This is simple grandstanding for the point of grandstanding.
There's no attempt to impugn.
It simply says, second attempt to connect with EFCC, no response.
The print is so small, I can't read if there's any.
I'm working on trying to zoom in, Your Honor.
Go to the letter.
Go to the letter, Sean.
10 of 12.
In one sentence or less, Mr. Bonney, what a slander is.
Go to the letter.
I'm asking you.
Okay, well, I think this letter, along with this chart, and a complete absence of reference to what was going on in the world, it amounts to this.
I'm not saying, Ms. Teneri, I hear what you're saying.
i'm not saying it's actionable slander and that we're accusing somebody of committing slander
i i apologize for using that word what i'm saying is thank you should not okay that's okay you don't
have to go any further okay that i think it should not be tolerated by this board by the planning
commission or by anybody that that reviews this case and i think what the city i think what the
city was doing excuse me was telling people to stay home and be safe and that's all i have to
say, and that should be all you have to say right now. Mr. Chairman, I'm sorry for jumping in like
that. No, no, you're fine. I'm happy to move on. I'm happy to move on, but it had to be said.
Mr. Spitson, a lot of these emails have to do with a settlement agreement
between EFCC and the Philadelphia Housing Authority.
between EFCC and the Philadelphia Housing Authority. Is that correct?
At least some of them in the time period, some of them in the beginning of the chronology.
I'm not familiar enough with the details of every one of these emails to say that that is
the correct statement. As a separate matter, I would again object to relevance here and delay.
any agreement between PHA and EFCC is a private party agreement that has no bearing on this case.
If either party wants to enforce any agreement that exists or doesn't exist,
they have a court system that does that, not this board.
I am referring to information contained in the exhibit provided by the applicant,
And I have the opportunity, I have the right to ask questions about that exhibit.
On 5-19, that's May 19, it says, focused on history and settlement agreement.
Can you slide it to the right a little bit?
Requested copies of all documents they had in their possession related to the settlement agreement.
Do you see that, Mr. Spitson?
yes i see that but i would not categorize as most of the correspondence is relating to that that was
mentioned on one phone call i understand but then you have the following entry that says
requesting status of documents and then the following entry after that regarding status
of documents so would it be fair to say that you are asking east falls community council for
copies of that agreement and any related correspondence? I was requesting information
from East Falls Community Council. Okay. Did you have a copy of the settlement agreement
at that time? I did not receive the copy from East Falls Community Council.
I would object. I'm happy to let this move on because it's going nowhere, but we need to move
it forward, obviously, as quickly as possible. There's no establishment of what the settlement
agreement is, quote unquote, why he would have it, why it's relevant. It is not relevant. It is at
best a private party agreement between two third parties, neither of which are relevant to this
application. Would you agree with me, Mr. Spitson, that at the time that you were asking East Falls
Community Council for a copy of the settlement agreement that you had a copy in your possession
since the year prior, courtesy of the Philadelphia Housing Authority, that you already had a copy of
it, as well as various pieces of correspondence between EFCC and the Housing Authority. Would
you agree to that? Again, Chairman, I have to object as to why we're going down this path,
what its relevance is other than to stall this case to a continuance.
That's a good, that's your opinion.
My question is, when you are asked, this is a document where you said that East Falls
Community Council was being non-responsive.
We're talking about your request of a settlement agreement and correspondence related there
When I asked you whether you had a copy, you told me just a minute ago that you did not
have a copy provided to you by East Falls Community Council and I'm now asking you whether in fact you
had a copy provided to you by the Philadelphia Housing Authority as of August 2019 when you
signed the agreement of sale with them many many many months before this car's but these emails
and requests. Objection chairman what is the relevance of that? Well first of all is there
something in that letter that you keep referencing that yes the board's decision today it there is
and we're going to get into that when we get to our case but my point is i mean i'm entitled to
cross-examine this witness i'm not saying you're not entitled to what the relevance on issues of
credibility and when he is presenting a letter and a document that says that we've not been
responsive and provided him with certain information, if it is in fact the case, and I believe it is,
and I believe I can prove it, that he had that information all along, I would say that that's
important for the board to hear for purposes of his credibility, for how they are presenting
their view of how this East Falls Community Council has acted. And we've heard a lot of that
from Mr. Whalen this morning, and my question stands.
I have to object here, and I'm sorry to interrupt again.
Madam Vice Chair already, you know, brought this to a head with Mr. Bonney.
brought this to a head with Mr. Bonnie. The document says what it says. The document doesn't
The document says what it says.
The document does.
say requested settlement agreement that didn't have. It just says requested copies of all the
documents they had in their possession. That's it. Again, reading and facilitating a, you know,
a vehement reading of this that has nothing to do with the factual case in front of this board.
then why did you put this why did you put this exhibit in front of the board's face
why did you submit this document tron i'm entitled to cross-examine it all right all
right all right here we go you know what we have two minutes this case will have to be resumed
there's no no way we can finish our morning list uh and and uh abide with the rules and regulations
that we have where we're bound by so uh mr bonnie just finish with this witness please and we're
to give we're going to have to resume this hearing that's fine i have a number of questions and i'm
going to now um well it's 11 58 and we have two minutes i i'm going to continue unless told
otherwise um uh can i share my screen there i didn't hear what you said i didn't hear what you
Okay, I see it.
Share.
Is this the first page of your, I'm showing you an agreement, a document titled The Top
Agreement of Sale, dated August 12, 2019, between the Philadelphia Housing Authority
and your company at TAPCO.
Would you agree that this is the first page?
That question for?
Mr. Spitson, do you agree that this is your agreement of sale?
I mean, that it looks like.
I know you can't, I don't want you to read the entire page right now,
but I'm just trying to move forward.
Chairman, I'll object.
