Do you have an opinion about our lack of direct service to other parts of the world and what it does to us as a competitive disadvantage?
I agree with you completely. It's extremely desirable to try and, you know, get that service in Philadelphia. And I think that it is -- we have the potential to do that. And I think really the hardest problem is to identify two or three markets that make the most sense, and then very aggressively go after 240 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 those. And I think it is possible to do that.
We expect to have a comprehensive study done from the consultant probably in the next 30 to 45 days. But the idea is to identify two or three of the strongest markets, and then focus on them and try and -- try and...
I'd be interested in hearing as to where they are and what the results of that study are.
I'm sure with your involvement with the Kimmel Center and your time there and with your involvement in arts and culture generally in Philadelphia, you would not dispute the figures that have been released over years, 241 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 as to the value of the Art Museum and its exhibitions, putting heads in beds, bringing tourism, filling hotel rooms, filling restaurants, even more so than our sports teams all put together. I said there would be no dispute to those figures.
Why in God's name would we make such a foolish disinvestment of money that really has a multiplier positive effect far beyond the money we've put in at Broad and Pattison Avenue on the Link and on the Citizens Park -- Bank Park? As you know, cities throughout the country, like New York and Chicago, even cities like Baltimore -- and I'm not denigrating Baltimore -- provides $9 million to its museum a year. We're going from a number of years ago 4.4 to 2.2 to zero. And we can't -- How can we expect -- With our -- Even with our outreach programs in the City aside, which are important, just the mere ability 242 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 to compete for Cezane and Manet and Dali and others, why would we make such a serious disinvestment which puts us behind other -- even further behind other cities that are competing?
Councilman, I agree with you entirely about the value of the arts and culture organizations, and specifically the Art Museum to our community, both in terms of being an economic engine, and just looking at it as a quality of life issue. Absolutely true that they are significant and important and valued by all of us. The problem is, with tight economic times as we're facing now, we've got to make some very hard, very painful choices, and --
Hard and Painful choices I don't have a problem with. Stupid choices are the problem. I mean, hard and painful choices are throughout the entire government. We make them all the time. 243 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 But this is -- this is a decision that just flies in the face of any illogical -- you know, all logic whatsoever. I mean, it's a very small investment overall. It's about $4 million in toto, including the Art Museum. And I mean, we -- we -- we waste money on overtime in the City that would choke a horse. And we're going to put ourselves in an economic disadvantage, and competitively with Chicago and New York and other cities, over $4 million. I just don't get it.
I think there's several issues that I'd like to respond to in what you just said. One is that we're not alone. Other cities are also proposing very much the same kinds of cutbacks.
Los Angeles has proposed eliminating its entire arts and culture budget. New York has cut its back 244 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 by percent. There are large numbers of cities that we could point to.
But when you're 8 providing $20 million to a museum, 20 9 percent, it's not the same as zeroing them 10 out. So it just -- 11
I'm not sure that I 12 would categorize this as zeroing out, but I 13 do recognize the pain and the difficulty 14 that -- 15
2.25 or 2.28 to 16 zero is zero. Zero. It's nothing. 17
But there's still 18 two-and-a-half million dollars in that line 19 to the Art Museum. 20
It's our building. I mean, that's like -- We can't 245 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 get credit for paying our light, heat and, you know, utilities. It's our building. It's like giving yourself a pat on the back for paying your own gas bill which doesn't happen all the time in the City anyway. (Laughter.)
Yeah. It's another -- It's another whole subject. I just really -- I just really believe and I know you're -- you're -- you're dealing with what your dealt.
But I just really believe it's insane to cut $4 million in arts and culture, including the Art Museum, when we're not going to be able to or be at less of an opportunity to go out and get those exhibitions to fill our hotel rooms and restaurants and bring people, international visitors, to our City. It just makes absolutely no sense.
I understand what 246 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 you're saying. But as I said before, we do believe that this is an opportunity to think more strategically about ways that we can help the arts and culture organizations find the dedicated funding streams going forward. We think this is exactly the time when it should happen.
But this is -- I know I'm over. But how can you, knowing -- knowing this whole cultural area, you know that in order to get dedicated funding streams from foundations and other places, you have to show some City support in order to maximize the opportunities. If you zero people out or you reduce their ability for the cultural fund to help small and emerging groups go and get monies from foundations... You have to provide some show that you're viable because the government or somebody else funds you. I mean, to take -- to take that away from the cultural fund, for example, puts all of these groups at a terrible disadvantage for some of the other funding 247 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 streams.
I understand that point. But I also would say to you that when you look at all of the pieces of arts and cultural that remain in the City budget, it's over $5 million. Chicago has a $4 million budget. Boston has a $1.37 million budget. With respect to other cities this is not as disastrous as you might think.
