So there's no 22 reason for anybody to get upset and concerned that the big Chief of Staff isn't doing anything we might ask her to do.
That's correct. 60 3/1/00 WHOLE COMM. - BILLS 79, 80, 82, 83, 84, 85
Thank you. Third question. And this is more to the sponsors of the Bill 0079, 0084, and 0085. At this time, I would ask the prime sponsors of them bills to withdraw them as considering there's probably some other amendments coming that we've been working on that may work this out.
0079, 0084, and 0085. I would ask the sponsors to withdraw them bills at this time. 'Cause I think it's confusing to everybody. I mean, we're going to stay here all day and ask questions for the Administration's bills, then we're going to have bills, and then I think we're going to have other bills or amendments?
Councilman, I believe all bills are being considered at this moment.
I understand that, Council President. But I'm asking the sponsors of those three bills that I mentioned to withdraw them now, if they would consider that? That would 61 3/1/00 WHOLE COMM. - BILLS 79, 80, 82, 83, 84, 85 be -- 79 would be Councilman Kenney and Nutter's, 84 would be Nutter and Kenney, and 85 would be Ortiz and Nutter. If these guys would consider withdrawing them bills?
All right, thank you, Madam President. That's all my questions.
Okay, thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman Cohen.
Thank you, Madam President. You know, a few years ago, the City was thought to be in a lot of financial difficulties, even though it had never gone bankrupt, had never missed on any significant payment, and people used 62 3/1/00 WHOLE COMM. - BILLS 79, 80, 82, 83, 84, 85 to say that the City ought to do more to help itself. So the City Council worked together with the then-mayors and we developed streams of revenue based on taxes, and we thought we were showing how hard Philadelphia was working and willing to sacrifice. You know, and when we asked for more State help, we said, Look what we're doing ourselves, you always said we should do more. And so in the process, we passed 12 taxes. Philadelphians were willing to subject 13 themselves to that concern. And then suddenly, we 14 found, instead of being financially responsible 15 people, we got known as terrible taxers, and we 16 were attacked from all sides for adding taxes. 17 And then there developed this 18 psychology, There ought not to be any taxes. And 19 Philadelphia has the reputation throughout the country as being the most heavily taxed city in the country, maybe in the world. And we're told by you, Mr. Hankowsky, at various times over the years, that we've got to overcome this difficulty, that's why we have to give such great contributions, tax abatements, 63 3/1/00 WHOLE COMM. - BILLS 79, 80, 82, 83, 84, 85 that sort of thing, to businesses to bring them into the City to overcome the tax problem. Yet here, we're proposing another new tax. And I don't quite understand that philosophy. Why is that a part of the package? Are we going to go further in developing a reputation as a tax-crazy city?
Excuse me, before you answer. Councilman DiCicco, do you mind helping Councilman Cohen with his microphone, please.
This is held together by a rubber band. It's a temporary fix.
Okay. Mr. Hankowsky, please respond to the Councilman's question.
Yeah. Councilman, I think you very accurately sort of talked about our fiscal history. And this City Council has, over the last number of years, in fact, very consciously adopted budgets and taxing plans that were decreasing our wage taxes and other taxes.
So I think we've 64 3/1/00 WHOLE COMM. - BILLS 79, 80, 82, 83, 84, 85 clearly indicated a trend. So I think it's a very appropriate question to ask, Why would we add a tax in the transaction? I think it's important to understand the context of the vehicle rental tax. The last calendar year, when we looked at the question of, were there any potential revenue sources that we might be able to tap to assist in the financing in that timeframe, in the context of new stadiums and new practice facility, and we did look at various taxes that we have. For example, we have a hotel tax but we've raised that to pay for the Convention Center. We looked at, you know, liquor tax, but we raised that to assist the School District. So we felt that none of those taxes -- because, I think, very consistent with your question, that raising any of those would be perceived as going too far in those tax areas. One place where it looked like we were not taxing at the highest level in the country was the vehicle rental car taxes. By the addition of the 2 percent -- it would obviously go higher -- but it was not inconsistent with what some other 65 3/1/00 WHOLE COMM. - BILLS 79, 80, 82, 83, 84, 85 cities have done in terms of using that as a vehicle for a new revenue source. And that it is not totally -- and I appreciate that, but to a significant extent, levied on, to be blunt, out-of-towners who utilize those vehicles in their business or luxury visitations to our city, and was a way to get a revenue stream with -- with -- I'm not going to say no impact, but trying to minimize the impact on our residents and our businesses.
