Well, were saying we're going to take months, we're going to pass this bill out of committee, which I will vote for, and we're going to take months supposedly to consider Neighborhood Transformation Initiative. I'm assuming that most people are going to do it from the beach.
I'm assuming that most people are going to do it from the beach. But essentially, what is City Council's capacity? Where do we have the technical capacity 118 5/29/01 - WHOLE - BILL 010261 to review this? Or are we going to actually construct a plan based upon desires of the members of this body, or are we simply going to take time to pick away at one? I want to know, what is City Council's technical capacity? What capacity do we have on technical staff to consider this initiative?
We have recently hired a consultant who certainly has great expertise.
Well, I will be sending a memo out very shortly to let you know who the consultant is, and anybody can feel free --
And unlike the stadium deal, are we going to have input on what this consultant considers?
Well, we did not on the stadium deal. We had a consultant come in here to testify or administration bills that said that they were representing City Council. 119 5/29/01 - WHOLE - BILL 010261
Well, I'll tell you, with the stadium issue, I think we all agree that that was an 11th hour issue, and I don't know that you or I or a consultant really had ample time in which to consider just about anything.
I -- (Unintelligible, parties talking over each other.)
Just a minute. This would have been another 11th hour issue.
But before we vote this out of committee, I want to know what we're going to commit to doing, beyond whatever consultant you have in mind, to give Council the technical capacity to do what needs to be done to transform neighborhoods. If we supposedly don't like or don't understand or have enough information about what the Mayor submitted, let us decide now before we vote this out of committee that when we come back, we will be actually ready. Or at least tell me the name of the consultant.
And in addition to which, Council President, I really need to get a 120 5/29/01 - WHOLE - BILL 010261 sense of what this process will be 'cause I've been around for a while and I understand the difficulties associated with getting members to focus during the summer months 'cause they're out doing things in their districts and in their areas. And I have not heard -- we are approaching that recess point of any process that will have members either in small groups or as a whole meet with Council, meet with the Administration over the summer, and I'm increasingly becoming concerned that we will leave here on the 14th and we will never discuss this until September. And, I mean, I really -- I'm feeling you were comfortable with that possibility.
Let me just say that we have asked the Administration a number of questions and they have not responded to them. So I am saying to you, it is now up to all of us. I think there is not a member of this Council who does not want to see NTI being a success, and we're all very eager to work toward the goal of making it a successful project. I know that you say that some people will be at the beach and are they going to work at 121 5/29/01 - WHOLE - BILL 010261 the beach?
The beach is only 60 miles or 90 miles away, and people don't sit on the beach all summer; they do come into the office. So I'm sure that Councilmembers would make themselves available to deal with this issue at any time. Councilwoman Tasco, you wanted to be recognized?
Point of order, point of order. I had a question on the floor. My question is about the process that will be set up as it relates to the Council and the Administration. You have indicated that there were a number of questions asked of the Administration by this Council. Is that questions asked by the technical staff or by numbers of members of Council?
The tech staff. 122 5/29/01 - WHOLE - BILL 010261
I think Councilman Goode put forward a framework before this last intervention that he made. If we're going to be able to put forward $250 million as a start, we have done this before in this Council. We have spent $300 million one time in North Philadelphia, and after the expenditures of the money, North Philadelphia still looked as bad. We had $100 million in economic --
Point of order, point of order. Well, can you reference that $300 million? 'Cause I'm looking for it.
It was spent. In 1986, we put out some bonds -- I'll give you the --
It was not spent, Councilman. It was not spent, Councilman. 123 5/29/01 - WHOLE - BILL 010261
You implied that $300 million was spent in North Philadelphia and it looks the same. That is not factual.
I'm saying we had a plan and it did not work because the things -- and we appropriated and we passed --
That was not for North Philadelphia; it was a citywide plan.
For the City of Philadelphia, not for North Philadelphia.
But it didn't work. And this 250 it is for the City. So the issue is, are we going to be able to leverage a plan? And I think this discussion is both Administration and City Council. I think it is us as a body deciding as to how it is best to leverage and really not just 124 5/29/01 - WHOLE - BILL 010261 build a few low-income housing projects of one-family housing across the City that speckle different neighborhoods but that really begins to develop jobs in those areas in North Philadelphia that can attract, maintain people living in those areas and give those individuals the wherewithal to sustain a house, to sustain a family, and not move out of the district. And I think we don't have that yet, and we haven't had that discussion. I think what we were talking -- what Wilson alleged at one point is that that discussion needs to take place, and it's not just the Administration, but it is us. If we're going to have a consultant, we're going to have to sit down with the consultant and say, This is what we're looking, this is what you're looking for or me or whatever it is and put it into a discussion and say to the Mayor, say to the Administration, You propose that we have some changes along the same lines. And have a real give-and-take as to what economic development really means in the neighborhoods. Not 108 loans that we just gave to renovate law firms in Center City and now we're 125 5/29/01 - WHOLE - BILL 010261 going to have to be paying some of the interest on that. But what economic development and neighborhood revitalization really means. And I think -- I think if we have that discussion, we may come out with a plan in which $250 million can be leveraged to really begin a kickoff point across the City in terms of different neighborhoods.