But as we look at the possibilities of what we're going to lose, potentially, in other economic development issues relative to our inability to compete for exhibitions and other things?
That's only if you expect that the public subsidies are the only thing that can be used to raise those revenues.
Well, but I haven't seen or heard of any specific opportunities to replace that money, other than we're just taking it away right now. 248 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 Will we hear it or...
Well, I mentioned several. There are other opportunities. I heard a wonderful speech last week by a man named Billy Shore, all about arts and culture organizations and other non-profits, looking to create their own businesses, their business lines, revenue driven -- revenue streams, in order to support themselves, rather than relying on public subsidy. There are a number of courses that we can follow. And sometimes in the toughest times it provides the greatest opportunity to be creative, to be imaginative, to be constructive about finding long-term solutions.
Well, just for the record, I don't think that this budget represents tough times for every department in the City, as opposed to what we're minimally giving arts and culture in the City. I think $4 million is minimal. Thanks. 249 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman Clarke.
Ask you a couple of questions. First I want to talk about gaming, slash, slots, slash, gambling, slash, tables, whatever your choice. There's been said that possibly by the end of this particular legislative cycle in Harrisburg, that there may be a gaming bill coming out that will affect, obviously, the state and particularly Philadelphia. We may be in the position to receive between two and three fixed locations and maybe a racino. I want to get a sense of the City of Philadelphia's involvement first in the operation, in terms of the revenue that's generated as a result of casinos, in terms 250 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 of the location, site specific, in terms of the process and negotiating the agreements with whatever operator ultimately ends up with one of these facilities, and particularly what involvement the Commerce Department has or whatever entity in the government has which could potentially be one of the largest economic engines in the City of Philadelphia.
Councilman, I have not been involved in those, but I could try to find out who in the City has been involved and be happy to let you know who that is.
Is there anybody here today? It's a relatively big issue.
The train is moving, and I'm wondering is anybody at the -- on the train or... I know they're not in the engine driving the train.
I know there are people in the Administration who are following the issue, and I will try to 251 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 identify who they are and let you know.
I mean, I'm not -- Can you have somebody call and find out who that is?
Okay. I think it's Mr. Burrell, but I will find out for sure.
Are you asking that Mr. Burrell come up and testify?
If he's the only one in the City who has the knowledge.
Why don't you let me confirm that. We'll do that and we'll get back to you. 252 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04
And I'm not talking specifically about the Harrisburg end, as it relates to monitoring the legislation. And I am talking about it to some degree, but I'm talking about the ultimate placement, talking about the economics of the potential deal. And I would be, like, extremely concerned that if somehow nobody in government from Commerce or some other department in government has done an analysis, I'm sure -- I shouldn't say I'm sure, but I doubt that Mr. Burrell is dealing with this at that level of specificity, what I really -- I mean, this is -- This is supposed to be the big economic engine coming down the pike.
I would imagine that that is the Planning Commission, but I don't know for sure. And I will check and get back to you.
All right. Can you, before we leave, see if we can make a 253 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 call and have someone come and testify on that today?
Neighborhood commercial corridors is obviously near and dear to my heart because I represent a district that has a number of neighborhood commercial corridors that, frankly speaking, have seen better times. One of the questions I've always had is what the relationship with the Commerce Department or any entity within the Commerce Department has with Neighborhood Transformation Initiative. And I'll tell you one of the reasons that concerns me. A few years back, under another Commerce Director, we had an opportunity based on an analysis that was done by some of the local... one of the local CDCs and some of the business people on Cecil B. Moore Avenue, that had we been aggressive per the recommendation of not only the groups and myself, we would have been in a position to acquire a substantial 254 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 amount of real estate along the Cecil B. Moore corridor at basically fire sale price. And somewhere down the line, although the Redevelopment Authority did an analysis and was prepared to proceed on acquisition, the Commerce Department and Director at that time decided that that wasn't a priority of the government. And we did not proceed with that acquisition. And now one probably -- one property could possibly go right now for the cost of what it would have -- we would have been able to get the entire corridor for because of what's been happening with the advent of the student housing, the entertainment complex that will hopefully will be done in the next couple of weeks, and other activities related to Temple University. What is the relationship with Commerce in the Neighborhood Transformation Initiative offices, as it relates to an aggressive strategy to acquire and develop properties on neighborhood commercial 255 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 corridors?
In the short time that I've been there, one of the things that has struck me is the fact that on commercial corridors there seem to be a number of activities. And one of the reasons that I ask that we put a working group together at the summit to talk about how we conduct the economic development activities was precisely my experience here. I think one of the things we'd like to do is look at the fact that in certain areas, commercial corridors being one, we have separate activities, and whether we need to knit them together. But I'd like to call --
Excuse me, please. Excuse me. Councilman Goode has a point of information.
