COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA COMMITTEE ON RULES - - - Room 400, City Hall Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Wednesday, March 14, 2007, 1:30 p.m. - - - PRESENT: COUNCIL PRESIDENT ANNA C. VERNA, Chair COUNCILMAN DARRELL CLARKE COUNCILMAN JACK KELLY COUNCILMAN JAMES KENNEY COUNCILWOMAN DONNA REED MILLER COUNCILMAN BRIAN O'NEILL COUNCILWOMAN BLONDELL REYNOLDS BROWN COUNCILMAN DANIEL J. SAVAGE COUNCILMAN WILLIAM K. GREENLEE BILL NOS. 060957, 070005, 070006, 070008, 070009, 070010, 070011, 070012, 070013 V A R A L L O Incorporated Litigation Support Specialists 1835 Market Street, Suite 600 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103 215.561.2220 215.567.2670 2
Good afternoon, everyone. This is the public hearing of the Rules Committee. I apologize for the delay. I would ask Mr. McPherson to please read the title of Bill No. 07005.
An ordinance 9 establishing a neighborhood improvement district in an generally includes both sides of Germantown Avenue from 6300 to 7631 and certain blocks of streets that intersect that portion of Germantown Avenue to be known as the Mount Airy Business Improvement District.
Who is here to testify? Good afternoon. Please identify yourself for the record and proceed with your testimony.
Well, my testimony says good morning, but I'll say good afternoon. My name is Eva Gladstein. I'm director of neighborhood transformation for the City of 3 3/14/07 - Rules Philadelphia and I'm here to testify on behalf of the administration in support of this bill. This bill will allow for the creation of the Mount Airy Business Improvement District, a district that will include the Mount Airy commercial corridor extending generally along both sides of Germantown Avenue from the 6300 to 7631 and certain blocks of streets that intersect that portion of the Avenue. The creation of neighborhood improvement districts, and this would be one of them, is consistent with the objectives of our newly launched Restore Philadelphia's Corridor program, which is designed to help reestablish neighborhood commercial corridors as central places to work, shop, and meet neighbors. The Mount Airy Business Association and Mount Airy USA have worked closely with other community stakeholders in creating the neighborhood improvement district. In addition, Mount Airy USA has been participating in the City's Main Street 4 3/14/07 - Rules program for two years, which provided $25,000 in Main Street Facade Challenge Grants for the Winston Commons Project. In addition, ten businesses on the commercial corridor have received facade improvement funds through the City's small business commercial improvement program over the last months. 10 NIDs are one of the best 11 examples of collaboration between the 12 City and our neighborhood commercial 13 corridors. Like their counterparts in 14 East Passyunk, Port Richmond, and 15 Roxborough, the Mount Airy business, 16 entrepreneurs, and property owner 17 recognize the need to improve the 18 environment within which they and their customers live and work. Their efforts to keep the commercial areas clean, safe, and attractive will directly impact the stability of the entire community and as the neighborhood prospers the economic vitality of the commercial center will also be strengthened. 5 3/14/07 - Rules The result of this will be a dynamic neighborhood improvement district that promotes long-term growth and viability of the commercial areas in Mount Airy. And we think this effort deserves the support of the City. Therefore, I urge your support of Bill 9 No. 070005, and thank you for your consideration.
You're welcome. The bill states that the proposed budget for the district for the first year of its creation is $115,000. Are there any other projected costs and, if so, what might provide an additional source of financing?
If I could respectfully suggest, I believe there are members of Mount Airy USA and the business association present who have created the budget who might be better able to answer those kinds of questions.
Okay. That's fine. 6 3/14/07 - Rules Does anyone on the committee have any questions of Ms. Gladstein? (No response.)
The next panel is George Butler, David Young, and Ken Weinstein.
Good afternoon. Please identify yourselves for the record and proceed with your testimony.
Ken Weinstein, 502 West Allens Lane. If I could, I'd like to defer my testimony for a minute.
With your consent, my name is Paul Levy. I'd like to offer testimony.
Thank you very much. My name is Paul Levy. I am here to testify in favor of Bill 070005. I'm really here wearing two different hats. One is a former resident of Mount Airy and second is president of Philadelphia's first business improvement district, the Center City district. I have copies of my testimony if people want them. From 1987 through 2004, I was a resident of Mount Airy and I initially watched with concern, particularly in the late '80s, a steady degeneration of Germantown Avenue. But from the time Mount Airy USA was fully staffed up, it became clear the area was enjoying the fruits of the very hard work of a business and civic organization that was committed to the revitalization of this historic corridor in Philadelphia. I obviously believe in the benefits of business improvement districts, but I volunteered to come here today because I think this effort is 8 3/14/07 - Rules being carried out in exactly the right way. In Center City, we benefit enormously from the dense concentration of business and commercial properties that gives us a strong taxable base that supports a broad range of services. The challenge that has emerged in many low and moderate income neighborhoods that have put in place business improvement district is that the limited assessed value in the area limits the ability of that organization to raise sufficient funds often to provide needed services. But in the case of Mount Airy, we have a highly successful community development organization and business association working with their residential association with a proven track record in raising funds and working in partnership with government, and they're now proposing to expand that partnership by adding to their kit of revitalization tools a Business Improvement District. This formula of multiple funding streams 9 3/14/07 - Rules for neighborhood commercial revitalization is a formula for success. Should Council approve this bill, I would be pleased to welcome the Mount Airy Business Improvement District into the family of Philadelphia Business Improvement Districts and am prepared to offer any advice and guidance to this new BID as we have done with all BIDS in Philadelphia should they request it. Thank you very much for this opportunity.
You're welcome. Any questions or comments from members of the committee? (No response.)
Thank you, Mr. Levy. I'm sorry. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Miller.
I'm glad 10 3/14/07 - Rules to see you today. I didn't know you moved from Mount Airy.
They let me get away. I had to come downtown. It was a job obligation.
Certainly, you've been very supportive of neighborhood improvement districts. You worked with us in Germantown prior to me coming to City Council and along with Frankford establishing the first. Glad to see you here today and thank you for your testimony.
Thank you. Please identify yourself for the record and proceed with your testimony.