You know, I used to try to defend each separate tax that we levied, you know, along the lines that you're talking. This tax didn't apply to a certain percentage of our citizens in Philadelphia but it hit outsiders, but it never flew. What flew was that we were raising taxes and that Philadelphia become the heaviest taxing city, the city that it was most expensive for anybody to do business in. And I'm just urging that maybe we ought to give some more thought. This is the kind of question I would have raised had Council had any opportunity to be involved in developing this so-called conceptual 66 3/1/00 WHOLE COMM. - BILLS 79, 80, 82, 83, 84, 85 agreement. I would have thought it was very important to stay away from any new taxes. Now, with respect to that car rental tax, with respect to the car rental tax, has there been any study as to how many Philadelphians it would affect as against outsiders? (Mr. Hankowsky confers off the record with Ms. Franklin-Suber.)
Councilman, I want to answer that question but if I could make one other point.
Which is, I also just do want to indicate that obviously the authorization, as indicated in my testimony for this tax, was provided by the legislature in June of last year and actually culminated in perhaps six to seven months of discussion in Harrisburg about this. So there was a -- you know, as I said, it was done in the context and it's been 67 3/1/00 WHOLE COMM. - BILLS 79, 80, 82, 83, 84, 85 there and we've had the capacity to enact it since that time. To your question about Philadelphians versus non-Philadelphians, it's a little difficult to precisely know that. But if you look at the revenues of the rental car companies, and I believe -- and if I were given a moment, I'd probably pull out the right file, so I'll take the liberty of saying "approximately," and I could confirm it in a minute. But, I think, somewhere in the neighborhoods of 75 to 85 percent of those revenues are obtained by the rental car companies at the Airport. In other words, where people are coming, you know, via plane, arriving, and now need a vehicle to move around in doing their visitation. There's additional obviously because we know there are rental car places in Center City and there are some even in -- throughout our neighborhoods, you know, where you can rent an Enterprise car or something like that. But just looking at that information and talking with the companies, we think that it's probably in that neighbor, that 75 to 85 percent 68 3/1/00 WHOLE COMM. - BILLS 79, 80, 82, 83, 84, 85 of this is non-City resident activity.
I know I've had a substantial number of calls from constituents who say that they don't rent constantly, residents of Philadelphia. They don't rent cars constantly, but because parking rates and garage rates are so expensive, they don't own cars, but that three or four or five times during year, they may rent a car for a week or two. And they were raising the question of why ought they be paying for the facilities, either the sports stadium or the practice facility? I think it's -- I think it would be awfully good if you could find a way to substitute something else for the tax because those State legislators who enacted this legislation authorizing us to levy the tax, many of them were the loudest complainers about Philadelphians having raised all of the taxes during the years, and I'm sure they're going to forget that they passed the legislation, but they will be blaming us a year or two down the road. So I would like to suggest that there be additional thought on that aspect. 69 3/1/00 WHOLE COMM. - BILLS 79, 80, 82, 83, 84, 85 Now, I'm also told, and I'd like to --
Gentlemen, we are not going to tolerate this, please. (Some audience members continue to boo.)
If we behave in this matter, we will recess and clear the chamber. Please have respect so that we can respect you. Thank you. Councilman Ortiz?
Thank you, Madam 70 3/1/00 WHOLE COMM. - BILLS 79, 80, 82, 83, 84, 85 Chair. Miss Suber, I was interested in your answers to Councilman Goode about this issue never being brought up in any of the Town Meetings. And -- because I've never had any phone calls into the office as to people asking for building of a practice facility. But I'm interested in the fact that you stated in the answers to your question that we would be -- we would have to buy back the facility if we do not meet a certain date to approve the package for the building of the stadiums. However, the Eagles have no -- they have no 15 responsibility and they have -- they don't have any liability at all whatsoever in terms of staying in the practice field to practice. They don't have to practice in the practice facility in the practice facility that we have built for them and we bought back. They could move to Chester or Delaware County. Is that true? In your legislation, there's no 23 requirement that if you don't meet the November 3rd date, that the practice facility that we have to buy back, that the Phillies stay and practice 71 3/1/00 WHOLE COMM. - BILLS 79, 80, 82, 83, 84, 85 in that practice facility.