Thank you, Madam President. I believe Councilman Clarke asked about the relationship between Neighborhood 256 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 Transformation Initiative and the Commerce Department. And I believe that an honest response might have been that actually under next year's budget about $8 million in commercial demolition is actually being de-obligated and put into residential; isn't that correct?
Yeah, Councilman. I was actually -- When Miss Naidoff finished her response, I was going to ask her because of the shortness of her tenure at the department, ask someone from the agency to come and who could speak to what's currently been in place. I mean, you know, although you've been here six weeks, I would hope that there are people in Commerce that have been working prior to your hire.
Who have some 257 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 sense of what's going on.
There certainly have been. That's why I just turned to Mr. Traylor.
Mjenzi Traylor, First Deputy Director of Commerce. And Councilman, I think that you're right in suggesting that there has not been the amount of economic development emphasis in the coordination of activities between commerce and NTI up to now. I think that our primary emphasis right now has been to make certain that since NTI's emphasis has been on demolition, to make sure that we were identifying all of those commercial buildings that needed to be included in the demolition packages, in order that we were developing some of the site space that would be needed for projects that have not in most cases been identified yet. But I think going forward what we need to do -- and I had hoped that the summit would be helpful in this -- is to 258 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 develop a stronger policy around economic development and the NTI initiatives. And I think that we -- You know, I think that we're in a position to do that and need to do it.
Point of information. While the Commerce Department has actually put together a list of sites that need to be demolished in order to develop commercial corridors within NTI areas, isn't it true that in the proposed budget that we are about to consider, that the Administration's actually de-obligating funds for commercial demolition and transferring them to residential demolition?
I think that that was true in the NTI budget. I mean, those are not funds that were in our budget.
Well, that's the point. The point is, what is Commerce Department doing in connection with NTI? And in fact, it's almost nothing. 259 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 But in addition to that, what was supposed to be done at NTI is even being de-obligated. It's a transfer of funds from commercial to residential proposed in next year's budget.
When the government... Because this NTI thing is kind of an animal unto itself. I'm not really sure who NTI is, who runs NTI. Are you... Is your department in any way, shape and form involved in any of the discussions as it relates to these development issues, if there are any, in neighborhoods? I mean, I'm assuming that NTI would be involved -- NTI bond proceeds would be involved in some of the riverfront development activities, particularly up in the northeast. But do you get involved in any levels of specificity, as it relates to acquisition of commercial corridors and neighborhood development? 260 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04
As I indicated before, we have been involved to the extent that we have identified those properties that we felt if demolished would provide some of the best opportunities for development. To that extent we have been involved. Now, have we... Now, one of the areas of weakness that I think we're trying to find better ways to be involved is in the development of commercial corridors, I mean, because for instance some of the neighborhoods will have the kind of or the levels of new housing activity that would suggest that either where there are existing corridors, that they need to be seriously strengthened in order to take care of the new retail needs of those people moving into those areas in the future or in some cases we may be talking about certain areas where new commercial 261 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 corridors that have not existed in the past need to be created in order to accommodate those needs. Now, if the question is has the planning to date left us with something that says we're sure of what that's going to look like in the future, I would have to admit that we still have a long way to go to get there, Mr. Councilman.
Well, I think my question centers more around the ultimate responsibility for all phases of neighborhood development, be it planning, be it demolition, be it site clearance, be it acquisition, because at the end of the day, if you don't have site control, it really doesn't matter. And I'm just trying to get a sense that when we have this discussion, you know, who's really at the table to talk about the needs of the Commerce Department and its mission to develop neighborhoods. And I'm --
Councilman, I'm like 262 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 Curtis Jones from PCDC to address that as well.
Again, Curtis Jones, President and C.E.O. of the Philadelphia Commercial Development Corporation. As -- One of our major responsibilities is in low and moderate income areas to be involved with the business association's commercial development corporations, to look at potential development. We have not waited until we got the signal from NTI to start their process. We have submitted to Commerce, who subsequently submitted it to the City, a list of properties, both privately owned and publicly owned, that could be batched together for potential development. And in fact, our commercial area specialists which are in effect mall managers, have recommended sites that potentially, based on residential development from NTI, would be ripe to develop. 263 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 And to that degree, we've been trying to tool up within our organization to begin looking at staff that could help develop, for lack of a better term, small strip malls, and in particular infills to existing commercial corridors. So we're planning internally --
Well, if you look at 56th and Lancaster, there is a development there, stores, and a anchor store which 14 is, I believe, a Save-a-Lot that we've 15 developed as a prototype. If you look in the past, we were responsible for 29th and Dauphin, and in part the Ogontz Avenue Plaza.