Thank you, Council President. Council President Verna, Council members, ladies and gentlemen, I'm Ken Weinstein again. I reside at 502 West Allens Lane. I'm 11 3/14/07 - Rules co-owner of Trolley Car Diner and a partner in Brinton Housing Partners, which has several properties along Germantown Avenue. I'm also cochair of the Mount Airy Business Improvement District steering committee. I do have copies of my testimony. I appreciate the opportunity to appear today before City Council Rules Committee to speak in favor of establishing a Business Improvement District along Germantown Avenue business corridor in Mount Airy. I'd like to introduce my fellow Mount Airy BID steering committee co-chairs, George Butler and David Young, who will join me in describing the proposed Mount Airy BID and answer any questions that you may have. One and a half years ago, we pulled together a small group, including Michael Moore from Councilwoman Miller's office, and Jeanne Bethune, who is here with us today from the Mayor's Business 12 3/14/07 - Rules Action Team, to establish a BID in Mount Airy. The BID was proposed to replace the Mount Airy Ambassadors, which had a major impact on the cleanliness in the business district but had to fold due to lack of funding. During the almost two years that the Ambassadors existed, our streets were clean, we had an additional security presence along the Avenue, and property owners, business owners, and our customers were feeling very positive about the directions of our business district. The Ambassadors, run by Mount Airy USA, were funded with Councilwoman Miller's support and through voluntary contributions by property owners. It worked well, but as the commerce department dollars were reduced and voluntary contributions shrunk, the funding to keep it alive was not there. We knew that we needed a new mandatory participation program with dedicated funding such as a BID. We first approached our elected officials in order 13 3/14/07 - Rules to raise almost $45,000 to hire our BID consultant, Larry Houston, and to pay for other expenses during the process. Councilwoman Miller -- again we appreciate her support -- through the commerce department gave us 25,000. State representatives Cherelle Parker, John Myers, Rosita Youngblood, and State Senator Leanna Washington provided us with $5,000 each through DCED. The strong support of our elected officials along with a lot of time and effort by our 35-member steering committee has helped us get this far and here today. We're proposing the following: Establishment of a Business Improvement District from the 6300 block of Germantown Avenue to the 7600 block of Germantown Avenue and portions of several commercial side streets along this stretch. We're proposing that commercial property owners in the district be assessed 18 percent of annual real estate taxes to pay for the BID projects and 14 3/14/07 - Rules staff. And we're also proposing that the Mount Airy BID be governed by a nine-member board, all but one elected at an annual meeting of all property owners in the district. Eight members of the board will be property owners actually paying BID assessments. One member will be from a nonprofit institution along the Avenue, and that member will be selected by the other eight members. Additional nonvoting board members, including representatives from Mount Airy Business Association and Mount Airy USA, will be selected by the board. We ask that the City Council Rules Committee approve the establishment of the Mount Airy BID by voting this resolution out of committee with a favorable recommendation. I'd now like to introduce George Butler from the award-winning Butler Prestige Photography, who will explain some of the improvements and services that a BID will bring to Mount 15 3/14/07 - Rules Airy.
Thank you very much, Ken, and especially for that award-winning in the introduction. To Council President Honorable Anna Verna, Council members, ladies and gentlemen, I am George A. , owner and operator of Butler Prestige Photography located since 1988 at 6338 Germantown Avenue. This is also my residence. In my capacity as a property owner, business merchant, community resident and active volunteer in the BID and other community organizations, let me first go on record in full support of the proposed Mount Airy improvement district as outlined in Bill No. 070005. My role today as Ken suggested is to briefly, I do underscore briefly, discuss the following topics, mainly the proposed budget and its services. Based on the 18 percent assessment via real estate taxes using the Board of Revision of Taxes 2006's 16 3/14/07 - Rules assessments for commercial properties and apartment buildings with five or more units within the district, it is our expectation to raise approximately $115,000 for our year one Mount Airy BID budget. To account for inflation, such assessments shall increase 4 percent annually of this 18 percent base amount. What services are to be procured with this $115,000 budget? Well, under maintenance and operations, $70,000 of this budget will be earmarked to clean sidewalks and street gutters from the 6300 block of Germantown Avenue to that of the 7600 block of Germantown Avenue. Appearance not only matters in personal grooming, but it's equally important in community appearance and grooming. After all, a clean, attractive, safe business corridor with adequate parking and effective marketing initiatives will provide a real economic boom for our area. It will signal community pride and unity in making a 17 3/14/07 - Rules good neighborhood into a better one, if not a great neighborhood to live, work and/or shop. Next, on the security, parking, and marketing, some $5,000 will be earmarked for year one of the budget to explore and develop plans for better public safety, parking, and marketing. Security services will include but not be limited to establishing a district public safety committee to work with local police and business operators to improve safety in the district. Parking services will include a thorough examination of all parking needs throughout the district and finding suitable solutions. The cornerstone of marketing will be to effectively attract new businesses and customers to the district by working closely with realtors and by developing appropriate marketing kits featuring up-to-date demographics and business highlights. And finally we come to the 18 3/14/07 - Rules worker bee glue that holds it all together, which is the topic of administration. As outlined in the proposed ordinance, the budget allocation for administration in year one will be $40,000. The administrative costs will include, among other things, marketing and production of regular e-mail newsletter, the performance of an annual audit, the preparation of an annual report to be disseminated among benefitting properties and tenants as well as grant writing to expand programs and to advance streetscape and parking projects. The marketing management element will have the following responsibilities, that is, producing newsletters, conducting surveys, public relations assisting the board and committee, planning and overseeing events, keeping marketing up to date, cooperating with realtors and developers, facade improvements, grant and 19 3/14/07 - Rules sponsorship solicitation, contacting City agencies overseeing board member selection, contractor selection, and oversight, and such additional duties as may be determined from time to time by the board. That's probably the longest sentence I've ever read in my life. The district will contract annually with Mount Airy USA to provide these services.
Given the experience, expertise, and successful track record of Mount Airy USA, it is no wonder that we're optimistic in believing we will be able to leverage additional dollars through their grant and proposal writing skills. To reiterate, I'm in full support of the proposed Mount Airy BID since it offers the greatest real potential of bringing together all of the various community stakeholders in a volunteer-driven, consensus-building mechanism to bring about progressive 20 3/14/07 - Rules growth and improvement to the Mount Airy business corridor and in an equitably financed manner. Thanks again for this opportunity to address this issue.
You're welcome. Thank you. Please identify yourself for the record.