I feel real good about what my friend and my colleague said, but all I'm asking for is a process and understanding that you may not be able to answer that today in this forum. But I've been around and --
And I think it should be addressed in this forum.
I'm telling you, people get out of here June 14th, and I'm really concerned that there will be no discussion in any formalized way during the course of the summer about this issue. And that's my biggest concern.
Councilwoman Tasco. 126 5/29/01 - WHOLE - BILL 010261
I think that the issue for us as District Councilmembers, and I know at-large Councilmembers should have concern for the City as a total. I think the process has to go back to what is the plan. And we have said over and over again we don't -- we have a framework, but we do not have a plan. And if I look at the City today on a map and we give $250 million, what will the City look like when we spend the $250 million? That's what I'd like to see. My concern is that the framework was put together. We all know the problems that exist. We need -- all districts are different. My district may not require as much demolition as maybe another district. What will be spent in the 9th District or the 4th District or any other district is going to show that there's a difference in the expenditure of funds to make a difference. What am I going to get for the 9th Councilmatic District in terms of rehab money, of stabilization money? I lose my people to Montgomery County every week. What does this $250 million mean? It is unlike doing a TIF, because it's for a specific project. We know a building's going to be 127 5/29/01 - WHOLE - BILL 010261 done and so many things are going to go into this building. We're asking for money for the entire city where there are ten districts, and everyone in each district is seriously anticipating to see what's going to happen in their community. Either tell us something's going to happen in that community or nothing's going to happen in that community. I had no input in terms of the development of this framework except to discuss what the problems are. I don't know what input I will have in terms of determining what the solutions will be in terms of what it means for the 9th Councilmatic District. And my concern is what this $250 million means, and I want that process, however we set it up, whether it's the Administration going back to the table saying to each District Councilperson, This is what you're going to have and this is what your district's going to look like when we spend $250 million. I think that is very clear. I have said it over and over and over again. I don't think I have miscommunicated what my concerns are. And all 128 5/29/01 - WHOLE - BILL 010261 I want is those concerns addressed. I do not want one group getting $450,000 and I'm told that's all the 9th Councilmatic is getting, and I have 155,000 people, wards, and other people in Olney and Logan 6 especially looking for some activity in their community. I want to know what that means. I do not know what it means based on the bill that we have before us. It has nothing to do with anything else except that I want to be able to say to the 9th Councilmatic District, This is what we're going to do, bottom line. How we get to that. . . Since we didn't introduce the plan, I think it rests with the City to do it.
Miss Wilkerson, I think that you heard Councilwoman Tasco. Is there a possibility that each District Councilperson can be told precisely what activities would go on in his or her district?
I couldn't put it any more clearer than Councilwoman Tasco. I'm interested in what the 6th District, as well as the other District Councilpeople.
And I think 129 5/29/01 - WHOLE - BILL 010261 the expectations of this in the community is just so high. As a matter of fact, there was one group that I met with a couple of month ago months ago, and I think they truly believe that at one end of the street, they're going to see a new recreation center, and at the other end, there's going to be a new library. I think that the expectations are just so high. They really are. Do you think there's a possibility that the Administration can break it down by each Councilmatic District as to what activities would go on in their respective districts?
I think what we've attempted to do is show the kinds of activities people can look forward to. I think that would be misleading. For example, a lot of -- you know, 150 million out of the 250 million simply supports demolition. A lot of the kinds of dollars that we look to leverage are not dollars that are a part of the plan, and so I think that when you start talking about, you know, what's it going to look like at the end of the day, you know, after you spend 250 million, what is it going to look like? I don't think it is going to begin to tell a complete story. 130 5/29/01 - WHOLE - BILL 010261 I think that I can spend, you know, money in the, you know, the 1st District, doing demolition. You know, it will reflect what is going to be spent out of the 250 million, but it won't reflect the kind of dollars that we hope to leverage. You know, if I spend acquisition dollars in the 1st District, it's not going to begin to tell the story of what that might mean in terms of leveraging private activity. So we can probably, you know, say out of the this 250 million, you know, the 7th District will get, you know, $15 [sic] In demolition money. You know, another district will get, you know, X-number of encapsulation dollars. But I think at the end of the day, you won't begin to have a complete story about what it is that we expect to have happen as a result of the investment that the City's making. I think that these really are pre-development dollars in a lot of respects and they're dollars that the City would be committing in order to leverage additional resources. And I don't know that if we simply whacked up the 250, we're going to end up with anything that is useful, but we 131 5/29/01 - WHOLE - BILL 010261 can -- you know, we work on doing that.