Yeah, but we haven't 264 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 done this type of demolition and this type of emphasis on new housing development in quite some time. But we are --
-- why not? Whey aren't we doing that, if we're aggressively demolishing areas of residential, what we hope to be newly developed residential areas. Why aren't we as aggressive? And it sounds to me that we're not being as aggressive in the ultimate development for commercial areas. Right now we're looking at 27th and Girard as an example, where we've heard and time after time from any potential operator of a supermarket, that the site just wasn't big enough to accommodate the needs. You know, that's an instance where I think that, you know, Commerce, in conjunction with the folks from NTI, would 265 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 aggressively work on a strategy to be able to accommodate that particular community to develop a much-needed supermarket. And I guess I'm just not seeing the level of participation because I'm -- You know, I meet with NTI people all the time. More often than not, with the exception of maybe the Empowerment Zone, there's really nobody from Commerce to participate in those discussions. And I'm --
No. The working group that's been involved in looking at those potential sites, we have a representative on that --
Well, I'm not just talking about sites. I'm saying from a policy perspective.
You know, I mean, NTI primarily, as it relates to people and neighborhoods, they think of that as... First of all, they say it's a demolition program. 266 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 But once people get educated beyond that, they think that's a way of building new homes. But they don't ever think of it as a way of developing commercial corridors or malls or whatever type of retail commercial activity that we need to have in these neighborhoods. And I think that may have to do more with the lack of aggressiveness on the behalf of the Commerce Department to be a player in that whole process. And that's my concern.
Well, I think the only way we can respond to that right now is that we have tried to keep up with the process and make as much input into it as we can. However, again, I do think it's important for us to become more aggressive. And we're hoping that some of that can be achieved through the blueprint creation process. But then, other parts of it will have to do with, as NTI moves forward with 267 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 its demolition activity, making certain that we're keeping up with that.
Acquisition. Because acquisition is in my mind sometimes more key than the demolition process. I mean, in some instances a developer would be more than willing to demolish the property themselves, if there was the ability to give site control. But without site control, it doesn't really matter. And that's... You know, I would like to see, you know, a strategy that includes the Planning Commission; that includes, you flow, the folks from NTI to talk about developing these commercial corridors; and, you know, possibly some mixed use activity. Right now we have a couple of individuals who are interested in developing on Cecil B. Moore -- And I bring that up because that's one of the, hopefully hottest, commercial corridors in my district. 268 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04
Excuse me. Councilman Clarke, Councilman Goode has a point of information.
I actually got a copy of the fiscal year '05 program statement and budget for NTI. I have two particular problems, one which I already raised. The first is that when we approved NTI of the $250 million which then became $295 million, only $20 million was put aside for economic development. And it was originally listed as commercial, industrial, whatever the listing was. Somewhere along the way, over the last few years, that definition of that $20 million has been changed to read, large vacant building demolition. In other words, dollars that could have been used, in terms of those $20 million for demolition on commercial 269 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 corridors. Then someone made a policy decision, which we have not approved in Council, that says that it was now only going to be used probably for large industrial buildings. First problem I have. Second problem I have is, you talk about becoming more aggressive but the $20 million out of the 250, which is now really out of 295 is being cut next year by $8 12 million, from $20 million to $12 million. 13 And on of the statement it 14 says, shift $8 million from commercial 15 demolition to residential demolition. This 16 is the Administration's words. How do you 17 respond to that? 18
I think the only way 19 that we can respond is to say that there 20 are obviously some needs in the demolition work that has been scheduled through our housing programs that has put a demand on those dollars, in order to complete the assembly of those residential parcels. Other than that Mr. Councilman, I'm not 270 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 sure --
Well, I'm saying there is actually the removal of $8 million. There was only $20 million out of the $295 million for economic development period. Now there's a shifting of $8 million, which reduces it from $20 million to $12 million, shifting from $8 million from commercial demolition to residential demolition, which means that now of the $295 million, only $12 million is being used for economic development. And still within that budget it says it's for large vacant buildings, which means industrial, as opposed to commercial corridors.
I -- I think that we probably need to confer with the NTI people and see if we can get an answer to your question that would -- that would provide a rationale for that cut.
Well, the answers to the question is that hundreds of 271 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 millions of dollars are spent on residential development. Hundreds of millions of dollars are spent on economic development, but not in neighborhoods. When you come to the table, in terms of CDBG budget or the NTI budget, economic development and commercial corridors are always going to get shortchanged, and now being shortchanged again. And it is what it is. It's actually a policy decision that under this Administration neighborhood development means residential neighborhood, as opposed to commercial corridor development.
Okay. And I think the only thing that I would add, though, on the large -- on the large industrial building demolition is that very often that does impact neighborhood situations, what we would call neighborhoods, and our ability to reestablish them as residential neighborhoods that in time will have commercial corridor activity associated 272 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 with them.
