The Art Museum gets its cut, the Culture Fund gets cut, the Atwater Kent, the African American Museum, a whole host of other things happen that you've laid out, and that there's now going to be this new partnership with a variety of people in the art and culture community. Let's assume that some how, some way this budget gets passed in the form that its in.
I think that my personal objective would be, as I stated 342 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 before, which is to work with the arts and cultural community in ways, many of which I have done for years, which is to look for sustainable long-term dedicated funding. There are a number of alternatives, and we are working within the Administration, actually, to develop some ideas along those lines, some solutions that we think are viable and productive.
What are some of those alternatives? What are some of the ideas?
Those are the once I mentioned before, the United Arts Funds which is done in cities like Charlotte, and Pittsburgh, and Delaware, dedicated revenue stream from tax -- some tax base. You've mentioned or one of your colleagues did, gambling or some other kind of revenue stream. There are certainly objectives that a number of people have suggested, in terms of trying to take all of the creative juices that exist in our arts community and 343 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 look for other alternatives, be it that kind of support or finding other ways to raise revenue.
Do you think any of those alternatives or suggestions or ideas or concepts are going to happen in the course of the next seven weeks?
So on July 1, if the Art Museum loses two and a quarter million dollars or $2.25 million, and the Atwater Kent Museum has its operating subsidies zeroed out, and the Cultural Fund gets cut more than more than in half, what happens then?
I think, as is true with any kind of budget cut, and quite frankly, what happens to all of us even as individuals in our family situations, when you have... have to reorder your priorities because of the fiscal realities, you do that. It's not easy. It's not pleasant. It's sometimes very painful, but it often 344 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 has to be done.
Well, okay. I mean, I understand that. But I guess I'm still pressing on you're going to start working on these issues. What I'm hearing you say is they'll just have to deal with it in the course of the next year because... I mean, I'm sure I don't spend as much time in Harrisburg as some others, but I've certainly not heard in recent times in any of the gaming discussions anyone talking about somehow splitting off some dollars now for arts, as much as any other members of the General Assembly might like that. I would have to believe that any of these scenarios: Tax sharing, and art and culture funds, and the like, must come as the result of some amount of time and discussion between and among a whole host of people. They don't certainly happen overnight. And they're not going to do anything to assist in the next... in the 345 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 next few weeks, if not in the next year or so. So how do all of those efforts result in at least those groups being able to maintain what they have?
As I indicated before, I know that it is going to create pain and difficulty. I think it's very much like a family situation when, heaven forbid, somebody gets laid off from a job. You need to reorder your family budget in order to cope with that situation. I think that this is what we all have to address when the City is facing the kind of fiscal constraints that it has right now. That doesn't mean that going forward we ought not to all be working together to find some creative solutions and working together to get those accomplished. But I think for the moment there are going to be some tough times.
Well, I guess my last comment is that I hear what you're 346 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 saying. The only problem with that -- some of that theory or sentiment is that many of these entities actually help generate revenue for the City of Philadelphia. That's the part that is disconnected, in terms of that the... the train of thought. Where you have an investment that is generating return, you generally don't start pulling out of it. I mean, you know, it's certainly not something you do in the investment business or the financial services business. And I don't think there's any doubt that art and culture and a variety of these other entities actually generate revenue. They attract people. They're as much a part of the quality of life in this City as many other things that we do. So why we'd pull away at this critical juncture, as compared, quite honestly, to some of the other spending priorities that we have, is beyond me.
I think the two answers that I'd like to refer back to, 347 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 because I've made them before, have to do with investing in our future because these are tight times and we have to make choices. And the second point is just that we do believe that when you're faced with this kind of fiscal reality, you've got to pay attention first and foremost to the core services: Police, Fire, protection of children, public health. And there isn't a whole lot left over for anything else, as much as we would like to be able to do it. We wish we had a magic wand.
Well, I'm actually not so much looking for a magic wand, as I'm looking for some good decision making and some leadership. But we'll leave that for another day.