May I ask. The other question I have is, how does the pie get -- how does the decision get made as to where you leverage the dollars?
I this that in part turns on the kind of challenges in the neighborhood. For example, I can commit -- you know, if you commit $450,000 to leverage over $2 million in the 9th District and you put it out at $5,000 a property, I don't know what the math is, I don't know how many properties you treat, but you may be dealing with a problem in the Ogontz area. To deal with that same kind of problem in the 5th District, it might take a lot more money simply because of the nature of the problem. So I don't -- I don't know that if you ever get to the point of simply, you know, saying, Well, this district got 10 million and that district, you know, got 15 million. You know, I don't know where that gets you. But I think that we can -- you know, I think that we can -- you know, we can take a look at trying to talk about exactly where the 250 might go. 132 5/29/01 - WHOLE - BILL 010261 I don't think that that begins to paint an adequate picture of what's likely to happen or what the Administration's expectation is.
And just to follow up, when you presented to us the plan and you showed us the blight early on and the blight as it exists now, given the proposal that you have and the framework, even with planning on leveraging the dollars, there has to be some idea where you would leverage those dollars, and if you got 'em, what you would do with it. And in the end, if you've targeted specific areas that you want that are -- and I agree, there are some areas that certainly need it much more than others, but there are other areas that if we don't -- and we've talked about this before -- stem the tide of flight, you're going to have a blighted area. So in the end for me, what does it mean in five years? Even if you say, okay, well, we're going to leverage a billion dollars, okay? When we spend it, suppose we get it all? Let's suppose we get it; then what will the City look like then? 'Cause you got to have some idea. Are you all going to decide it or are these consultants going to 133 5/29/01 - WHOLE - BILL 010261 decide it? Who's going to decide, how do they decide? And I'm over there fighting with some consultant to try to get something for the 9th District, people I don't know, who don't know me. And, you know, the politics get all in the way and I end up not having anything in the 9th District. I mean, we have to deal with all of that. But in the end, when you leverage and got your billion and you got your -- finish your plan and you say this is the ideal of what the City should look like, there ought to be some way to look at the map to say this is what it should look like in the end, just for your own plan.
Miss Wilkerson, before you forget, I would like you to get together with Mr. Dubow and Mr. Erekson so that we can deal with the encapsulation issue. Also, if you would give me a call tomorrow, I'd like to set up a mutually convenient time and date so that we could talk about the possibility of a process by which we're going to be working.
Thank you. 134 5/29/01 - WHOLE - BILL 010261 I would like to move on. We have a couple witnesses that have been waiting.
Would it be appropriate, as done in other circumstances before, to suggest that we temporarily recess the public hearing, move into the public meeting, vote on this particular initiative, and then come back to the public hearing to allow people to excess their views. I mean, I don't know if anyone's voting against this particular transfer ordinance. I don't think it's going to be the majority of people the Council Committee of the Whole Committee, but perhaps we could approve --
I would like to make that suggestion, and we've done it. I mean, it's been a routine in Council, especially when we have 135 5/29/01 - WHOLE - BILL 010261 people waiting as long as they've been waiting to kind of really get the business out of the way and allow people to come and testify.
Having not been a part of the process that District Councilmembers were a part of, my understanding of the process is that the Administration took District Councilpeople on a trolley ride through districts. Can you tell me about that process and how that might impact our voting on this bill in terms of where you move on imminently dangerous properties or how do you construct a neighborhood transformation plan. How have District Councilmembers been involved so far by the Administration? I wasn't on the trolley.