Can you talk to Councilman Clarke about the Elm Street Main Street money that's coming from the state that might be available for his District?
Actually -- And I wasn't going to bring that up today, but I've got some conflicting recommendations from the government on what locations should be submitted as applicants for the Elm Street, slash, Main Street project. Made a call this morning. I'm hoping that that gets rectified, because one of the entities in the government has suggested one location -- two locations, and then I got a letter, actually from you, Miss Naidoff, today that suggested two other locations, and I'm not clear as to what our ultimate application will be. 273 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 But that wasn't -- I didn't want to -- I did want to follow up on my questioning, as it relates to the policy implications around NTI and Commerce.
I think you probably answered it to the best of your ability, as it relates to... But I guess my question should be -- because, you know, I don't want to beat a dead horse -- is what policy and who, as it relates to the Commerce Department, will be involved in policy making, as it relates to development of commercial corridors in neighborhoods and commercial malls, and other types of commercial retail activity in neighborhoods, as a result of utilizing NTI resources. And I think, frankly speaking, that you got -- you have been out-hustled because the advocates for housing have been more aggressive than the advocates for economic development in the government; not just outside of the government, but in the 274 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 government. You know, and the people who are in the housing industry in the government are extremely aggressive in making sure that they get money to develop housing. Councilman Goode referenced the shift in focus, the $8 million. I mean, that was because of folks in housing wanted -- needed more money to acquire and demolish properties to do new housing. But I don't see the same level of aggressiveness on the Commerce end to develop commercial activities or acquire land in preparation of development of commercial activities.
So to continue that approach -- I mean, you're always going to be left with your pockets empty.
Okay. We continue to conduct that struggle every year. I think most people here on City Council know that we have, both in terms of stimulus dollars, 275 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 as well as CDBG dollars, have argued continuously for having a heavier emphasis on economic development. Have we won those struggles? For the most part, we have not, as you're indicating. But we'll keep making that point.
Well, I mean, you know, you got a new resource on the table. And I'm just saying that... I mean, I don't want you guys to give up because you haven't been successful in the past, you know, with stimulus dollars and other types of resources that were on the table and just say, well, I'm not even going to fight to get NTI dollars to help develop commercial corridors. I think that you should, you know, continue to fight and, you flow, take it to another level because I'm concerned we'll build all these houses and, you know, we won't be in a position then to help develop the commercial corridors, you know. People will have brand new homes but won't be able 276 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 to go get a quart of milk, you know. And they'll go and get in their cars, and they'll drive out to the malls in other areas, you know.
And that money will not be recycled into our community.
Councilman, every year we come here, and we have felt that concern as well, and over the past years from time to time, this Council has been helpful in adding project dollars. And we hope that you will continue your advocacy.
All right. Let me ask you this, then -- And Council President, is my time almost up?
No, but I do believe that Councilwoman Miller had a point of information or a point of order.
277 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 Councilwoman Miller.
Thank you. Thank you, Councilman Clark. I just wanted to continue or pursue the discussion on aggressive -- Commerce Department becoming a little bit more aggressive. I'd like to know -- And I was actually going to give you a call to see if you'd be willing to sit down with staff from my office, and put together a strategy to deal with the large commercial buildings. I actually... I would actually like to see the onus of those buildings demolish the buildings, rather than to use some of my NTI funds. I have a couple buildings that are slated for a million dollar demolition, but I know that the holdup and one of the problems has been equity court. And I thought we could sit down and figure out a way to deal effectively with the whole issue of dealing with equity 278 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 court and getting those judges to move and get the owners to pay. I mean, there has been some movement by owners to actually pay for their own demolitions versus us paying for their demolition. I know you're going to lien the property; but still, I could use that couple million dollars -- I'm just talking about two buildings right now, but I know it's more. I could use that money more effectively in my district.
Well, we have a team that would be willing to meet with your staff around that.
Thank you. Councilman Clarke, are you about finished?
Thank you. Thank you, Madam President. All right. That leads me to go back to the Commerce Director. In the past, 279 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 members of the team and the Commerce Director were somewhat unsuccessful in getting the appropriate resources on the table. And I don't know if that is because the head of the team didn't fight as aggressively to get a seat at the table and to subsequently get resources on the table. I believe the Commerce Director is a member of the Cabinet.
And I guess I should ask you, Madam Commerce Director, now that you're at the table, will you develop a strategy to be aggressive and to fight and support your staff, to ensure that they get the appropriate resources to help develop these neighborhood developments?