There is no 4 obligation on the part of the Eagles to practice in that practice facility.
So we could find ourselves buying back a practice facility that the Eagles, for reasons of their own, go and practice somewhere else, because they have no obligation and we don't force them to do that.
That's right. And they have that right to do that now under the existing Vets Stadium lease. We have an obligation under the existing Vets Stadium lease to provide a practice facility. They are not required to play in the practice facility.
We are -- we have right now, under the current lease, to do what?
So we have met our obligation. 72 3/1/00 WHOLE COMM. - BILLS 79, 80, 82, 83, 84, 85
That's correct. And they have no obligation to practice in it.
But we have met our obligation to provide them right now, currently, with a practice, and that has been done?
And they want the City to run risk if we don't meet a certain date -- and not the City but the taxpayer, that we would have to buy back that practice facility if we don't meet that November 3rd date. Is that another penalty? I think the Council President said that's a penalty. Why should the City be penalized for not meeting a date that's arbitrary in the first place?
But not meeting a 73 3/1/00 WHOLE COMM. - BILLS 79, 80, 82, 83, 84, 85 date because we may not have the information to meet that date.
Councilman Ortiz, let me try to answer the different parts of your statement. It is not a penalty. I mean, the beauty of an agreement is that you have different sides that come together and they work out something that is to the mutual benefit of both sides, and that process involves give-and-take. We have asked the Eagles to take the risk that there is no new football stadium, proceed with construction of their practice facility in the City of Philadelphia so that we can ultimately benefit with increased tax revenue.
I mean, so there is risk on both sides here, and we felt that if there is no new football stadium, which is going -- the revenue stream is going to support the construction and operation cost of the practice facility. If there's no new football stadium, they would have taken the risk, constructed the 74 3/1/00 WHOLE COMM. - BILLS 79, 80, 82, 83, 84, 85 practice facility. We would have paid them the construction costs. We're not paying all of the costs that they're going to incur. And actually, it might be better to have the Eagles' representatives explain their perspective on this issue. From their perspective, all of the risk certainly is not on the City of Philadelphia. We felt that in the context of the agreement, what the City would stand to benefit by way of jobs in the practice facility, whether it's construction jobs, permanent jobs, if we buy back that facility, we would then at that time negotiate with the Eagles what the terms and conditions of any lease arrangement would be. So we -- both parties, both parties share the risk at that point that we're not going to reach agreement, and that the Eagles may move outside of the City.
And we will deal with that circumstance at that point in time. That is -- that is not unreasonable under all of these circumstance. 75 3/1/00 WHOLE COMM. - BILLS 79, 80, 82, 83, 84, 85 Our goal and objective, as I've stated previously, is to set the stage for discussion and debate of new-stadium development. And if we put our time and energy into that, we expect to be successful and we won't have to implement this contingency plan.
But the issue is that we are willing to risk taxpayers' monies, and that's what we're talking about here. The risk that the Eagles take is really very minimal.
In terms of the practice facility, the practice facility would be purchased using the revenue stream from the rental car tax. And, as Mr. Hankowsky said, this is a new revenue stream, and the impact of that --
It is absolutely taxpayers' money, but we also gain in terms of the wage and other business taxes that the City will recover from having the Eagles practice facility, corporate headquarters, and the NovaCare sports medicine facility right here in Philadelphia. And that facility will be open to the public. 76 3/1/00 WHOLE COMM. - BILLS 79, 80, 82, 83, 84, 85 (Applause.)
But nothing in the bill that is presently before us obligates -- (Shouting by some audience members.)
Gentlemen, please, let's have respect for each other. Thank you.
Nothing in the bill, nothing in the bill obligates them to practice in the practice facility that we have purchased.
That is correct, and it's consistent with the agreement we have with them now. And it doesn't mean that in the event there are no new stadiums and we go to the table to negotiate the terms and conditions of the leases that we don't discuss that issue at that point.