I mean, there's ongoing dialogue with a lot of District Councilpeople, and depending on the kind of issues in a district, you know, it impacts on who it is that the Councilmember might communicate with. As a way for the Administration as a 136 5/29/01 - WHOLE - BILL 010261 whole to get some understanding of conditions in neighborhoods, last year, the Mayor, you know, probably visited nine of the ten Council Districts on a trolley tour, and it was an opportunity to have the District Councilperson explain to the Mayor, you know, the City Planner, the Managing Director, and others what they saw as the challenges in the district, and we've tried to incorporate that and have that inform a lot of decisions that the Administration made. The kind of information that we got was as varied as, you know, the significance of charter schools to, you know, the need for comprehensive demolition. You know, different districts see the problem and see the challenges differently. And we've tried to fold that into the kind of thinking and planning. I think you saw it in the budget that was proposed this year. We proposed in the five-year plan over $50 million in General Fund support, you know, to tackle the kind of problems that Councilmembers talked to us about when we were out in the neighborhoods.
So, not having been on that tour, as a at-large member, I'm sort of at a 137 5/29/01 - WHOLE - BILL 010261 disadvantage. I represent the people in ten districts but don't necessarily represent any district, particularly according to certain District Councilpeople, but essentially not having been on that tour, the District Councilpeople told you what they wanted to happen in terms of neighborhood transformation or not?
No, I think that's overstating. I think it was an opportunity for District Councilmembers to share their perspective on the issues in neighborhood. I remember, you know, up in the 10th Council District, the Councilman had very specific issues he was concerned about. Some of them are the kinds of things that I think, you know, sitting in City Hall, you don't really understand in the same kind of way. So I don't think it was specifically advising the Administration about what, you know, the Councilmembers wanted to see come out of NTI; it was more of a conversation about what the issues were in the districts.
I'm not suggesting that each Council -- District Councilmember submitted you with a plan. I'm saying, as you were 138 5/29/01 - WHOLE - BILL 010261 riding on the trolley, I'm assuming that the District Councilpeople talked about the neighborhoods, talked about what they thought the problems were, talked about their vision for their districts.
Thank you. I think we've had a couple witnesses that have really been waiting quite some time. So I would ask that our first witness be called.
June Bey. I'm not quite sure how to pronounce it. (Witness comes forward.)
It's been interesting to say the least. I have to honestly say I've never been to one of these type of meetings, but I'm glad I was in attendance today. After hearing everyone speak, I kind of don't know where to start, but I'm here because of the way the City looks. And after hearing how much money has been sunk into the City and it still looks 139 5/29/01 - WHOLE - BILL 010261 like -- I mean, most areas that I go to, the Southwest Philly area and North Philly, it still looks like a war zone. And I hear about all of this money being put to a different project here, there, and everywhere, and still there's no result of any uplifting of the neighborhoods. And I guess my -- what drew me here was the fact that I've had several people come to my -- bring to my attention that they had properties knocked down bought the building next door was demolished, because it was a unsafe building and it was targeted to come down, but in the event of that one coming down, it made the building next door to unstable, so they had to bring both buildings down. And then they had the nerve to send the homeowner a bill for the demolishment of the building. And these people, I've encouraged them to fight the City or fight the construction company that decided to bring down the building. And I'm not understanding how L&I can send people out and just look at a building and look at it from the curbside and never go in and inspect the building to see if it can be salvaged. Or is there a cost analysis done to say, okay, if we 140 5/29/01 - WHOLE - BILL 010261 demolish it, it's going to cost this amount, but if we salvage it, it will cost this amount. At least if you have those two parameters in place, you could say, Well, maybe we salvage it and we can at least encourage someone to come back in and pick up where we can't finish. I also was made aware, I mean, through the incident where the buildings were torn down that there's an encapsulation program, which I heard mentioned several times here, but most of, I would say, Philadelphia doesn't -- they don't know about the program. And to me, if you have a program in place that actually would salvage some of these problems, when a person calls and says, I have a nuisance property, that someone did a property next door that's vacant, I need to have it remedied because I don't want a vacant building 'cause I don't want it drawing undesirable people or whatever next door to it, that they would be given the option of having someone to come out to look to see if it qualified for this encapsulation program. And it seems like this city is only offering people the option of destroying or tearing down properties. And when you tear down these 141 5/29/01 - WHOLE - BILL 010261 properties, you're also tearing down the properties of the -- I mean, you're tearing down the value of the properties remaining, because if you take a property from the middle of the block and leave all of these properties standing up, it defaces the properties that are remaining. And what do you say to the people who are still left in the neighborhood, who, for whatever reason, don't want to move out or can't move out? You offer them nothing. It becomes a hopeless situation. And I think that to continue on this path is to me, it's just saying that we've given up on the people who don't have the knowledge that everyone in this room has to do something different within neighborhoods to bring life back to the neighborhoods. And when someone else mentioned something about jobs, I think it was a perfect point because of the simple fact the construction company that knocked down this particular building was from Upper Darby. So here now you've taken money out of the City, and not only are you tearing down the properties in the City, but you're also contracting people out of the City to knock them down.