I obviously can't comment on what happened before. And I 280 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 would be happy to meet with you to talk about that, to learn from past experiences you may have witnessed. But I can certainly assure you --
You know, I think that you should talk to members of your team about that. I mean, I could tell you, but sometimes having that direct rapport with members of your team, that they can be candid about what they believe to be some of the things that didn't work in the past would probably be more beneficial than talking to me. And, you know, you and I are okay.
And we can always talk. But I think it's more important to have members of your team, for them to have your ear, to talk about some of the things that they would like to see 281 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 changed.
Well, we talk about it a lot. And much of that has gone into the planning for the summit and the blueprint process, because it's the identification of issues by the members of my staff about things that have happened in the past that they'd like to see changed that has led us to push so hard for the summit and the blueprint process. We do think things need to be improved. They can be changed. And we think that we don't have all the wisdom in the department, so that's why we're seeking the input from people who have worked in the field of economic development for many years. But with respect to my own role, I can only tell you that my experience so far has been that I feel fully a member of the Cabinet, the Mayor's team. And I have had no indication at all that my long track record of being fairly aggressive and strong and supportive of the 282 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 programs that I'm working in hopefully will stand me in good stead in this job as well.
Okay. One last question. Then I know other members have questions. Centering around the issue that we're discussing now, who from the Commerce Department has the primary responsibility of developing the Avenue of the Arts North?
Who from the Commerce Department has the primary responsibility for assisting the development of the Avenue of the Arts North?
-- oh, that's over with. The heck with the north. 283 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04
No, not at all. I actually have a meeting with Karen Lewis. And I obviously have a very strong personal interest in the Avenue of the Arts. And we have talked about specifically the Avenue of the Arts North and making sure that we put the proper emphasis on the development going forward.
All right. Okay. That's good. Okay. Thank you, Madam Chair. I'll come back.
First I'd like to start off by expressing my concern about the cuts in the cultural and arts areas. As you know, I'm the Vice President of the Cultural Fund. And I can't tell you a recent issue that has drawn more e-mail, phone calls, letters than these proposed cuts. And I think you've heard loud and clear this member of Council and some of my colleagues are going to do... I'm going to have to be careful how I say this. We're going to do what needs to get done to try to get restored the funding to what I believe is really shortsighted on... I heard what you said about other cities. Well, I'm not a Councilman in Houston or any place else. And I have an obligation to respond to my constituents. And I'm sure that you've heard and you have heard what we have heard about this. And this is very, very important to me. And I am going to do, again, whatever I can to try to prevent -- Especially you 285 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 said earlier about the $250,000 to the Select Greater Philadelphia. That message that is being sent to the cultural groups that are supported by the Cultural Fund, it's just very devastating to them, and they're very concerned, as you can see around this room. So I'd appreciate it that we work together. I don't want to have to fight over this. And I think that if we don't fight, we might be able to get the ear of the Administration, and maybe they will have some second thoughts on these what I call significant cuts, even though it is a very small piece of the entire package. The other area that I'd like to discuss with you is our airport. And I know that not many weeks -- And not knowing a lot about all of the things that go on, I don't think it's fair for me to address the question to you. But I'm constantly getting complaints about something that I'm told that we have little control over. And it's 286 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 in our International Terminal. When passengers have to deplane and go through Customs and also maybe Immigration, they see these numbers of stations there, and they're not open. And there's a big long line. And I understand that the administration at the airport has been trying to communicate at the Federal level to get more people there. It is so negative. You know, I'm -- Sometimes I want to get a hat and pull it over my head when I'm on a flight, especially when the pilot gets to the airport a half hour early and there we are on the ground. You can see the gate. And a half hour, 40 minutes go by and the pilot... They're starting to get very, very honest with the passengers. They're starting to say -- I had one say, this is what it's like in Philadelphia. I got you here 40 minutes early. We're on the ground. But we can't get a gate to let you off the 287 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 airplane. So, things like that. Can't get a gate. You can't get through Customs when you're flying internationally, all of these negative things about our airport. It's a great airport. I mean, we couldn't live without it here. But my point being, if we're not able to control the Customs and the immigration operation at the airport, shouldn't we at least have some influence with the powers to be from our Congressional representatives, our Senators, to be able to stop this terrible, terrible bashing of Philadelphia? It's tough to be an elected official and be coming back from a short vacation or something like that and have to hear all of this. People... A radio broadcaster here in Philadelphia on the Morning Show packed up his four kids, his wife and drove to Atlantic City because he didn't want to experience what he experienced recently 288 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 going through Philadelphia. So, I don't want to, again, beat it to death; but boy, we really have to focus on what our perception -- the perception of Philadelphia is. And a lot of people get that just traveling through that airport, let alone coming here just to work.