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman Rizzo.
Thank you, Madam President. I think this whole issue would be a lot 77 3/1/00 WHOLE COMM. - BILLS 79, 80, 82, 83, 84, 85 easier to resolve -- can you hear me okay? -- if we had a feel that we were going to get to new stadiums, and I'd like to get back to the point, the scenario where, if there's a new Eagles -- a new stadium for the Eagles to play and there's no 7 stadium for the Phillies, based on that statement, it appears that you have a plan that will accommodate a new football stadium at the existing South Philadelphia site and allow Veterans Stadium to remain for the Phillies to play baseball in. Based on that statement, how come we're not a little further along on the citing of a football stadium and a new baseball stadium? And, again, I don't think we'd be having this conversation if there was a little more action in that area.
Councilman Rizzo, I disagree with your characterization of my statement. What I simply pointed out was that the difference between whether or not by November 3rd we have reached agreement on a new football stadium as compared to a new baseball stadium, the Phillies have no interest in the Eagles practice facility. 78 3/1/00 WHOLE COMM. - BILLS 79, 80, 82, 83, 84, 85 So in terms of our obligations, I simply pointed out to you what the possibilities may be. I made no statement or assumptions with regard to, you know, situs of football or baseball stadiums. That's not what this proposed agreement is about. It's simply to set the stage to have those discussions and to make sure that before any site is selected, the public has an opportunity to be heard. We're not there yet. We're just trying to get past the practice facility issue and to have in place a contingency plan if we do not reach closure on new-stadium development.
If we don't have -- if we have a stadium site selected for football, and in the scenario that you describe, we do not have is a stadium location for baseball --
The Street Administration has not selected a site for either new stadium.
I think the Councilman has said they have. Repeat your question, Councilman, please. 79 3/1/00 WHOLE COMM. - BILLS 79, 80, 82, 83, 84, 85
How could you -- the statement that I think I heard you make was that there would be the potential -- there is the potential of having a football site picked out and a stadium erected for the Eagles without a location for the Phillies. I think I heard you say that the Phillies could be playing in Veterans Stadium. That tells me that there's a possibility of building a new football stadium in South Philadelphia and keeping the Vet where it is.
In terms of the contingency plan, it deals with every possibility, that's correct. So it is possible -- it is possible -- it is possible that we may reach closure on a new football stadium and we may not on a new baseball stadium, and it is possible that we reach closure on a new baseball stadium and not a new football stadium, and it's possible that we do both, and it's possible we don't do either.
Based on -- based on no baseball stadium in South Philadelphia, and I guess I'll ask this question of Mr. Hankowsky, 80 3/1/00 WHOLE COMM. - BILLS 79, 80, 82, 83, 84, 85 could we based on what information we have in place today, could we construct a facility in the South Philadelphia complex for football and allow Veterans Stadium to remain and play baseball in?
I think, Councilman, candidly, it's impossible to answer that question. As Miss Franklin-Suber indicated, the Street Administration has not made any decisions vis-a-vis siting. I mean, the answer to your question, candidly, is that it's possible to put stadiums anywhere. I mean, if you want to condemn and buy property, you can do anything anywhere.
But there's no 17 transaction on the table. We don't know anything about -- we're not negotiating any of the economics.
Mr. Hankowsky, I think that Miss Suber indicated that that scenario could happen. I think the Councilman is asking for some clarity on that. And I would just like to interject, if that be so, what suddenly happened to the parity 81 3/1/00 WHOLE COMM. - BILLS 79, 80, 82, 83, 84, 85 clause? I mean, last year, when we were supposedly going to be addressing new stadiums, we were told that one could not be built without the other because of the parity clause in the lease.
I wasn't here for that discussion, Council President, but I did --
Well, we were, and that's what we were told. But can you just refer again to question that Councilman Rizzo was asking.