Council President Honorable Anna Verna, ladies and gentlemen, my name is David W. Young. I reside at 6114 Wissahickon Avenue in Germantown, Philadelphia. As I am executive director, I represent my organization, Cliveden, which is a historic site of the National Trust for Historic Preservation. And since 1967 it has been located at 6401 Germantown Avenue. This 240-year old national 21 3/14/07 - Rules historic landmark was the site of the revolutionary battle at Germantown which occurred in Mount Airy in 1777. As a cochair of the BID steering committee, I have been at work with my neighbors and colleagues for about a year to provide information related to this process to the property owners of the proposed business improvement district. The communication process has been organized to be open and inclusive about how the business improvement district will be created, empowered, and managed. The communications process has included a variety of means to convey, collect, and coordinate the information about creating a new Business Improvement District on the Avenue. Since last year, this has meant nine full steering committee meetings which were attended by between and 30 people each, three open 23 community meetings where between 45 and 24 65 people attended each one, and a steady 25 stream of e-mails, newspaper reports, 22 3/14/07 - Rules mailings and other announcements. All meetings have been announced publicly well in advance and held at prominent locations easily accessible to those interested in the process. There have also been focused meetings among property observers and people interested in the BID to address specific concerns. Each member of the steering committee, especially the co-chairs with whom I am seated, have often gone door to door to follow up on discussions, information, or queries regarding the process of creating, empowering, and managing the BID. We have conducted surveys of the property owners and business operators as to the objectives and goals for the proposed BID and the level of support necessary to manage it. It's from this process that we learned of the percentage valuation assessment we would use. The survey also identified four key areas of concern to the people of 23 3/14/07 - Rules this district that the BID will address: safety, sidewalk appearance, parking, and customer attraction. At all times throughout this process, we have attempted to be totally open and inclusive to people about the BID and about how it can realistically bring benefits to our community. I favor the BID. Although I am director of a nonprofit, not taxed, my organization will contribute what its assessment would be if it were to be taxed. And as Cliveden occupies an entire city block, it will be a substantial donation. Cliveden will do this because my organization believes that an area of the city such as this with beauty, history, and potential on an avenue known the nation over for its contributions to American history deserves nothing less. The tourists and school visitors we bring to events and programs at Cliveden look to us to provide safe clean sites to visit and 24 3/14/07 - Rules lively amenities and attractions to go along with it. Even though it may mean a slight impact on our budget, its benefits will be positive to the progress we strive for within our community. Thank you, Councilwoman Miller for all your help. And thank you, Council.
Thank you very much. Are there any comments or questions of this witness or witnesses? Councilwoman Miller.
Thank you, Madam President. Ken, I have a question here regarding the board makeup.
You said you have a nine-member board and that would be elected at annual meetings, but it's the last sentence I just have a question about, additional nonvoting board members. What is the total number in addition to the nine nonvoting 25 3/14/07 - Rules members?
I think that's an open question that will be up to the initial BID board on how many nonvoting members they want to have. I think it could be a powerful tool that they can bring on 5 or or 15 other people who 9 have expertise in certain areas that can 10 really help us out.
Right. When we did Germantown, we had a number -- I don't remember the exact number -- of voting members, but we had so many people interested we created an advisory board that could include everybody.
I think that would be an excellent idea also, yes. I think that's something that needs to be formed by the board.
I want to commend the committee for its work. We met a year and a half ago up at the diner and since then -- has it been a year and 3/14/07 - Rules a half?
We met about a year and a quarter ago actually at Cresheim Cottage Cafe, the other place.
Where you serve such great coffee. Anyway, I do want to thank you for coming in today and commend the steering committee for all your hard work. I know it's not been easy, but you had a goal and we're getting closer to reaching that goal. So thank you for your testimony. Thank you for coming in today.
Thank you, Councilwoman. If I may, a couple things, one is I would like to introduce members of the Mount Airy business community who came here today to support the Business Improvement District. If you would all just stand up, people in support of the Mount Airy Business Improvement District. Thank you very much for coming. Also, we are asking for the 27 3/14/07 - Rules removal of four properties that should not have been on the initial resolution, and those four properties are 6821 Germantown Avenue, 7413 Germantown Avenue, 2022 West Nipon Street, and 6353 Germantown Avenue. We request these four be removed from the Business Improvement District.
I also want to thank the other City departments that have been very helpful and Jeanne Bethune in particular and my staff from my office, commerce, and the staff from my office that's been working with you guys. You're on the move. Thank you.
Thank you. Do we have anyone else to testify on this bill? Please approach the witness table. While you're approaching the 28 3/14/07 - Rules table, I would like the record to reflect that to my extreme left is Councilmembers Savage, Kelly, and Clark, to my extreme right Councilman O'Neill, Councilman Greenlee, Councilman Kenney, Councilwoman Brown, Councilwoman Miller. Thank you. Please identify yourself for the record and proceed with your testimony.
Brenda Foster, 6373 Germantown Avenue. We have a travel agency that we've been there for 14 years. And I just want it to be clearly 15 noted that I am not in favor of the BID 16 process. I've been on several of these 17 kinds of things. It sounds good on 18 paper, but when it comes down to 19 actuality, the money is usually used a 20 lot up in fees for administration and never filters down to where it needs to go. So I just want for the record to be duly noted I am in opposition of it.
Thank you very much. 29 3/14/07 - Rules Do we have anyone else to testify on this bill? (No response.)
I just wanted to make sure that people knew before they left that we are right now working on the cafe legislation. I know that is of interest to some of the folks here in the audience. So, again, thank everyone for coming down. And for me, I very seldom see lots of folks from our district because we're so far away, so it really feels good to see people from the neighborhoods. Thank you for coming.
Thank you. Since there was no one else to testify, I would ask Mr. McPherson to please read the title of Bill No. 060957.
An ordinance 24 approving the Municipal Statement of Revival of the Frankford Special Services 30 3/14/07 - Rules District of Philadelphia and authorizing the filing of such statement with the secretary of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania for the purpose of retroactively reviving and extending the terms of the district, all under certain terms and conditions.
Good afternoon. My name is Marie Delaney and joining me is Tracy O'Drain.
Good afternoon, Eva Gladstein, director of neighborhood transformation for the City of Philadelphia.
Good afternoon. Again, my name is Eva Gladstein. I'm here to provide testimony in support of Bill 060957. This bill will allow for the approval of the Municipal Statement of Revival of the Frankford Special 31 3/14/07 - Rules Services District. Previous legislation, Council Bill 00541, extended the term of the special services district to December 31, 2005. This bill allows for the revival of an expired municipal authority. As I testified on the earlier legislation, we believe that neighborhood improvement districts are consistent with the objectives of the Restore Philadelphia Corridors program that we recently launched, which can help restore neighborhood commercial corridors as central places to work, shop, and meet neighbors in our communities. The Frankford CDC, which will provide management services to the neighborhood improvement district, has participated in addition in the City's Main Street program since 2005. They have assisted businesses with receiving Main Street facade challenge grants and leveraged other resources. Again, NIDs are one of our best examples of collaboration between the City and neighborhood 32 3/14/07 - Rules commercial corridors. They signal the entrepreneurs and property owners recognize the need to improve the environment within which they and their customers live and work. Their effort to make the corridor clean, safe, and attractive directly impacts the stability of the entire community and as the community prospers, it in turns promotes economic vitality of the commercial center. The result will be a dynamic neighborhood improvement district that promotes long-term growth and viability of Frankford Avenue corridor. We believe that this again deserves the support of the City and I urge your support. Thank you very much.
Thank you very much. Please identify yourself for the record.