I mean, to the extent that Mr. Bonney wants to make this document obvious
as to why we're discussing it,
I don't know as the attorney whether this is or is not the first page. It could be without doing a confirmation and reading every word. So just trying to move on as to what the relevant question is, we can maybe do a cart before the horse as to, you know, establishing the document.
Okay. Well, I'm showing page 8 of 18 of this PDF. The pages aren't numbered, but it's page 8 on the PDF, where there's a paragraph 13C, as in Charlie, representations and warranties, where the seller is representing.
um and again i'm going to have to object i understand what mr bonnie is discussing but
this document is relevant to these proceedings only to the extent that it creates an equitable
ownership interest in atapco properties such that it may apply and appear before this board
the inner workings of this document have nothing to do with this board's analysis
If Mr. Bonney, which I believe he's trying to do, is tee up a legal case, he's trying to shoehorn testimony from this matter to tee up some kind of legal case that EFCC may have or may not have with PHA.
But that's wholly irrelevant and a judicial determination as to this document. The legal analysis of this document for this board's purpose is solely limited to whether it creates or does not create an entitlement by Atapco Properties to proceed as the Ecuador owner, which it clearly does.
Gentlemen, gentlemen, I'm sorry for the interruption.
Please stop describing my motives.
Mr. Bonney, we're going to have a result. This case will have to be resumed. Do we have a date, Tanya?
September 8th at 3.30.
okay so mi 2021 that's 000336 4401 ridge avenue this hearing will be resumed
on september the 8th at 3 30 p.m i i i i assume i am incorrect and it is futile to ask but i must
uh miss sunkett is there any earlier date i presume not but
no okay and and if there is no other date can i just have the board confirm that i do not need to
Okay. And if there is no other date, can I just have the board confirm that I do not need to repost or re-notice for that September 8th hearing?
We okay on those grounds, Sir Tanya?
No, resolution hearings do not need posting.
Can I mention my client is telling me that that is the date of Rosh Hashanah?
I think September 7th is.
Well, I'm just going by what my client says.
And if it's...
I know, and I'm not Jewish, so I don't know.
I'm looking at my calendar.
September 7th is Rosh Hashanah.
Thank you, gentlemen.
Oh, and that...
Well, we would object to that date.
What grounds?
That it's a holiday for me and some of my, at least one of my witnesses, one of my witnesses who just texted me.
The 7th?
The 7th, are you talking about, like, it starts at 6 o'clock, it's sundown, and then it goes into the following day, and that's the real holiday?
That's how we work, yes.
well my suggestion is why don't we leave this i'll submit i'll confirm with my client
and i will submit a letter um if if and we can do it that way i don't know if we um excuse me
this is sharon no we cannot do it that way the date has to be announced now in order for everyone
who is now present to have notice? I obviously, you know, I already asked and was told no. I need
to obviously push this matter forward as quickly as possible. I guess if we're having any kind of
resumption, you know, the Planning Commission was only going to be, you know, they were going to
bend over backwards and give us a week to do their analysis and do a resumption. You know, I'm happy
to do next week. I'll do the week after. I'll do literally any day that we can get this done. But
this has been, I mean, literally months and months of delay at this point.
Is there another date in the same general vicinity, either before or after?
September 21st.
That's even further out.
So the Rosh Hashanah is on the 7th, correct?
That's correct.
So why is the 8th not appropriate?
It's not appropriate for one of my main witnesses.
If it was up to me, I would do it.
For the purpose of the holiday?
That's what I'm being told.
So two comments here, Chairman.
um a mr bonnie represent you know i've just been told that it's okay it's okay okay thank you
thank you very much all right see you gentlemen on the september the 8th at 3 30
with no reposting and no re-noticing correct correct tanya
that's correct chair thank you so carol i'm not again uh which you'll call the case because i
wasn't here initially called the next case okay yes calendar number 2790 4515 east thompson street
uh this case is uh per se by carrie and robert robert hunter there are also no exhibits the
applicant has previously requested a continuous continuance and she stated she was not sure that
variance is what was needed. No further correspondence has been received. So are
Carrie and Robert Hunter in the virtual audience?
And this is Sharon. This is either the second or third listing.
No one in but no one's responding. Ms. Carrie or Robert Hunter?
No, Chair. No, Madam Chair.
Thank you. MI 2020-002790-4515 East Thompson Street. Dismissed.
Dismissed. Professor Plaza, Dismissed. Thomas Holloman, Dismissed.
Calendar number, Jim, are you here? Okay, I'm moving on to number 11.
Okay, I'm moving on to number 11.
Calendar number is 05815966 Elsinore Street.
Calendar number is 0581.
Radamez Francisco is also handling this per se.
The RCO Longcrest Community Association
has submitted a letter of opposition.
Good afternoon, everyone.
Good afternoon. Can you put your name and address on the record and spell your last name to the
chair, please? My name is Chris Francisco. My father is Radames Francisco, who has English as
his second language, so I'll be assisting him here. Okay, can you spell your name,
your first and second name? Yes. Excuse me, this is Sharon. There is a problem with this.
We are only able to, for an un-English speaking applicant, we are only able to use a court-certified interpreter.
We'll have to continue this case, correct?
um this is tanya hi um could we verify that uh the father cannot present this case going forward
if not it will have to be continued and a court um interpreter have to be present
so can we verify that to be certain can i can i ask him if he feels comfortable um yes okay sure
Is it possible he can make an attempt to proceed now?
Chair, it's your call. If he can do it himself. If not, I was trying to prevent this from being scheduled late in the year. So it's your call, Chair.
Yeah. Let's try and see if we can get through this hearing.
So is he Radames?
And can he spell his name?
R-A-D-H-A-M-E-S
And your last name, Francisco?
Francisco. Francisco, like San Francisco.