Well, let me respond to your statement first, because there is no obligation on the part of the City, under the parity clause, to build two new stadiums for both teams. If we are simply in a contingency plan, making sure that if there is a new stadium for one of the teams, the other team is not adversely affected by having to play at Vets Stadium without also taking into account the condition of the stadium. And so our position would be, if there's a new stadium for one team, and one team we have not reached closure on a new stadium, we're going to make renovations to Vets Stadium. 82 3/1/00 WHOLE COMM. - BILLS 79, 80, 82, 83, 84, 85 We don't believe that that raises any parity issue. In response to Councilman Rizzo's question, simply by saying that we have provided a contingency plan which recognizes that there are four possibilities does not then translate into the fact that, you know, can you -- can you build a practice facility in some other location. Well, again, anything is possible, and the contingency plan deals only with contingencies. It's not dealing with the site location of new stadiums, and it's talking specifically about this site for the practice facility.
I'm again going to ask Bill Hankowsky. Based on the information that's available, the available land to build a new football stadium, could you build, based on, again, the comment that a scenario could develop that the money would have to be spent on renovations to the Vet for the Phillies to play baseball, could you build a football stadium based on the available acreage that you know that not many people particularly know what's available and what's not available, could you build a new 83 3/1/00 WHOLE COMM. - BILLS 79, 80, 82, 83, 84, 85 football stadium and leave the Vet for the Phillies to play in? Yes or no. 4 Based on what you have, not the unknown, based on the information that you have.
I appreciate your attempt to give you a yes or a no, and if I could, I would, but it doesn't yield itself to a yes or no, with due apologies, Councilman. The only land the City of Philadelphia owns is the parking lot around the Vet. That's what we own today. And putting a football stadium there and leaving the Phillies in the Vet makes no 14 sense because then you have no place to park anybody. So any other contingency, any other scenario would require acquiring additional property from somebody, which hasn't been done. So there is no in-place scenario. There are lots of theoretical scenarios, but there's no in-place scenario that would allow for it without making a siting decision and taking a series of further actions. That would clearly have to come to this body.
Well, then, from what I understood, the scenario that I understood 84 3/1/00 WHOLE COMM. - BILLS 79, 80, 82, 83, 84, 85 was that if you built two new stadiums in South Philadelphia, that the Vet would definitely have to be razed to make that happen. You could not continue -- you couldn't build a new football stadium, let the Vet stay for an extended period of time, and build a new -- and keep the Vet -- keep the Vet operational at the same time at that site on Pattison Avenue.
You cannot do that. Is the -- the answer is, you can't do it without -- and keep the Vet there, right? Yes, no?
Again, I really appreciate -- I would love to do yes, no's. But all I'm saying is that you need to consider new real estate. To build a new football stadium, you need to consider new real estate, and that means you have to make a new site decision. That's all I'm saying.
Okay, that's fine. But, again, just to go back to what the Chief of Staff said, it just -- it didn't add up to me and it still doesn't. 85 3/1/00 WHOLE COMM. - BILLS 79, 80, 82, 83, 84, 85 Thank you, Madam Chair.
You're welcome. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Blackwell.
Thank you, Madam President. Is it true that the real cost, Mrs. Suber, to buy the Eagles practice facility would exceed $23 million under the proposed deal since the City's liability would include not only payment of the interest on bonds on the financed million -- 15
Councilwoman, 19 we're having difficulty hearing you, please. 20
You can't hear 21 me? Did you hear the beginning of my question? 22 But also the cost of issuance and other reasonable 23 fees and expenses? If so, why is the City liable to pay the issuers' fee in connection with the issuance 86 3/1/00 WHOLE COMM. - BILLS 79, 80, 82, 83, 84, 85 and maintenance of a letter of credit, and how much might this be?
Councilwoman, you are correct. In other words, the cap of up to $23 million is a cap based on how much money we would provide to the Eagles or reimburse the Eagles based on their actual cost to build the facility. Because the City would then and PAID, based on the agreements that are before City Council, would enter into a financing agreement of whatever it would cost us to put that financing agreement in place -- a letter of credit or bonds -- we would pay, as we would pay in any City financing, we pay those expenses. If we are able to, we would keep those at a minimum, and that's part of actually why this structure is set up the way it is. By using the City's credit through the lease-back, hopefully you don't have to have a debt-service reserve and the following. The specifics of that will have to be finalized should we get to the point where we actually have to issue these bonds.