We're here today to offer testimony in support of Bill 8 No. 060957. This bill will allow for the revival of the Frankford Special Service District. Since 1996, the Frankford Special Service District has served our area's business community providing services which create a clean, safe, and inviting area for local businesses. These services are essential for business corridors such as Frankford Avenue. In December of 2005, the special service district changed management, and during the transition there was a lapse in services. Under new management, the board of directors has demonstrated a renewal and firm interest in restoring the services to the community. In order to do this, we need a revival of this district. Under this 34 3/14/07 - Rules revival, the special service district will become a Business Improvement District or a BID. We thank you for your consideration and encourage you to allow us to once again perform this vital service to our business community.
Thank you very much. Are you going to be testifying?
Thank you very much. Are there any questions of the witnesses at the table? (No response.)
Thank you very much for coming in. Do we have anyone else that wishes to testify on this bill? (No response.)
Thank you. Seeing no one, I would ask Mr. McPherson to please read the titles 35 3/14/07 - Rules of Bill Nos. 070006, 070008, 070009, 070010, 070011, 070012, and 070013.
Bill No. 070006, an ordinance amending Section 14-1605 of the Philadelphia Code entitled "Regulated Uses" by adding licensed gaming facilities as a regulated use, all under certain terms and conditions; Bill No. 10 070008, an ordinance amending Chapter 11 14-1400 of the Philadelphia Code entitled "Commercial Entertainment District" by deleting the provisions authorizing the City Planning Commission to approve temporary facilities by removing licensed gaming facilities and off-track betting facilities as permitted uses and by deleting any provisions that may undermine Philadelphia local zoning controls, all under certain terms and conditions; Bill No. 070009, an ordinance 22 to amend the Philadelphia Zoning Maps by changing the zoning designation of certain areas of land located within an area bounded by Reed Street, Tasker 36 3/14/07 - Rules Street, Christopher Columbus Boulevard, and the Delaware River; Bill No. 070010, an ordinance amending Chapter 14-1400 of the Philadelphia Code entitled "Commercial Entertainment Districts," by prohibiting districts within 1 mile of one another providing additional restrictions for gross floor area, open area, and waterfront setback requirements and providing for additional signage controls, all under certain terms and conditions; Bill No. 070011, an ordinance 14 amending Section 14-1600 of the Philadelphia code entitled "Miscellaneous" by adding a new section 17 entitled Prohibitions on licensed gaming facilities prohibiting the erection, construction, alteration, or use of licensed gaming facilities and providing that no variance may be granted from such prohibition, all under certain terms and conditions; Bill no. 070012, an ordinance 24 amending Chapter 14-1400 of the Philadelphia Code entitled "Commercial 37 3/14/07 - Rules Entertainment District" by providing that no ordinance designating a commercial entertainment district may be enacted unless a neighborhood improvement district has first been created that includes within its service area the proposed commercial entertainment district, all under certain terms and conditions; Bill No. 070013, an ordinance 11 amending Section 14-1605 of the Philadelphia Code entitled "Regulated Uses" by prohibiting regulated uses within 1000 feet of any commercial entertainment district and adding payday lenders as a regulated use, all under certain terms and conditions.
Thank you, Mr. McPherson. Do we have anyone that wishes to testify? Good afternoon. Thank you for your patience.
Good afternoon. My name is Joyce Wilkerson. I'm Chief of 38 3/14/07 - Rules Staff to Mayor Street. With me today are a host of City people. I'm the only one offering testimony. I've distributed my testimony. I have extra copies here. While the Planning Commission and the Law Department testified on behalf of the administration last month, I want to review the positive fiscal and economic impacts of gaming on the City of Philadelphia, an all-important fact in considering the merits of the proposed bills. The introduction of gaming represents a significant economic development opportunity in Philadelphia. Developed well, gaming will add jobs, increase our tax base, support schools, diversify our tourism industry, and support the expansion of the convention center. I'd like to summarize the specific aspects of each benefit. During the Goode administration, Philadelphia began to focus on hospitality as a potentially significant component of the City's 39 3/14/07 - Rules economy with the commitment of development of the Pennsylvania Convention Center. Hospitality and the leisure industry now ranks No. 4 in terms of source of employment in the City of Philadelphia. Adding to visitor attractions, Sugarhouse in the late 2008 and Foxwood in 2009 will join the array of theater, arts, museums, historic attractions, nightlife, gaming events, conventions, shopping, and other hospitality offerings. Gaming venues located convenient to the central business district will strengthen the critical mass and variety of offerings available in Philadelphia giving visitors to Philadelphia a reason to extend their stay, spending the night, eating in restaurants shopping, and the like. Gaming provides our hospitality industry another significant visitor attraction that complements and supports planned convention center expansion. Gaming offers enormous 40 3/14/07 - Rules employment opportunities for city residents. Construction of the first phase of the casinos will add approximately 1,000 construction jobs to the local economy generating an estimated $34 million in wages. The operation of the first phase of developments will create approximately 2,000 permanent jobs with an increase in wage tax receipts for the City of Philadelphia of up to $16 million annually with additional indirect economic growth. As a result of programs conducted by the OIC in connection with the convention center, the hospitality industry has become one of those industries offering entry level jobs to people in our neighborhoods. The administration's goal is to implement this model for entry level job creation as well in connection with the growth of a robust gaming industry in Philadelphia. The economic significance of gaming does not end with the creation of jobs or construction-related tax revenue. 41 3/14/07 - Rules Since 1994, the City has invested in a tax reduction strategy to enhance our economic competitiveness. A 2004 general assembly provision has provided for approximately $100 million in revenue annually to be applied to the reduction of Philadelphia's wage tax. 7 percent. Finally, as a result of the legislation passed by the general assembly last year, the first $5 million from host fees will be set aside for School District funding. As recent news stories have made abundantly clear to all of us, our public schools are tragically underfunded. Every dollar of support is critical. The revenue support for the city is no less critical. Just over a week ago, I testified in Council in support of the administration's five-year 42 3/14/07 - Rules financial plan. 1 million -- and the number I have in my written testimony is incorrect -- in gaming-related host fees revenue for the City. 6 million in both 2011 and 2012. In addition to host fee revenue assumed in the five-year plan, the rate of growth in tax revenue is supported in part by taxes paid by gaming-related job growth.
