorney, a longtime participant of the organization, no problem, but I wouldn't go to such a hearing to degrade the people who began this effort, people like Ed Piszek, Cardinal, Krol, Irene Schmidt, all these other people, I would not go to a court and degrade them. Absolutely not.
All 9 right. I have no other questions. 10 I'm just going to say sometimes 11 though when you feel like you're 12 not being heard or somebody's doing 13 something that's not legal, that 14 you do have to go to the courts for 15 that decision. That's all I'm 16 saying. And if it's a choice to 17 not do that, I'm fine with that 18 also. 19 But sometimes there are, 20 you know, the reason why we have 21 three branches of government is for 22 that reason, to try to keep each 23 branch in line. 24 Councilman Driscoll.
Are you currently occupying that property or are you --
Not by court order, no, no. What happened is this, when the court decided it was the City of Philadelphia property, no problem. I would have never argued that because I looked at the Department of Records right here. On one side, it says it was satisfied by the City of Philadelphia, satisfied by the city of Philadelphia and owned by the Cultural Center from 1992 to 2010. We never knew that there was any kind of a changeover back. For whatever reason it was, no one knew this was happening. If they had said, hey, by the way, guys, you didn't do this or you have to do this or that, that would be different. That would have been settled years ago. 5 Our attorney by the way, 6 I want to put this on the record, 7 did speak to Mr. Thomas maybe five 8 months ago and it was the same 9 rigmarole. He said it was 10 niceties. They knew different 11 things because this person had 12 worked, you know, in various parts 13 of city government. But it was 14 always that we wanted our -- 15 whatever. The thing is transfer it to Public Properties as the other museums are and no problem. I'd only like to add one thing. If these people in Washington want to give money to own the building, it would be put in the -- if they gave the money to the City to pay for it, it would be put into a Polish Foundation's name. To continue that operation, that building would be the place that they have to do that. I want to keep everybody happy, because people in HUD in Washington are saying to contact this gentleman in Philadelphia because you're eligible. You have it in your packets, for the museum portion. Remember, it should have been under the name Polish American Social Services, which is what Jack Kemp told Wilson Goode to do, and he did it, and it was signed, sealed and delivered. And all these people, these great people, came and said it was finalized. And no one ever came for 30 years. So that's what happened.
Thank you, Mr. Blichasz, for your testimony. We have all your documentation here that we will submit for the record and I will call to the order of the Chair that we will close the hearing, but we'll leave this open for future conversations.
Well, my final question is what's tomorrow going to bring. Tomorrow is a Council day -- and by the way, all members of City Council, I don't know why this is, because they were more involved with this than our Council is able to be involved now. That's possibly because Mayor Goode and the Council worked closer. However, I don't know what it was.
I mean, there was a Council ordinance 20 that allowed this to occur as part of the agreement.
But even after the Council ordinance was done, the Councilmembers came to all the events, of course Tayoun and others, Rafferty, and all they came to all the events. They were just pushing this like it was a done deal. That's what makes this so weird. That's all.
Mark, I would like you to bring it up to Council and ask them. And also, I have to tell you -- because I already started this with the people in Washington -- they say that normally the money that comes from HUD is supposed to be administered by administrative and legislative portions of the government. That's not how it is in Philadelphia. It's done by the Administration and not by the legislative -- the Council.
City Council is the legislative arm of government. We are not the executive branch.
I know. But is that a reason to change the Charter, that each group has some representation as they do. They told me in Harrisburg, it's that way. In Scranton, it's that way. In Pittsburgh, it's that way. Why not in Philadelphia?
Okay. Well, thank you for that. We do approve the budget though that has the HUD dollars. So that would conclude the hearing today and we'll leave it open to the call of the Chair in case we need another additional hearing. And I really want to thank you for your testimony and hopefully we can find some resolution. (Committee on Commerce and Economic Development concluded at 4:49 p.m.) C E R T I F I C A T I O N I, hereby certify that the proceedings and evidence noted are contained fully and accurately in the stenographic notes taken by me in the foregoing matter, and that this is a correct transcript of the same. __________________________________ TANEHA CARROLL