So now 142 5/29/01 - WHOLE - BILL 010261 we don't have jobs in the City, because now you've given them to contractors who come in with these low bids and for whatever reason, you decide to give it to them. But yet. Everybody's talking about uplifting the community, but you're doing nothing to do that. Also, someone had mentioned something about hiring, I think, a consultant committee or a consultant. I think that's a excellent option because I think you should hire a consultant committee -- I mean, have a consultant committee that maybe have dealt with this type of disparity in other cities, because I have never heard of any other city that knocks down as many houses as Philadelphia has. And these houses are only being knocked down in the neighborhoods -- predominantly they're knocked down in the neighborhoods that are predominantly where people of color live. And like me and some other people, I would never want to move next door -- I mean, move into a neighborhood where they have holes in the neighborhood. What do they call it, a gap-toothed neighborhoods? So now we've also taken away the values of these neighborhoods, and we can't 143 5/29/01 - WHOLE - BILL 010261 encourage people to move back into the neighborhoods. So I would think the City, before actually taking it upon themselves to even vote for a bill like this to hire some consultants to come in and take a look and give the City another option because I feel like tearing down all of these properties is horrible. And when I came here today, I was so surprised not to see this room filled with people. But because you have not placed any value on their properties, now they have not placed any values on their properties. Because I know that you may knock down a property next door to me, I'm here, because I know that when I go to resell that property or if I go to refinance my property so I can get some money to fix up the property, there's not going to be a value there. And because people are not in here, it's because they have no knowledge, and it's because of the lack of education in the areas of where people of color live, they're not filled with this room, filling this room. Because if you start demolishing properties in the Fairmount section, in Society 144 5/29/01 - WHOLE - BILL 010261 Hill, in the Queen Village section, this room would be packed with people. And it's only because they know the value of their property and because the value of their properties well exceeds the value of the properties in the area that you're demolishing these properties.
Thank you. I just want to let you know that this hearing is to appropriate monies for imminently dangerous properties. We certainly don't want properties to be falling on passersby. God forbid if there would be children passing and this house would suddenly fall on them.
I understand that but I know of a property that was taken down for that same reason, because the back porch that could have been easily detached from the house came down, was falling in.
So for you to tell me that you're just targeting only properties that are --
Dangerously and you want them 145 5/29/01 - WHOLE - BILL 010261 to come down, do you have the expertise to say that this property is actually going to do that? Yes, there have been incidents where properties have fallen, but those properties don't outweigh the properties you plan to destroy. You're talking about a couple hundred versus thousands. And this property's one particular property. And two properties I know of, those properties should not have been torn down, and there could have been some rehabilitation to the property. So I understand why you're here, I mean, why this bill is in front of us, but I'm saying that to me, you spend all of this money tearing down properties and still the City looks the way it looks. And it's only in our neighborhoods that it looks that way. So -- and like I asked somebody about the encapsulation program, that should be known to everybody as soon as they call and say, I have a nuisance property and that property may cause my property further damage. They should be told about the encapsulation program. And that $8 million should be spent on educating people and getting people jobs back in the 146 5/29/01 - WHOLE - BILL 010261 City and also spent on building up the gap-toothed neighborhoods you've created.
Thank you very much. We appreciate your patience and your coming in to testify. Thank you so much.