The combination of these dollars support our social service programs, our Police Department, our Fire Department, as well as other core city services. As you know, the fund balance general fund balance is precarious with the increase in labor costs, benefit costs, prison and homeless population, and other burdens of our county functions. The City has only been able to keep up the aggressive and increasing pace of tax cuts by shrinking government 43 3/14/07 - Rules to its smallest size in generations. But these efforts to increase services while cutting taxes will be in jeopardy if we delay the implementation of gaming. To the extent Council action or litigation relating to these actions delays the opening of Philadelphia casinos, there will be significant impacts on revenue projections in the five-year plan. This is not to dismiss or minimize the challenges casinos pose to directly impacted neighborhoods. We must appropriately address the concerns of these communities. This brings me to highlight one additional impact the proposed bills may have for the future. The administration has worked diligently with casino operators to assist them in complying with local laws to address access, traffic, provide employment, and highlight community concerns. To the extent that these bills work to prevent the implementation of the state gaming 44 3/14/07 - Rules act, the proposed laws may undermine or even eliminate our current home rule authority as outlined in the commercial entertainment district development review process. This would result in developments that may be less responsive to local conditions and less accountable to the community. I urge you to consider these potentially serious fiscal implications when considering changes to the CED framework presented by Bills 070006 and 070008 through 12. The administration supports Bill 070013 provided that the definition of payday lender is addressed in a manner consistent with the testimony provided on February 21. This concludes my testimony and I'd be happy to answer any questions you might have.
Thank you. Are there any questions from members of the committee? 45 3/14/07 - Rules The Chair recognizes Councilman O'Neill.
I direct my question to the City solicitor. Mr. Solicitor, it's the last chance I'll probably have to see you in a public forum before tomorrow's expected vote on the casinos. I read through your opinion and it appears to me that your conclusion is that the proposal is not in accordance with law. Is that a fair reading of your --
Oh, the charter language, not the seven bills before the committee today. In terms of the charter provision, that is correct. I believe it is preempted by state law based upon the factual review that was undertaken and testified to by the planning director on March 2 before the government and law 46 3/14/07 - Rules committee -- law and government committee. Sorry.
Given that opinion, you mention or you state in your letter on the first page, your opinion letter, the extraordinary remedy of removing the proposal lies in your hands either preventing it from getting to the Council, which you mentioned why you hadn't had the Planning Commission study, or the electorate -- and I think there's a fair inference that it could pass Council and you could -- it doesn't say and electorate. It says or. Or would imply that the Council has approved something on its way to the electorate. Do you plan on removing it from the ballot under this provision if Council were to pass it with 12 votes?
I am currently reviewing that particular question at the request of clients and have not yet opined as to that.
Let me ask 47 3/14/07 - Rules you, do you believe you have discretion given your conclusion? It says within your discretion, but it would seem to me that the discretion would be based on I'm not sure. Your conclusion is a fairly straightforward one. Do you believe you still have discretion in that area?
I believe, Councilman, you're referring to footnote 2 of my opinion that was dated yesterday.
In that opinion, I basically indicated that the statute, the Home Rule act, which provides for a review of the petition of electors by the clerk as to the minimum number of 20,000 electors and by the City solicitor with respect to the legality of the question and whether it is in intelligible form for a ballot question, as to those last two issues, I indicated in the footnote that I believe that I had wide discretion to make a determination whether, in fact, those two tests were met. And in 48 3/14/07 - Rules exercising that discretion, I looked at the facial petition or I should say I looked at the petition facially only without the benefit of the factual results of the Planning Commission's review. I did not address the question that I think you're trying to ask today, which is whether I believe that that type of discretion I have with regard to a petition of electors under the Home Rule act is the same as the discretion I have with regard to a ballot question which has been duly adopted by City Council. I haven't opined as to that issue and would not want that footnote reference in my opinion of yesterday to somehow be confused with that question.
I just was trying to read into the provision not saying Council and the electorate, which would indicate pre-introduction, or the word "or" would indicate that Council could do something like unanimously pass it or pass it with more than 12 and you 49 3/14/07 - Rules could still -- you still had the discretion to keep it from the electorate.
It was not my intent to address that particular question that you are now posing, Councilman.
Thank you, Madam President. We've kind of been through these discussions in the past relative to other actions of Council, do we pass ordinances, that kind of thing. And not wanting you to speculate on what you may decide, don't you think that the consideration of that would be fraught with an awful lot of problems relative to our ability to represent people who live in the city? I mean, if the clerk determines or a court determines as it has that the signatures on the petition were not sufficient and 12 or 17 members 50 3/14/07 - Rules of Council voted to put it on the ballot, having a single appointed official of the City, much as we respect you, make a decision to keep it from the voters, don't you think that would have a really I guess echoing problem amongst the electorate, amongst the taxpayers? I mean, it seems a bit -- it would seem a bit heavy handed.
Well, I can only respond this way, Councilman Kenney, and that is that the charter responsibilities of my office requires that I from time to time make unpopular decisions in connection with what I believe the law requires of me and implicates in connection with actions undertaken by Council. But I also fully respect the point of view that I am an appointed official. I'm not an elected official. And in making a decision which I thought was in my sole discretion about whether threshold tests had been met under the Home Rule act, I thought that I should 51 3/14/07 - Rules defer to the electorate, undertake only a facial review, not attempt to make a determination about whether the petition should come before Council or not. I think I discharged the responsibilities of my office in a way that frankly I'm proud of. But having said that, having now been advised by the planning director about the practical effect of the ballot question that was under consideration on March 2, it is my determination that state law preempts the kind of effect that the ballot question would have insofar as it would remove essentially all viable properties within the city from gaming, which I think is in direct conflict with the state gaming law and the actions taken on February 1 by the state gaming control board.
I guess we come down to the discussion relative to what's legal and what's correct. We've had these discussions about trash pickup, which is not I don't think as 52 3/14/07 - Rules earth-shattering as this particular issue is, and it would seem to me to come down on the side of what's perceived to be fairness as opposed to what may be a threshold or a legal threshold would seem to me to be the correct way to go and have a court at some point say that it wasn't the correct way to go as opposed to being perceived as unilaterally trying to keep people from expressing their opinion.
I understand there is an easy way to do my job. I think I have addressed the substance of your question. I will stop there.
The Chair recognizes Councilman DiCicco. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Thank you, Madam Chair. Good afternoon. My questions I guess will be for Ms. Wilkerson. In your testimony, you describe the revenue benefits to the City. When you did this breakout, was 53 3/14/07 - Rules there any consideration or did you look at the cost/benefits analysis versus -- gaming versus the revenues? There was a certain cost that will have to be incurred by the taxpayers if these establishments are built, additional police, sanitation, other types of city services that I think everyone would agree are certainly going to be needed to supplement those communities where these two sites are located.
