So I don't think anything would really change based on the amendments is all.
But let me also say that in court and having been married to a labor leader for some 30 years, custom and practice is also a legal issue and will stand up in court, and I'm sure the lawyers in the room would support that. So it is a matter of courtesy, but it is also more than that.
I'm not so sure or we wouldn't be having this debate.
My point is, under the amendment, if we're going to change something and we're talking specifically now about the Project Review Team with one person from the Mayor and one 273 12/11/01 FINANCE COMMITTEE - BILL 010694 person from the Council President, I am not arguing against a Project Review Team. My point is this: If you're going to put in writing the role of a District Councilperson as it relates to this amendment, amendment C under Section 7, "shall first provide each District Councilperson whose district is directly affected by such matter a reasonable opportunity for review, comment, and recommendation." Well, the first thing that comes to my mind is who defines "reasonable? "Reasonable" could be 10 days, it could be 10 minutes. So that's one thing. If you're going to put it in writing, then let's put it in writing where it's real clear on the District Council's role in being involved as a real member, a partner member of that Project Review Team as it relates to issues in that Councilmatic District.
Certainly I think that I agree, and I would ask the Administration and the technical staff to certainly get together on this issue so that tomorrow when we meet -- and the hearing will resume at 8:30. But even if we can't 274 12/11/01 FINANCE COMMITTEE - BILL 010694 deal with this at 8:30 -- but maybe you want to meet this afternoon because we want to deal with this during our hearing process. We do have about 5 panels to hear from, so we would hope that at 6 sometime tomorrow morning that the Chair's 7 requesting that you meet so that we work out 8 language that is acceptable to all so that there is 9 no question. 10 We don't want to have to debate this later 11 and say that on this date, December 11th, at 3:30 that the question arose and it was not resolved, so that there is clarity and not a question later. I don't want that hearing at this point in history that there could be a question later. Ms. Wilkerson?
I'd appreciate it if the drafters would explain what the intention is of the reference to bid package and also contract. Is it intended only to go to demolition -- demolition and encapsulation or any bid package or contract that might be funded with bond proceeds? I'm thinking of the example of an encapsulation that is then followed by some kind of home improvement grant that involves construction. I just want to know, you 275 12/11/01 FINANCE COMMITTEE - BILL 010694 know --
The way it was drafted, the intent was that any contract or bid packages that has the expenditure of bond funds would come before this Project Review Committee, so it would include any contractor bid package to be paid for out of -- whether it was the 250 or the 295, you know, whatever it is that you get to bid.
So, for example, a private homeowner that comes to the City and gets a basic system repair grant has to come to the Project Review Team for --
Again, I mean, the specific details -- if there's a project review grant that's going to be given out that goes before the Project Review Team, it can identify, you know, the specificity of it, it can identify how much for each grant, what are the criteria, something like that, so that everybody understands what the criteria are, or will be, that this grant will be given out. I mean, that is something that, again, depending upon the nature of the program, this can 276 12/11/01 FINANCE COMMITTEE - BILL 010694 be worked out, one would think, with the program definition to identify what the specific components are going to be and then can define exactly what the role is at that time, I would think, what the Project Review Team will approve or won't approve.
If I may, I just want to give another example. I think in my earlier testimony -- 'cause I'm just trying to seek clarification. In my earlier example, I mentioned the fact that there was a program called "It's Your Turn," which is a combination of grants and loans to homeowners to make repairs to their homes. What the City did in that instance was, we contracted with the Local Initiative Support Corporation, they brought private money to the table, GMAC and Nationwide, we contribute about 300, $400,000. If we were to use bond proceeds, then anytime, under language, are you saying that a grant is given to a homeowner who, 'cause they prequalified contractors and the like, would that be something that would be affected by this ordinance in the project?
May I answer that, may I answer that? I wasn't going to bring this up, but I 277 12/11/01 FINANCE COMMITTEE - BILL 010694 just am trying to clarify why I think it's important to have the Councilmember involved in the process. Now, I don't -- I don't object to It's Your Turn, it's a good program, and I knew about it because you told me, but you never asked me. You came to me and told me that you all were funding this program, you decided where it was going, you decided the census tract, and so I'm not going to play petty politics and be against a program that's going to help my constituent. What we're trying to do is say that prior to even appropriating or committing the dollars for the program, you should have had a conversation with me, should have had a conversation with me. And I did not fuss, I bitched little bit about it, okay? But I'm not going to stop the project because it's important to my constituents. But under this, the project manager will say they're getting ready to do something over there -- I don't want to know whose house is getting fixed in West Oak Lane, I don't care about that. The money goes, the people run that program, I trust that they'll do the right thing, they have systems set up, they have programs set up. I don't care who 278 12/11/01 FINANCE COMMITTEE - BILL 010694 gets the money, I don't care as long as the program works. But I do want to have some say in what going to put in the 9th Councilmatic District. And it is that something where I would have said, Well, maybe I don't want that program to go there right now, I have this group over here that's doing this and I would like to have this as my priority. And that is why this is important. It doesn't get down to micro-managing what these programs do; it's knowing what the policy is and what the overall policy is and what's going to happen in your district.