Good afternoon. Thank you for the opportunity to testify today on Bill 15 010261. I do understand that I'm here today to testify about funds being reallocated in fact for demolition without a plan, again, just for that $8 million. I contend there should be a plan. Although development projects may have been done in a willy-nilly way in the past, that doesn't mean that we should continue down that road. So as I talk to members of my community, and I am in the 5th District, but I talk to people all over the City because I do sell real estate all 147 5/29/01 - WHOLE - BILL 010261 over the whole city, they wonder why it is that you all are moving forward even with $8 million or any amount of money in demolition without a plan. I understand that this money is to go towards imminently dangerous properties being demolished. And just as the last person who testified, I am concerned that properties that are not imminently dangerous are being demolished. When we in our community have a plan to stabilize, we are not even able to reach our goal because some of the properties are being considered nuisance and are being torn down. We are very much concerned about this. We think there should be at least a plan for every area. I am a member of the board of Advocate Community Defendant Corp. We have a Diamond Street corridor plan, which I want to be a part of this record. If we have a plan with our small resources, how come the Administration does not have a plan? I have some other things too, so you all are going to put them together. I have pictures of the many vacant lots, like a small policy program -- a small lot program, I should say. This is evidence, I should say, of what lots have already 148 5/29/01 - WHOLE - BILL 010261 been demolished and how they are handled in our communities. We have thousands of vacant lots in our community at this time. Without a plan, we will have more vacant lots in all of our community that are not managed while you all give $8 million more without a plan for them to come in and further demolish properties. Especially we're concerned of properties that are demolished on mostly intact blocks. We as a community are requesting that those properties be stabilized when there are five or less in a block that's mostly intact. We don't want inspectors from Licenses and Inspections determining that those properties should be demolished when we are in our community planning, saying we want them stabilized. In addition, there are no reuse plans. And I'm still focusing on this $8 million because a lot could be done over the summer with $8 million to erect the plans that we are trying to do in our communities. I understand there's land banking going on. Where is the plan? I keep going back to the plan because we don't have any, we have not seen 149 5/29/01 - WHOLE - BILL 010261 any. We have been through meetings throughout our communities and we have tried to be patient as we participated in those meetings, but out of them has come no plan, no comprehensive plan that we can put our hands around. We are also concerned about job creation as it relates to demolition. And cleaning lots, etc. And we don't see a plan as it relates to that either. If you're so concerned about how imminently dangerous problems or imminently dangerous conditions has affected our community, there were five people killed, from what I understand, from encroaching trees. How come we're not splitting up some of that money to deal with some of those encroaching trees problems and we're sucking a lot of it into demolition? And as I contend on a substantial number of properties that are nuisance but not imminently dangerous.
I would like to see a plan set up so we can determine in each of the districts what properties are, in fact, truly imminently dangerous or which ones are nuisance and can possibly be encapsulated or in some other way partially 150 5/29/01 - WHOLE - BILL 010261 demolished in that we might be able to use those properties in the future. Although we keep hearing statistics about how people are leaving our community, I contend that in every single organization that does rehabilitation or provides housing for this community, they have a long waiting list. So where are these people going? I know there are a substantial number of people moving out of or community, but there are a substantial number of people that want to stay in our community, evidenced by those long lists of people that want to move into properties. When a building fell in Center City and killed the doctor, I did not see you all saying we must go now and tear down all of Mr. Rappaport's properties. Why is it that our community is being ravaged in the middle of blocks, leaving us unsafe, leaving us with structural problems after a property is torn down, leaving us with water in the basement. Everybody that lives on the opposite side of a property that's torn down in a middle of a block has water in their basement. And these are things that you all need 151 5/29/01 - WHOLE - BILL 010261 to think about before you go and just give $8 million to Licenses and Inspections without a plan, without any kind of backup for all of these kinds of problems. There are some properties that have been torn down years ago, and if you look at 7 the records, three or four times, the City had to 8 come back, dig up the earth, and then put another 9 sealant around because it wasn't done properly. 10 So these things are going on in our 11 community where we live. I mean, each community has 12 different issues, but I want you all to really be 13 clear on the issues that are confronting us as it 14 relate to demolition. 15 I would like to ask, are the inspectors that are determining from a curbside view that our properties should be torn down, are they engineers?
Point of order. I have a business to attend. Could I be recorded as voting aye on this bill.
I may be back 152 5/29/01 - WHOLE - BILL 010261 before that.
I'm sorry. The Chair recognizes Councilman Rizzo.
I think we ought to set the record straight. The statement that they eyeball these from the curb without any physical inspection, I think that's exaggerated. There are -- inspections do include, in some cases, a physical inspection of the building before they're condemned or whatever. So that may occur in some cases. Maybe for tax assessments, they eyeball it from the curb, but I don't think in most cases that L&I just does a curbside inspection.
But I am really concerned that there is not enough community participation in these decisions that are made. We are posed to hire engineers to tell us which properties can be salvaged. So we want to make sure that we have this information beforehand. Another thing, as I sum up, that we're quite concerned about is environmental issues. Buildings are torn down in our community, we do not 153 5/29/01 - WHOLE - BILL 010261 get any notice. We have people with respiratory problems in our community. We would like to see where there's documentation that lead has been taken out of these properties beforehand and that asbestos has been taken out beforehand, because I understand that's why the cost of demolition is so high. Yet we cannot get from our request so far evidence that lead is being taken out of these properties or asbestos is being taken out of these properties that are being torn down. Dust is flying and we have a high increase of asthma in our community. So, you know, we don't want lawsuits later coming to the City because all the precautions have not been taken. I think it would be really very --
Miss Robinson, I don't mean to cut you short, but I think that if you worked with the District Councilman, he would be able to let you know beforehand exactly what properties would be demolished. And certainly if you have any concerns, they should be addressed to him.