Yeah. We incorporated some of the thinking in the gaming task force, but more importantly we usually discount the numbers. You know, we've discounted the numbers to take into account the fact that the gaming won't start as quickly as we might want. We discount the numbers to some extent because we understand there are going to be costs associated with it. As we move forward in the coming months and years, we'll be putting a finer point on exactly what it's going to cost, exactly 54 3/14/07 - Rules what it's going to cost for police protection. We're also involved in discussions with the providers or the licensees about what part of the costs that are generated as a result of gaming they're going to bear as opposed to the City, and something like the traffic-associated costs come to mind. So Mr. Diaz, our City solicitor, and others are engaged in conversations and others around these very issues. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: That's what Mr. Diaz refers to as the client or clients are the casino operators?
Certainly not my clients, Councilman. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: When you used the term quite often not only today but in the past conversations our client or clients --
I was referring, councilman, as I'm sure you're aware, to the charter requirements that all 55 3/14/07 - Rules officers and members of boards and commissions of the City are clients of the City solicitor. And it was in that context that I was referring to clients, certainly not outside city government. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: But Ms. Wilkerson says you're testifying that there have been discussions with potential operators.
I meant negotiations with them. The City team is working to advance any number of City goals. We have concerns about transportation. We have concerns about everything from having green buildings to assuring that there's an appropriate spinoff of opportunities for Philadelphia residents and that the City team is led by the City solicitor.
And, Councilman, on that point there are about a dozen issues that we're negotiating with the two licensees on, that is, the City team is negotiating with the licensees. And 56 3/14/07 - Rules certainly at the top of that list I would put issues related to things like traffic in connection with the water infrastructure and flooding issues in South Philly, issues related to jobs, the issue related to tax abatement, which is certainly important to keeping our bottom line numbers as the Chief of Staff just mentioned, as well as the opportunities to create a connection to the riverfront. Those are among the top issues, but we have a full list. I'm happy to provide a briefing to you or members of the City Council on those issues and to advise as we proceed. But certainly that is an element of oversight that quite frankly we are currently authorized under the gaming, the state gaming act consistent with I believe as I've testified before the framework that we have developed with your support on the commercial entertainment districts. And I have testified as well that we put that oversight ability and 57 3/14/07 - Rules our negotiating capacity at risk I believe if we were to totally lose any local land use controls either by a contrary decision of the courts or a preemption by the general assembly. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Thank you for your answers. I have a few more but I'll just pass over them. I've said this in a different context in the past. I guess the frustration for me is you're an appointed person to the administration as is Ms. Wilkerson and Ms. Woodcock, but it seems like we all just take -- the administration has just basically decided, well, you know, we got this bill 17 passed, Act 71. The state made a decision. The gaming commission board made a decision as to the two sites. And that's the best -- it is what it is and there's really nothing more we can do. I think the frustration for me and the people -- there's only a handful of people here today, and by no means consider that an indication that there's 58 3/14/07 - Rules still not the opposition that there is out there. I can guarantee you that probably tomorrow this place will be packed, not because I asked them to come but because they're coming because they think it's that important. But as an elected official who represents the citizens of the City, and even though you're not elected, you're appointed, we're all in this together, the frustration for me is that the administration has not taken a position to say we have a problem here, we have communities that are going to be seriously impacted in a negative way. We should be trying to work with our state lawmakers to try to get some relief, repeal Act 71, amend Act 71 or something that gets us back into the process so that maybe reasonable people can sit down at a table and figure out a place or places other than these two sites where gaming may work. But outside of this Council, which is the voice of the 59 3/14/07 - Rules people, the administration hasn't taken this position. They've accepted it as a fait accompli and expect everyone else to be impressed, if you will, with the revenue numbers and the job creation when there's a more human element to this that is being ignored. And that is why you have such anger and frustration out in the communities is because people feel as though they're going it alone. I don't think they think that of me and my colleagues who have been extremely supportive of me on this somewhat of a district issue as compared to some other issues we have to deal with, but there seems to be nothing from our side saying there is opposition and it doesn't necessarily mean -- and there are signs that say no casinos and casino-free Philadelphia, but I'm a reasonable person. I think that we can come to a point in this whole conversation where we may be able to find two alternative sites. 60 3/14/07 - Rules So that's where I wish the administration -- because I understand these numbers.
I worked here years. 5 I understand the revenues that we 6 anticipate and some of the good that may 7 come out of the revenues, but I also 8 understand the negative impact to those 9 adjacent communities. And I'm not here 10 with the rhetoric, the doomsday theory. 11 I certainly really believe the more I've been dealing with this for the last 16 months that there's going to be panic in some of those neighborhoods and I think we're going to see an exodus of people moving away from those neighborhoods. Hopefully, they don't move out of the city, but that's maybe their only alternative. And we may see an uptake in our transfer tax but all for the wrong reason. So that is the message that I think we've been trying to communicate with all due respect to all these other things. And you have a job to do and I 61 3/14/07 - Rules respect and appreciate that, so it's not a personal thing. Romy, you smile but it isn't. We're all in this together I thought, but we kind of feel like the administrative and legislative branch are miles apart, miles apart, whatever it is. We're too far apart. That's the conversation I've been asking to have and continue to ask until whenever that day comes when there's no longer an opportunity. And that's probably what I will be talking to Senator Fumo about tomorrow afternoon at o'clock with Representative O'Brien and Keller, let us get back in the game, no pun intended, and let's see if we can't come up with a place or places that work. That's my speech of the day I guess. I don't know how else to explain it. This is not about -- for me, it's not about the personalities or the people involved in either of the sites, whether they're good guys, bad guys, or not. This isn't about them for me at least. 62 3/14/07 - Rules This is about the future of this City for decades to come, not just Pennsport, not just Queen Village, the neighborhoods I happen to represent and hopefully I'll still continue to represent for four more years. It's much bigger than that. That's the immediate impact. That's where the rubber meets the road as they say, but it goes beyond that. And in one of my questions, you know, we don't talk about -- at least I don't think anybody's looked at the negative impacts that are possible towards the port industry and the impact it will have there. We don't talk about all these additional cars and will they have a negative impact on the retail establishments that we worked so hard to bring to this city. In my opinion, if these sites get picked -- that are picked get built -- and it's only a prediction. I'm not an engineer and I don't have a crystal ball -- especially as far as the Foxwood site is concerned, something will 63 3/14/07 - Rules break, either the Foxwoods casino will fail and then all the revenues that we anticipated we won't realize, or the retail and the port business will fail. They are not compatible. No one is going to ever prove to anybody that it will work there. That's why we need that other conversation. And it's getting close to the 11th hour but damn it, the next hour, whatever that is, for the next several months I'm going to keep driving that message home. We have to keep talking about this. Thank you.