So we don't have an estimate of what those fees could be at 87 3/1/00 WHOLE COMM. - BILLS 79, 80, 82, 83, 84, 85 this point?
I don't have it off the top of my head. I have people here who might be able to give us an estimate, if you want me to come back to that in a couple minutes?
Certainly. One other issue. One of the questions and issues that Council has had has been -- and Councilman Nutter referred to that earlier -- the lack of information that we had, and that's what held it up in December. Let me ask you a question. Is the proposal submitted to Council really complete or incomplete because it didn't include the practice facility lease? In other words, I understand that if Section 2.5 of the proposed prime lease, to approve the Eagles' lease, there has to be a document, that Council has not seen this lease agreement.
You're absolutely right, Councilwoman. There would be the lease between PAID and the Eagles, and that's the lease that, in the earlier questions, we've indicated, is the lease that will have to be fully 88 3/1/00 WHOLE COMM. - BILLS 79, 80, 82, 83, 84, 85 negotiated, if in fact we buy it back. We've prepared a draft, but it has -- to be quite candid, it has a number of blanks in it, term, rent --
But isn't that what you're asking us, Bill, to introduce today, something that we haven't seen, by passing this in the prime lease?
Well, it author -- the lease leaseback authorizes, obviously, the City to lease it, lease it back to PAID, and authorizes PAID to lease it to the Eagles. That last leg of the transaction, the lease between PAID and the Eagles, is subject to the subsequent negotiation that would have to occur if we bought it, rent it, and whatever, and would require the consent of the City.
I -- I -- I don't want to misspeak, but I believe the legislation before you doesn't require that it comes back. PAID is required to get the City's consent to enter into it. We can't enter into it without the City's 89 3/1/00 WHOLE COMM. - BILLS 79, 80, 82, 83, 84, 85 consent.
That's part of the question, that we don't have a document to evaluate.
I think -- I think that -- I'm sorry. I think that our attorneys disagree with your response. (Stanley Shapiro comes forward.)
Mr. Shapiro, please identify yourself for the record.
Yeah, I'm Stanley Shapiro, one of the staff attorneys with Council. I mean, that's true, but when you say "City," you mean the executive branch. You mean the --
Yeah, I apologize. I didn't mean to misinform. Yeah, that's what I meant.
I -- that's -- that's 90 3/1/00 WHOLE COMM. - BILLS 79, 80, 82, 83, 84, 85 right.
The current documents before you don't include a provision that requires it to come here, that's right. I apologize if I didn't say that, but that's what I meant to say, right.
And included in that lease, they have all of the terms, and they would be the rent the Eagles will pay, the naming rights. Who is responsible for the operating and maintenance costs for the practice facility? Who's going to be responsible for the capital repairs? And wouldn't that all be a part of the lease and we have absolutely no knowledge as to what those terms and conditions would be, nor any say?
Council President Verna, we have stated previously that all of the terms and conditions of the practice facility 91 3/1/00 WHOLE COMM. - BILLS 79, 80, 82, 83, 84, 85 lease would be negotiated in the event that the contingency plan is implemented. The same would be true in terms of whether or not we want to revisit any of the Vets Stadium lease provisions. We -- we -- you know, again, this is a very simple proposed agreement. It does two things, and its purpose is simply to provide assurances to our teams to create construction and permanent jobs by proceeding with the practice facility and allowing everyone to go back to the full debate in the public arena of new-stadium development.
I'm sorry, Councilwoman. I didn't mean to interrupt you. Please continue with your line of questioning.
No, that is -- no, thank you very much. That was a great help to explain our questions, because I believe that everybody in this Council is for stadiums; I don't think that's ever been the question. The question is only information that we needed in order to be responsible to do our jobs.
And we all want the practice facility, but it's how we get 92 3/1/00 WHOLE COMM. - BILLS 79, 80, 82, 83, 84, 85 there.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Before I ask my questions, is Mr. Roundtree here?
Is Mr. Roundtree in the audience? (Jim Roundtree returns to the witness table.)
I'd like to say, Councilman Nutter and Mr. Roundtree, I had the pleasure of playing football with Mr. Roundtree when we were young. And he would at least be a third-round draft pick, if he was in shape. (Laughter.)