Well, I understand that, madam, but since you all are dealing with this 154 5/29/01 - WHOLE - BILL 010261 issue, when we contact our Councilperson to get information, if it's not forthcoming in a timely manner, the properties are then demolished and all we're left with is a vacant lot. So I want you all to understand that as you vote, we have issues in our district that maybe are not addressed as effectively as you might address them in your district. So since we have a substantial number of those properties, I want to make sure you all understand, as you vote, that we have issues in our district that you don't have in yours. So, you know, I understand what you're saying about dealing with the Councilperson.
Now, I am sure that I have the same problems in my district, I am sure that I do. And as I said, I think if you were to work with the District Councilman, he would be certainly very happy to cooperate with your request.
Right, I understand that, ma'am, but let me say this: How is our plan going to connect to this plan that the Mayor has when they're going ahead without giving information to the Councilperson as to which properties will be 155 5/29/01 - WHOLE - BILL 010261 demolished? And the last thing in closing. You said you got a consultant?
Okay. Well, how was that done? Because we in the community are consultants, we have expertise. And since a substantial portion of it is going to be spent in communities like ours, I would like to get in on that consultant contract because then I will know --
I think you should work with your District Councilperson.
Is Gordon Whitman here? (Witnesses come forward.) 156 5/29/01 - WHOLE - BILL 010261
Good afternoon. Please identify yourself for the record and proceed with your testimony.
Good afternoon. My name is Gordon Whitman, and I'm with Temple University and the Eastern Pennsylvania Organizing Project. And we'll be brief and we're testifying in favor of the bill.
My name is Linda Haley. I'm a member of Visitation Parish and a member of Visitation EPOP.
I'm Hattie Williams. I'm the block captain of the 2600 North 31st Street. I am also a member of EPOP. And my grievance is there's nothing been done in Strawberry Mansion, and everybody keeps talking about all of this money, but every time something's done, it's on the west side. We don't have stores, we don't have nothing up there, and anybody gives a darn about us. And I can't tell people on my block nothing because we get notices from the tax department that your house only worth $3500 and all of this crap. And we have some beautiful houses in my 157 5/29/01 - WHOLE - BILL 010261 area and we do have some good stable blocks up there, but it's getting to be a nuisance when I keep hearing this mess about all this money and nothing being done up where I live. Up where I live look like a God-darned war zone. And some of the houses are empty, the windows is out. There was one across the street from me. I've been calling L&I for about ten years about that house. The windows are out and it's a mess. And I know a lot of you don't live in the areas where we live, but we have a right to have L&I come in and do something, 'cause we have called them for ten years about a building which was there at 30th and Huntington Street. They didn't come out, the water was running through the building, going in other people's houses. So last year, the building fell down, then here they come running. Well, why didn't somebody call us? How can you call 'em, when you call and they don't even call you back, they don't answer you, they don't do nothing. And I'm sick and tired of calling L&I, trying to get things done in my neighborhood. Right there at (indiscernible) and Huntington, PHA has a house there. There's no fence 158 5/29/01 - WHOLE - BILL 010261 on the side of the house. That yard is always full of trash, it smells like urine, broken bottles and everything. Now, I have called them ten times about that. They still haven't come out and did nothing about it. And then they say, Well, call L&I. You call them and they don't come. So what are you supposed to do? And it's really getting sickening. And we have a guy that's down on the corner. He sell clothes on that corner. He pile up all his trash over on the northeast -- on the north side of Huntington Street, by the parking lot on the street, and that's that stuff is there until trash day.
Council President, we as much as anyone want to see action taken on vacant property in Philadelphia. We appreciated the opportunity in March to be able to brief City Council on some of the research and perspective that we have. We also believe that there are important decisions that have to be made about how to spend the blight funds, decisions between demolition and rehabilitation, between new construction and 159 5/29/01 - WHOLE - BILL 010261 rehabilitating existing property, decisions about where money gets spent, the fiscal impact of spending money in different ways. And we want to make sure that there's an opportunity for those decisions to be made well, for the Administration and Council to make some good decisions that will shape the City for years and years to come. So we support the bill as a stopgap so that the City has an opportunity to develop a plan and to do it in public and to do it with good information and in a good way. So that's why we're here supporting the bill, but we hope that there will be a plan and there will be a plan that's a good plan and it happens rapidly and it meets the needs of the City's neighborhoods.