As you know, the administration worked for many, many months in opposition to what was finally adopted as the Commonwealth's approach to siting these facilities. We've maintained all along we're in a better position to understand the impacts. The City is in a better position to manage the development process. We didn't prevail in that. The approach we've chosen to take is to work aggressively 64 3/14/07 - Rules within the framework set out by the state legislature. I think you and members of the community have raised very real concerns, particularly about Foxwood. One of the things that I believe -- one of the comments we made in our commission to the gaming control board was the need for an additional ramp. There is a very difficult traffic situation that is created in South Philadelphia with the development of the Foxwood casino, and we will be using the process moving forward to get the developer and the Commonwealth to the table to respond in a more adequate way to the challenge. This is not the outcome we wanted as a result of the legislative process, but we believe that we can work aggressively and make this work for the community and the entire city.
I just wanted to add, Councilman, in connection with the administration's willingness to be responsive to the concerns that you've 65 3/14/07 - Rules raised, I think my letter today with regard to the Foxwood site, which was circulated to members of Council, was intended to show that we understand that these concerns are real. The administration is taking them seriously. And it's for that reason we have not processed the application, the zoning application that was filed by Foxwoods a month or two ago. We want to use the plan of development process and the CED legislation opportunity to address these community concerns and make sure that as we are proceeding with our review of the site that Council will have a full opportunity to engage in that discussion and to review the proposed bills for adoption. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Thank you both for your testimony. Madam President, just a couple more minutes. And I respect what you're saying. I understand that, but I also 66 3/14/07 - Rules think if the administration were to join hands with us and support these bills, it will send an even stronger message to our state lawmakers that even the administration is joining the people that it represents, the citizens of this city, in its fight and its attempt to try to figure out a better solution. We're somewhat divided on this. At least, that's what the public thinks. I was at a coalition meeting the other night. Most people feel that the Mayor has let them down. I understand what the Mayor's concern is. I understand that he's worried about the preemption and the possibility we may lose all these controls. That's a practical approach. But I also think that it waters down what we're trying to do because I think ultimately the administration was against the Foxwood. It was low on the list. It was the least --
The lowest. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: So why 67 3/14/07 - Rules don't we continue that argument? Why are we accepting it? Well, we did as best we could. It's all over. I don't think it's all over because in months those 6 state lawmakers that gave us this are up 7 for reelection. And it should be the 8 administration and the citizens who they 9 represent holding their feet to the fire 10 and asking them and insisting that we go 11 back to the table in some fashion to 12 figure out a way in which we can find alternative sites.
Let me just be clear. We have stated previously that the authority of the City with regard to land use is limited. We have a space. We think it's an important space. It gives us the opportunity to oversee these projects, to make decisions we believe are appropriate for the city and its neighborhoods, but that authority is limited. And I would also point out, Councilman, that yesterday in Harrisburg the governor when asked about this 68 3/14/07 - Rules situation in Philadelphia noted that previously he had been opposed to preemption that was directed at Philadelphia, but given the importance of this issue statewide, it remains a possibility. And I think given these realities, based upon the importance of Philadelphia's contribution to the economic agenda statewide, to the property tax rebates statewide where we're generating 40 percent or anticipated to generate 40 percent of the revenues that will be used by the state for these projects and for the convention center expansion, I don't believe with all due respect that we should expect that the Mayor if he were to join in opposition would have the kind of salutary effect that you're talking about. Having said that, we remain concerned about and are working toward addressing the issues that you've mentioned on numerous occasions and we 69 3/14/07 - Rules take seriously. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: I appreciate your comment again. The governor, by the way, refuses to meet with me on this issue. I requested a meeting, turned me down flat. This may sound a little bit over the edge, but I just would wonder if for some reason the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania decided to put a nuclear power plant at Delaware and Reed, would the administration's position be the same? I think they would join with us. For us this is a nuclear power plant. This is ready to explode. I mean, people are -- I've never seen this intensity. Madam President, I don't know if you were in Council when the trash to steam issue was --
I was. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: You were. This to me is another trash to steam issue that is steamrolling, no pun 70 3/14/07 - Rules intended, across the city. So I understand. You know, the relationship I have with the Mayor at least up until an hour ago has been pretty good lately. I hope that doesn't change. He and I have had some conversation. With your support, I think it certainly gets the attention of our state lawmakers who gave us this in the first place. I rest my case. Thank you.
Thank you. Are there any other questions or comments from members of the committee? (No response.)
Thank you very much. Do we have anyone else to testify on these bills? Please approach the witness table, sir. Good afternoon. Please identify yourself for the record.
My name is Ed 71 3/14/07 - Rules Kerlin. I am a resident of the Pennsport Civic Association.
I just wanted to emphasize to Council that despite what you have heard, the costs of the casinos have not been fully explored. We have a budget now of $5 million to attract convention and tourists to Philadelphia. I want to emphasize to you that regardless of what happens, if they go ahead and build these casinos, do not expect for the opposition to just die away. They may think they're able to mitigate the traffic and all the other impacts, but one thing they're not going to be able to mitigate is the opposition. And I can tell you now that there are people within the organizations opposing the casinos thinking hard and targeting the future customer base of Foxwoods. So if we begin to go after the future customer base of Foxwoods, meaning 72 3/14/07 - Rules conventioneers coming here, and ask them not to come back to Philadelphia to gamble, which is in essence just a message do not come back to Philadelphia, I don't think that that cost, that us working a counter purpose to all these agencies that are designed to bring tourists here has been calculated. So I just wanted to let you know that if they do build the casinos, we are heading down the road toward riot police opening day and that the opposition in the communities is that strong. And I think it can be sustained. And I think that there's evidence in our neighborhoods' histories that we will continue this fight. So I thank you for your listening to us and your taking the matter seriously. And in the end it may be a really good thing because I don't think you've ever had so much attention in the city to one issue and it has meant so much to so many people, and so thank you for taking it seriously. 73 3/14/07 - Rules
Thank you very much. And you can thank your councilman who has been working very, very hard for the community. I know you all know that. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: I didn't hear that, Ed. Did I hear you say I do thank him?
What was the question, Councilman? COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: The Council president said you ought to thank your councilperson.
I did. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Oh, thank you. Ed, just for the purpose of the committee, the coalition raised money to hire an attorney to appeal the process in addition to what City Council did. Could you just explain to them where that money came from and how much it was? I think it's important they understand --
I am not in a position to be a spokesman for the 74 3/14/07 - Rules coalition. I think we've agreed -- it's Whitman, Pennsport, Society Hill, and Queen Village. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: 20,000 each apiece?
Correct. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: $80,000 collected to date to hire attorneys to fight this. That's what I was just trying to get out.
That is correct. And I think the basis of that lawsuit focuses on a multitude of errors of law and of finding with regard to factors that have been overlooked or factors that have been ignored or factors that have been misrepresented during the license procedure. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Thank you, Madam President.
Thank you. Would anyone else like to testify? 75 3/14/07 - Rules Good afternoon. Kindly identify yourself for the record.