I'm talking about the people that actually transition through it. So, could somebody comment on the problems with Immigration and Customs, as passengers perceive the fact that they built this very, very big facility to have passengers pass through, and then they see two or three stations open. And sometimes I don't know that the maximum opportunity is down there. But it sounds like you guys have heard these stories all before. UNIDENTIFIED MAN: Unfortunately we have. We...
Pull that mike a little closer. UNIDENTIFIED MAN: In the new 289 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 International Terminal we actually opened 56 immigration booths. And there's a certain commonality amongst several of your comments. Basically, Federal staffing, staffing at the Federal level, is really a consistent problem, both from a security perspective. We talk about long lines at security checkpoints. We talk about long lines at Immigration. And you're right. We built a spectacular facility which says great things for the City when you arrive. And unfortunately, unless you get the right level of staffing, you're not able to derive all the efficiency that that new facility provides. And it is really an ongoing battle. It's an ongoing battle when we had Terminal A East, the old international terminal, just getting those booths staffed. I think we had about 13 booths at that time.
You weren't even born yet. 290 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 UNIDENTIFIED MAN: Now we have 56. So really the problem is magnified. And like I said, it is a challenge, both at the security checkpoints, at Immigations and at Customs. And we really continually go back and forth and try and...
Why when I talk to what I call seasoned business travelers, they don't bash Chicago. They don't bash Detroit, Dallas-Fort Worth. Why do they constantly just focus on Philadelphia? Maybe it's because they're in Philadelphia. But I've had some candid conversations with people. And they tell me it is really a serious issue that I described earlier. In the last few flights that I've taken, for vacation or whatever, I noticed that there are certain times when there's just a wait for an airplane to get on the ground. And I had a pilot tell me that that happens. But it's a very, very significant serious problem here in the City. 291 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 Is it because of geographically where we are because of the configuration of the airport? Why are these things seen to be more significant here than other places? UNIDENTIFIED MAN: Well, from an air space perspective, one of the problems that haunt us every day is the fact that we're positioned between New York and New York center and Washington, D.C. So unfortunately, traffic from both of those airports consistently overflies our airports, which certainly adds to the delay, as far as an air space issue. Going back to the staffing issue, though, I guess one last time, one thing that we've noticed -- and you mentioned Chicago, and you mentioned some other airports. We've created a large amount of new capacity. And the Federal Government has been very slow to basically step up and fill that new capacity that we've created. Another thing that comes to mind is 292 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 Southwest Airlines, which will begin next week. We built -- basically rebuilt the checkpoint at Terminal E and created another lane. And it's really been a battle, going back probably two months, just to get that additional lane staffed by the Federal Government and TSA people, just to basically meet that new demand that we know that we're going to have. And the only thought that I have is that at an airport like Chicago basically has had this capacity. They haven't really done a large international project where they've created a lot of new labor demands on the Federal Government like we have. That's really the only difference that I can think of.
Well, what do we do about this problem? I understand that we have a... And I'll be candid for a minute... that we have a person that runs the operation that doesn't respond to the local management's request. 293 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 We have lobbyists. We all know that. Did I make myself clear? UNIDENTIFIED MAN: No. I'm sorry
I understand that we have a person that runs either the Immigration operation or the Customs operation down there, that we have appealed -- you guys that run that place -- have appealed to that person to give more -- provide more assistance for those lanes that you describe. And nothing happens. Well, what do we do about it? Does the Mayor's Office know? Do the lobbyists that represent us in Washington? I assume that we have them represent us at the state level. We have them represent us at the federal level. Do we ever go to our Congress people that represent Philadelphia and say, hey, look: We've got a person that's not being cooperative with us. And again, I'm not going to, you know, have you -- let you or ask you to beat the person up here at these 294 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 budget hearings. But if they're not being cooperative, and it's creating a bad name for our City, somebody has to do something about it. UNIDENTIFIED MAN: Right. We have in the past and continue to use each and every one of the resources that you mentioned. In fact, on September 10, 2001, Senator Specter came to the airport when Terminal A West -- And you were there as well. And that was really kind of a cornerstone of this issue, to bring more staffing. And basically, the staffing we have today is a result of utilizing all those vehicles that you just spoke of. We certainly would like to have, you know, more staffing both at the checkpoints and Immigration and Customs. But I think that, you know, what we've seen across the country, from the security side specifically, TSA, they 295 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 really have been downsizing the numbers. Now, fortunately or unfortunately -- I mean, we'd have to say fortunately compared to other airports -- our number has remained pretty static. But most other large airports have seen a significant downsizing in the number of security screeners they have. So, like I said, I guess we're fortunate on a national scale. But I agree completely that, you know, as far as our image is concerned, the first impression that the airport gives to people arriving in Philadelphia could be improved. And one of the main ways to do that is by having the right amount of staffing.