Yeah. Miss Franklin-Suber, I had a question. I know this is -- the Chair said she didn't really want to deal with peripheral issues, but this is somewhat related as it relates to the site selection. Councilman Nutter had earlier talked 93 3/1/00 WHOLE COMM. - BILLS 79, 80, 82, 83, 84, 85 about a timeline associated with the information flow toward Council, and I would just ask, could you -- when you ask that question of the participants of the decision-making process as it relates to the deal, could you also ask if it would be appropriate to have a timeline on the site selection? I was not privy or did not have an opportunity to meet with the Transition Committee, and I understand that there were discussions with a number of individuals, and I wasn't a participant in it and I kind of feel somewhat at a loss as it relates to that process. So can you please ask if we can set a time specific on that issue?
Once the Mayor receives a report from the transition team regarding recommendations on -- on possible sites, I think the timetable would flow from -- you know, it would be related to the number of sites under consideration, and then it would be structured in a way that we could make sure that we get legislation introduced into City Council in an expeditious process. 94 3/1/00 WHOLE COMM. - BILLS 79, 80, 82, 83, 84, 85 I think everyone is anxious to simply start the process, and that's why this is an important first step. You know, we need everyone to come back to the table. I think everyone is energetic and enthused. We're prepared to go forward with vigorous negotiations. You know, the practice facility is important to us, our teams are important to us. The Transition Team, we are expecting their report, we have not seen it, and we will move full-steam ahead. And we would expect to inform Council of our timetable. If that's responsive to your table.
Yes, because we will -- I am certain that once the possible sites are identified, and again, the Mayor has not yet received a report, he has not had an opportunity to get any briefing or have any discussion with 95 3/1/00 WHOLE COMM. - BILLS 79, 80, 82, 83, 84, 85 the members of that transition team to understand their recommendations, their analysis. Once -- once the universe of possible sites becomes clear, then the process, the public process for dealing with the communities and understanding their issues and concerns about particular sites falls into place, and we will set up an aggressive agenda, and he will meet with all of the affected communities in the possible site locations. And Members of City Council will be involved in that process.
Okay. I was just asking if you could ask that question about a timeline on that.
Okay. Mr. Roundtree, remember those good old days? Mr. Roundtree, I wanted to ask you question with respect to some legislation that this Council passed last year on the prevailing wage bill. And at that particular time, it centered more around affordable housing activity. Do you recall that bill?
Yes, I do, Councilman. 96 3/1/00 WHOLE COMM. - BILLS 79, 80, 82, 83, 84, 85
And do you recall the amendment associated with that bill that talked about training programs of various kinds related to the individuals in a certain median income in the affected census tracts?
All right. My question is, does that prevailing wage bill in any way, shape, or form, is that a part of the Vets Stadium upgrades, any participating labor unions? Or is that just for those particular affordable housing initiatives?
It is -- it is currently not a part of that activity. It was only for the housing activity, that I'm aware of.
So the affected trades on the Vets Stadium upgrade or potential new construction on the stadiums would not fall under the purview of that?
Okay. Okay, all right, I'll come back to that later on. All right thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair, I'm fine. 97 3/1/00 WHOLE COMM. - BILLS 79, 80, 82, 83, 84, 85
Thank you, Councilman. The Chair recognizes -- I think Councilman O'Neill stepped out of the room. Is this a follow-up, Councilwoman Tasco? All right, the Chair recognizes Councilwoman Tasco for a follow-up question.
What provisions are provided in the lease for -- I think it was answered earlier.
Councilwoman, would you pull your mike up a little higher. We can't hear you.
For minority participation on the construction of the practice facility.
There is an amendment to the lease. There's going to be language that really addresses the economic development aspect of the Eagles participation for minority women and disabled businesses in the design, construction, and operation of the facility as well as a provision for minority and female craft workers in each trade as it relates to the construction of 98 3/1/00 WHOLE COMM. - BILLS 79, 80, 82, 83, 84, 85 the activity.
As it -- now, presently, the Eagles are constructing the practice facility, so it is considered a private venture and it does not -- the process does not go through the City Procurement Department.
But they have agreed to submit a, for a lack of better term, a minority and women's business plan that will become a part of the lease agreement.