And from the Administration's perspective, I think the question is, at what point do you have control? Is it in the budget process when the dollars are being committed initially? Is that the appropriate point to say, We want these dollars for a home repair program in this neighborhood? Or is it in the context of reviewing every single contract that's associated with repair of a property. And my concern is that the language as drafted --
And it's like 279 12/11/01 FINANCE COMMITTEE - BILL 010694 anything else. The federal government issues an order and the regulations are written later. And those are the things that can be worked out in terms of what -- we don't want to know every home loan program in the district.
And I think that's the kind of issue -- this is one issue that I think needs to be clarified in advance because these are the kind of certifications that will have to be made in order to access the bond proceeds. You know, there will be a form that will go around, and it's like okay, okay, okay. And we don't want to end up in the position that every time there's a construction contract, it's got to come to the Project Review Team for signoff. I think it is appropriate for there to be the kind of involvement and very -- you know, a very specific program signoff by City Council at the time funds are being committed at the budget level so that -- you know, when we talked yesterday, what we talked about was --
Well, I think that this gets to the crux of what we conceive of as NTI. 280 12/11/01 FINANCE COMMITTEE - BILL 010694 I am excited about NTI because I believe that NTI gives us the ability to get in front of the process Councilwoman Tasco just named. I don't want always react to a federal program or a state program. I want the ability to create programs in my district, and I fight hard to do that, and I try to create independent programs. That is what NTI brings that's exciting and new and different than any other project that I've been involved in. We finally have the ability to create. But this issue of -- Councilwoman Tasco's talking about where the Administration starts and stops, and I am talking about beneath that, the District Councilperson's prerogative versus Council-at-large or anybody else. You see, in the real world, I have an excellent relationship with all the elected officials in my district, but in one neighborhood, they may have a relationship with one neighborhood group and I may have a relationship with another. If we are going to sit here as District Councilpeople and Councilpeople-at-large and fight for funding for projects, I can't have it get out to the neighborhood and have it enacted a whole 281 12/11/01 FINANCE COMMITTEE - BILL 010694 'nother way by someone with a whole different agenda and a whole different set of people that he or she works with because they don't understand the concept in my mind. You know, I'm on call hours a day. If 7 you come in West Philadelphia and you bring a 8 business, you know that you can call me 24/7. I'm 9 there. If you say somebody's out there and they're 10 threatening to rob your place or your father is 11 attacked or somebody's bothering you, I'm on call. 12 But because I'm on call, then I reserve the right 13 certainly to have the final say in what that means 14 and where those dollars go. So that's very, very 15 important, the District Councilperson versus any 16 other person who has an interest in that area. 17 And certainly we are requesting that this 18 issue be clarified certainly tomorrow because 19 obviously, we need some adjustment to language 20 because we're having this discussion this afternoon. 21
Can I add a 22 hypothetical request to this question? 23
The hypothetical is 282 12/11/01 FINANCE COMMITTEE - BILL 010694 that if the Administration is allowing Council to be intimately involved in the budgeting process, and hypothetically, the budget is not enacted as to the way we agreed under the Mayor's scenario without amendments, how do we then again effect the change or bring that back or have discussion or have any direct input in what we believe is an implementation of a budget that we didn't agree to? When we approved the budget, we had a certain vision, and as the project moves forward, the vision begins to skew because people are carrying out that budget. A District Councilperson, at-large Councilperson, Councilperson Miller says, Oh, wait a minute, that's not what budget said when we approved that. What ability do we have to stop that train once it's out of the yard?
Okay, we will -- I think that this conversation is helpful. My concern had been that we end up in the middle of the development process, and what I'm hearing is, no, what you want is, you know, at the front end of the process, and that you want assurances that as the train moves down the track, it's not going to end up, you know, 283 12/11/01 FINANCE COMMITTEE - BILL 010694 highjacked and --
But there's got to be brakes on the train at some point in case things aren't going in the right direction.
I hear you, I hear you. I think that we can develop appropriate protections, and we'll work with Charlie and Rick and all of these people to do that.
All right. So let me tell everybody thank you, and we will recess until 8:30 "manyana." We'll see you in the morning. Thank you, everyone. (Proceedings end at 3:43 p.m.) - - - 284 CERTIFICATE I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing proceedings of the Council of the City of Philadelphia's meeting of the Council Committee on Finance of Tuesday, December 11, 2001, are contained fully and accurately in the stenographic notes taken by me upon, and that this is a true and correct transcript of same. RE: Ordinance No.# _______________________________, Josephine Cardillo Registered Professional Reporter and 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.)