Madam President, I just want to say that we do support this bill, and it's very interesting to be here today to kind of see how City Council works. And from listening to the different things that were said here today, I think that all of the Councilmembers not only have the right but have the duty to expect a plan from the 160 5/29/01 - WHOLE - BILL 010261 administration of this City, not that we should just give them all this money without a plan. The City Council is kind of like the CFO of the City, and in the business world, you wouldn't just give somebody money without a plan. So I think that you have every right to expect a plan from the Administration, some type of plan stating what they're going to do with this money before we give it to them.
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman Clarke.
There's one question I want to ask. Who do I get in touch with, because we're not in compliance with the water codes of the City. We have no fire hydrants on 31st Street. They took up 15 hydrants in that area. Now, if we have a fire up there, it's going to be a mess.
Councilman 161 5/29/01 - WHOLE - BILL 010261 Clarke?
I will be talking to you. 'Cause I'm actually afraid 'cause I had two fires in my house. Now if we have a fire up there, there's no water on our block.
Just a quick question. A point of clarification. My understanding of the testimony I just heard was that particularly the block captain had a serious problem with L&I, said that L&I was non-responsive, was concerned about what L&I was not 162 5/29/01 - WHOLE - BILL 010261 doing in the neighborhood but testifying on behalf of the bill to give $8 million to L&I?
I don't know that she said that, I don't know that she said that.
Well, that's what I heard, and I just want to clarify that.
Councilman Goode, what I said is, we had two buildings in my area and one of them fell down. We have been calling them for the last ten years about these two buildings. The one at 30th and Huntington Street, it fell down. We didn't say L&I till that building fell down. And then they want to know why you didn't -- one of the people in town (indiscernible) said what are you talking about, we've calling you for ten years.
With all due respect, ma'am, so you're asking that $8 million more be given to L&I?
We need the program to get things done, but I don't think they should get the $8 million and don't have a plan as to what they going to do with it.
Mr. Whitman, 163 5/29/01 - WHOLE - BILL 010261 do you want to respond to that?
Well, I think as the last person who testified said, clearly, there's a concern with how business has been done in the past, and we'd like to see it done differently. So, sure, there ought to be a plan for the $8 million as well and I think we all agree on that, and that if at any time the City spends money but certainly as the City expands spends the bond money, that it's even more important for there to be a plan that's publicly available that people can chew on and think about and contribute to.
Let's just keep it honest. There's enough politicians in the room.
Thank you for your patience. Thank you for coming in to testify. Do we have any other witnesses to testify? (No response.)
Seeing none, this will conclude the public hearing.
With respects to particularly the two constituents of mine in the 5th District, I just want to say that I agree with everything you've said, and I also suffer with the same levels of frustration. And I hate to belabor the point; that's why I think it's important to put the appropriate resources in place and have a better coordination of service delivery so we can in fact deal with those problems so you don't have to come down here and threaten me and City Council, as my friend over here has earlier, and I'm going to take care of your problem today. So although, you know, I will be supporting the transfer ordinance, I just have to go on the record to say that I don't think this is the answer, and I really would like to see us deal with a broader, more comprehensive issue. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you. Are there any other questions or statements or comments by members of the committee? (No response.)
Seeing none, this concludes our public hearing. We will now go 165 5/29/01 - WHOLE - PUBLIC MEETING into our public meeting. - - -
Thank you. I move that Bill No. 010261 be voted out of committee with a favorable recommendation and that the rules of Council be suspended so as to permit consideration at our next session. (Duly seconded.)
It has been moved and seconded that Bill No. 010261 be reported out of committee with a favorable recommendation. Also a recommendation that the rules of Council be suspended so as to permit first reading at our next Council session. All those in favor will signify by saying aye. Those opposed? The ayes have it, and the record will also reflect that Councilmembers Miller, Cohen, and Krajewski --
Madam Chair, before we leave, I just got a phone message from Milwaukee from Alderman Sanchez --
Can we just finish this, please. That the three Councilmembers that I just mentioned also voted in favor of it, so the motion carries, and Bill No. 010261 will be reported out of committee with a favorable recommendation. Councilman Ortiz.
Madam Chair, I just got a call from Milwaukee from Alderman Sanchez. Challenging me to a bet between the Bucks and the Sixers. He's sending some German products, but we're sending him some product from Philadelphia. If we lose, and we're not going to. (Adjourned 4:25 p.m.) 167 C E R T I F I C A T E I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing proceedings of the Council of the City of Philadelphia of TUESDAY, May 29, 2001, were reported fully and accurately by me, and that this is a correct transcript of same. RE: COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE BILL NO. 010261 __________________________________, JOSEPHINE CARDILLO, Registered Professional Reporter