Okay. On the possible repairs, if we get to that on the Vets Stadium, that process would flow through the Procurement Department?
Oh, I had another question. I can't think, I'm losing my train of thought. I'll have to come back because I forgot 99 3/1/00 WHOLE COMM. - BILLS 79, 80, 82, 83, 84, 85 my question.
Thank you, Councilwoman. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Miller.
Good morning. Mr. Roundtree, I have a follow-up question. I'm not quite sure what Councilwoman Tasco asked, but my question is also around minority participation. Since I've been here, each time we come before Council and present a large project, we've always talked about the Mayor's executive order as it relates to good-faith effort. I still don't really know what good-faith effort is in terms of a overall percentage of the goal or personal of the project. And can you explain in a little bit more detail about the good-faith effort. This is certainly a project that would lend the support for -- and we want to make sure and I know that you care about making sure that MBEs, WBEs etc. are included in contracts and in 100 3/1/00 WHOLE COMM. - BILLS 79, 80, 82, 83, 84, 85 employment opportunities, but I don't want to put myself in the position that I was in before when we discussed and approved the Kvaerner plan, and they be each time we come back with another hearing, we still don't get real clear answers on how the public did, in fact, benefit from that project and other projects. So I would think that maybe even the term "good-faith" needs to be changed or more clearly defined, because then who monitors it? And maybe the monitoring can be better this time, I don't know.
Currently, Councilwoman, we have agreed that the construction managers as well as the Eagles will present to the City their level of participation in two methods. The first is their overall commitment that will be attached to their lease. That is really in the form of an economic development plan, or more specifically, a plan to utilize minority women and disabled businesses in all their aspects. The other area is, as the construction is in process, we plan to meet with the Eagles and their general contractor and go through the levels 101 3/1/00 WHOLE COMM. - BILLS 79, 80, 82, 83, 84, 85 of participation in all those areas. We're working out the details now as to whether or not we can request a certified payroll so we can review it from their standpoint. But there is a mechanism that we can put in place to monitor that activity, and we will be involved in that.
Okay. And you're saying you're working on a plan with the Eagles?
The implementation of it. As far as philosophically, they have agreed on the level of participation, which, I'm sure, they'll be glad to reiterate when they come up to testify.
But one of the things that we didn't have in there is the details that you now see. So what I will say to them is their ability to provide that answer for you.
And also the Phillies. I know this is separate from the practice facility, but to me, it all goes together.
Okay. We have not met with the Phillies yet. 102 3/1/00 WHOLE COMM. - BILLS 79, 80, 82, 83, 84, 85
Thank you. We'll have a follow-up question from Councilwoman Tasco. And then, Councilman O'Neill, we will be up to you. Councilwoman Tasco?
Article 19 of the prime lease, Affirmative Action and covenants Against Discrimination. Are you amending that section to include the goals?
I'm told that, yes, that's the area that will be added to.
Because it does refer to the Commission on Human Relations. And what role does the Commission on Human Relations play?
On of the 103 3/1/00 WHOLE COMM. - BILLS 79, 80, 82, 83, 84, 85 prime agreement, it refers to the Commission on Human Relations. Will we see the amendments --
Okay, will we see the amendments relative to affirmative action sometime today?
This is Jim Roundtree. I was informed that it was already drafted and included in your package. So that's what I'm here to testify on behalf of.
The question for those who didn't hear so well because it's a bit hard to hear is whether or not the affirmative action language is in the agreement and where that is. And I believe that is what Mr. Hankowsky is 104 3/1/00 WHOLE COMM. - BILLS 79, 80, 82, 83, 84, 85 about to testify to? Mr. Roundtree said he believed his understanding was that it was included. Now we're waiting for clarification on that point. Just so that everybody understands where we are. Mr. Hankowsky?
Yes, the language vis-a-vis the Eagles' responsibility to have an MBE/WBE plan or an equal employment plan is in the lease between the Eagles and PAID.
Which will -- which is in draft because we haven't negotiated all the terms, but they are -- they are -- they are proceeding on the basis that that is in effect. In other words, they -- "they" being the Eagles and their contractors -- are executing the plan as if it's a legal obligation.
Does Mr. Roundtree have a role in developing that plan?