And to end this and to allow one of my -- another colleague to address you, is there anything that we can do to address some of these issues? You did say that we do use... But has it been effective? UNIDENTIFIED MAN: I think it 296 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 certainly has been effective, from the standpoint of we went from lanes to 56 4 lanes. And although they're not all 5 staffed all the time, you're certainly 6 correct. 7 I really think that without doing 8 the things we did there, just to get that 9 was kind of an impossible challenge to get 10 past. And using all those resources like 11 lobbyists, Congressmen, yourself, Council 12 members, is really how we got the results 13 that we did. I think we certainly have room to press on in that same vein and try and, you know, continue to get more staffing. And I think it would certainly have a positive impact on the perception people have of the airport.
Thank you. And I'm sorry, by the way, to hear about Mr. Isdell's loss, his mom's death. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair.
You're 297 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 quite welcome, Councilman. Councilman Goode.
Miss Naidoff, could you name for me the seven areas that you've asked the summit planning to consider?
I thought you said you also were going to forward that letter through the Chair, but I'd like to know what those seven are.
I know you said you also were going to forward the letter you sent to the planning committee through the Chair. I'd also like to know what those seven are now.
Be happy to. And I would actually welcome the input and the suggestions of members of Council, in the 298 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 same way that we've asked of the planning committee. So, I will send that along with a cover note specifically asking that. Seven areas that we are proposing -- And again, let me just say that this is our concept which we have now put out to the planning committee for review and consideration. And we will be scheduling a meeting with them, and we welcome your suggestions as well. But the seven areas are reducing and streamlining the cost of doing business, evaluating the use and productivity of targeted incentives, fostering competitive advantage and growth in our key industries and our neighborhoods, building the City. And just for a little more explanation on that, that includes housing NTI and preservation, transportation, River City initiative, Convention Center expansion, other projects. You'll see all that there.
So building the City is actually community development. 299 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04
Right. And collaborating with other levels of government, increasing the efficiency of the City's administration of economic development, and the last is improving the quality of the labor force.
You described your understanding of the economic development bureaucracy in the past as being transaction oriented. Don't you think identifying one-quarter of the $500 million fund falls in the same type of mind set? That they can decide they want to do business there on 15 miles of the waterfront, piece together projects that they want to do, and isn't that the same transaction mind set?
I don't really think 300 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 it's the same. A couple of things that I'd like to address on that. One is --
Let me just follow up on that. Does PIDC have deals there or not?
-- reviewed and considered and probably acted on while we're going through the summit and the blueprint process. We can't stop all the engines of government.
Related to the $125 million is a concrete decision has been made to spend $125 million on this new River city concept. Who knows whose crazy vision this is. It may be a good vision but there's no details to it. But obviously, there's been a concrete decision to invest $125 million. I'm asking: Is that related to deals or potential deals that are there or 301 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 not?
I think it's related to several things, Councilman. One is that the source of the $125 million is from the water and sewer bonds, as you know. We've discussed that before. And so it must be related to waterfront projects. The use of it will have to be related to waterfront projects. The idea of the new River City comes out of the fact that there are those three major projects under consideration at this point in planning: The Schuylkill River, the North Delaware, and the Navy Yard, and the notion is just --
Notwithstanding the fact that you can access $125 million for what you want to do with the water bonds, I'm asking more specifically, are you going to the waterfront, those 15 miles of the waterfront, because you have deals there or not? Are there deals there or are there not deals there? Are there potential deals there or are there not potential 302 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 deals there? Because on the one hand you're going to try to sell us on the $125 million by saying there's a vision there, there are potential deals there, there are deals there, that this is something that we can maximize the effectiveness of those dollars by moving on this because this is something that is planned. And it's the same sort of transaction oriented thinking that's being done outside of a comprehensive strategy. I mean, so how do you know that that should be the priority, and that should be, aside from the issue of you can use this water bond related money to access money. Is there any specific strategy there, separate from that, that's not transaction oriented?
This is all part of developing the strategy. I'm not quite sure I understand. The details of the strategy, the projects that will be done, the deals that will be done will all emerge 303 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 once a strategy is decided on.
If you don't have a comprehensive strategy, how do you know we should be investing up to a quarter of the money in the waterfront?
You're absolutely right. And that could be something that comes out of the blueprint process, that we recommend to the Mayor that that is not where the economic development activity should be going forward. But as I said before --
I don't believe that. So, I'm just going to end by asking you one more question. In the end, how will you know that your blueprint makes sense?
Because I'm 304 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 assuming that -- This is the Administration's blueprint. I'm assuming you were brought in to be the economic development czar. You said you wouldn't take the job without a comprehensive strategy; you wouldn't take the job without involving people in a process. The process is supposed to result in a blueprint. How will you know that the blueprint makes sense?