Good afternoon, Madam President. My name is Catherine D'Angelis. I live in Pennsport. I'm also a board member of the Pennsport Civic Association. I lived in Pennsport for years. I didn't have remarks 10 today, but I just started bubbling over 11 and decided to speak to City Council. 12 You've seen our signs many times, 13 Delaware River Neighborhood Alliance. 14 It's a coalition. It's 17 civic groups, 15 the local government of our communities. 16 Solicitor Diaz today said that 17 the siting of the casinos were because of 18 the importance of Philadelphia's 19 contribution to the economic engine of 20 the state. And I want to say to City 21 Council we are the economic engine. The 22 civic associations, we are your current 23 economic engine. Years ago -- and I'm 24 actually outraged that the solicitor, the 25 city planner, that these folks have left. 76 3/14/07 - Rules We are the people who gentrified the neighborhoods years ago when no one 4 wanted to live here in this city, no one. 5 And I moved here into my 1893 house, 6 which was uninhabitable. I contemplated 7 putting bars on the beautiful double 8 front doors. There are still no bars. 9 They have never been there. But that was 10 the neighborhood. As we rehabbed our 11 house, the city said we don't have any 12 money, we need your help, we need you to 13 adopt a park. Remember that? And we 14 adopted the park throughout the city and 15 we started many friends groups. I can 16 speak to, attest to, started Friends of 17 Dickinson Square, which is a viable today 18 friends group that protects the park at 19 4th and Tasker. It is so good that the 20 Horticultural Society in the past two 21 weeks just gave us the maximum $5,000 22 grant to help us along because we were a 23 partner with the City. The City said the 24 lots are dirty. We don't have the money. 25 We don't have the manpower. We're broke. 77 3/14/07 - Rules We need you to clean the lots. We cleaned the lots. There's drugs on the corner. We marched up and down saying "Up with hope. " How many people remember that 20-plus years ago? That's what was in our neighborhoods. And then we continued in the dead of night to stand on these corners so the drug dealers could not occupy them. We took back the neighborhoods that nobody wanted. There was no tax base there because people weren't contributing because these were empty and abandoned houses that the City said to us, hey, we need help, help us clean and seal these houses, and we partnered again with the City. We partnered with the City when they said graffiti everywhere. Jim Kenny, Frank DiCicco, did we walk up and down 4th Street filling paint and with the unions, volunteers painting graffiti off our properties? And this is not just Pennsport. This is up and down the river 78 3/14/07 - Rules where we have gentrified the neighborhoods. In that time -- and we were young. We had good knees then. From picking up all the trash, now the knees are sore. But in that time, we inadvertently became the leaders of our communities. And when Foxwoods has the audacity to say it's a fringe minority that speaks in the neighborhood, we are that minority. We are your civic leaders. We now run these civic associations. We are your local government. That's the minority. And we don't sit here as individuals. We represent our members, which are hundreds of thousands of people. We have gentrified our streets. Our homes, our streets are desirable. The corner of Front and Dickinson, ugly lot, ugly. $500,000 houses on there. There are 16 of them. The builder wants to put another eight, but he stopped pending Foxwoods. They are ground zero in our neighborhood. 480 feet from Foxwoods' 79 3/14/07 - Rules front door. Foxwoods want to put a ramp or should we way the City, right outside their front door. This is the same thing in Sugarhouse. It's 200 feet from people's homes. I want to say just in conclusion you know us. We're your neighbors. We're your government leaders. We're your partners.
" You don't know these casinos but you know us well. You've known us for years. We have 16 made this city livable, viable, 17 desirable. And now we don't have to 18 educate you as to the ripple effects of 19 what casinos bring in. I am not ready to 20 march in my street again to get rid of 21 druggies and crime out of my 22 neighborhood. We did that. It's all 23 right. And I urge you -- I know we're 24 testifying on the amendments today. I 25 urge you tomorrow to send a message. I 80 3/14/07 - Rules want a unanimous vote tomorrow. I think we deserve it. You are our partners. We've painted graffiti together. We've broken bread together. We fixed our neighborhoods. We are not strangers. We are the local government. We want a vote. It's that simple. These are our neighborhoods and we love them or we would not be here. These people want our money. We just want a good and wonderful Philadelphia. We're not -- it's not self-serving. We love our city. I thank you very much.
Thank you. Thank you very much. Is there anyone else who would like to testify? (No response.)
Seeing no one, this will conclude our public hearing. We will now go into our public meeting. Bill No. 070005 will be recessed until April at 10:00 a.m. 25 I'm sorry. The Chair 81 3/14/07 - Rules recognizes Councilwoman Miller, who has an amendment.
Thank you. I want to offer an amendment to Bill No. 070005. This amendment takes out the four properties that needed to come out of this bill. And if you look at your amendment, all four properties have a line going through them. The first one is 6353 Germantown Avenue, 6821 Germantown Avenue, 2022 Nipon Street, and 7413 Germantown Avenue. (Seconded.)
It has been moved and seconded that the amendment be adopted. All in favor will say aye. (Chorus of "ayes.")
The ayes have it and the amendment is adopted. This will be recessed until 82 3/14/07 - Rules April at 10:00 a.m. The Chair now will consider Bill No. 060957 and recognizes Councilman Clarke.
Thank you, 7 Madam President. 8 I move that Bill No. 060957 be 9 reported out of committee with a 10 favorable recommendation. 11 (Seconded.) 12
It 13 has been moved and seconded that Bill No. 14 060957 be reported out of committee with 15 a favorable recommendation. All in favor 16 will aye say. 17 (Chorus of "ayes.") 18
The 22 ayes have it and the motion carries. 23 Bill No. 0600 -- 24
Madam 25 President, I believe the sponsor did want 83 3/14/07 - Rules a suspension of the rules. I'm sorry.
The record will reflect that the rules have been suspended regarding Bill No. 060957.
You're welcome. Bill Nos. 070006, 070008, 070009, 070010, 070011, 070012, and 070013, with the consensus of the committee, the bills will be continued until Thursday, March 22, at 1:00 p.m. Councilman DiCicco, I'm just being told that you have an amendment to one of the bills? COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Yes, Madam President. I have an amendment. I believe all members of your committee should have received a copy to Bill No. 20 070013. But if you're holding them, we'll do the amendment on the 22nd.
Okay. Thank you. This will conclude our public hearing and public meeting. Thank you all very much. 84 CERTIFICATE I HEREBY CERTIFY that the proceedings, evidence, and objections are contained fully and accurately in the stenographic notes taken by me upon on March 14, 2007, and that this is a true and correct transcript of same. _____________________________ Kimberly A. Overwise Certified Realtime Reporter Notary Public (The foregoing certification of this transcript does not apply to any reproduction of the same by any means unless under the direct control and/or supervision of the certifying reporter.)