The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Blackwell. 348 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04
Thank you, Madam President. I understand that one of my colleagues, Councilwoman Miller asked a question with regard to the Commerce Director's immediate staff and the department, in terms of gender, racial and otherwise, breakdown. So we will wait for the... We will wait for the distribution of that information, and look forward to receiving it.
Madam Director, do you have a problem with District Council people receiving information from your department or from PCDC, with regard to activities in their District before -- before major actions have taken place?
Thank you. As you know, I've been concerned about that, since we made the request and were 349 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 criticized about it. Also, I have, and I'll -- I have a request. There's a gentleman on Lancaster Avenue who every year gives a program at Penn's Landing, the Islamic Cultural Preservation Information Council for Penn's Landing Independence National Park, every year; always have. And they have not received a response. It's for June 11th and 12th. Will you check into that?
And it's one that they get every year, every year this group. They're located in my District on Lancaster Avenue, but they haven't gotten any response. Finally, Madam President, I only have one more question. And that is, on June 26th we will be hosting our second Echoes from Africa. As you know, we have many Africans in Philadelphia. And we work very closely with them. I have a large contingent of 350 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 Africans in the area closest to the President's area. We share some of that, in Southwest Philadelphia. Certainly we have sent letters and when we invite -- we invite participation. Mjenzi Traylor was a part of that last year. We certainly invite the City's participation in that. And frankly, that was one of the other requests on the letter, only that we be included in information involving this community, because we work so closely with them. And that was the other part of my request. We invite the City to participate, and also resubmit our requests that we be involved in affairs involving the African community in our City. That was the other part of our question. That's why I didn't know why everybody was so upset. We wrote a letter, Madam President, asking that no funding decisions made without inclusion with regard to our Districts, that we be 351 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 included in events involving the African immigrant community, and that economic development plans created by Commerce or subsidiary agencies like PCDC, that we be involved, and that we can be involved in some approval process. But you had thought I created a new war, and that I was trying to run the City and be Mayor of this whole City, when all we're talking about is some way to be included in what's happening. It's embarrassing for a Council person to go into a neighborhood where the City is funding something, and we're not involved in it or where the City picks -- where there are two community groups involved and the City picks one that does not work with the community. It's happened. We had an instance, Madam Director, before where there was a fence. I mentioned this before about two years ago, so it still remains with me. We had a choice for where to put a cyclone fence on 352 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 Market Street, 52nd Street, and we chose one location and PCDC chose another a half a block down. And it just didn't make sense when it's our community, we know the players, we know who -- we know who's who, and we know who works with the City, and yet sometimes the District Council person is left out of those decisions. And it's unfair. It makes us angry. I resent it. And I bring forward it again this year, and hope that in the next year I won't need to mention it again. Thank you, Madam President.
Thank you. Councilman Goode, your light is on. Did you want to be recognized?
Ms. Naidoff, in hearings on the five-year plan I've referenced an analysis by the National Community Reinvestment Coalition that 353 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 showed that Philadelphia was dead last of the top 100 metropolitan areas, in terms of small business lending to minority census tracts and lower income census tracts. You said you were not familiar with that analysis, but I forwarded it to you. Have you had a chance to review it?
Councilman, I have not reviewed it in depth. I turned it over to Mjenzi Traylor, and he has had, I think, some conversation with your staff about it. And I invite him up now to talk to you about it.
No, I don't want to talk to Mjenzi about it. I want to talk to you about it.
Also, you were cc'd on a letter -- I was cc'd on a letter to you from the Greater Philadelphia Urban Affairs Coalition, wanting their small 354 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 Business Lending Task Force to be involved in economic development summit. They put a year-and-a-half of work on small business lending, small business development. Members of that task force include Wacovia, PNC, Citizens Bank, the Reinvestment Fund, Philadelphia Association of Community Development Corporations, a number of different small business development experts around the City. As I said, they have put in a year-and-a-half of work, made testimony before this Council on their recommendations. Those recommendations have been unanimously adopted by this Council. They've asked to be included in the economic development summit. Can you tell me how you would envision them being included?
I turned that letter over to our project director, John Gerber, and he's going to be in touch with them. And we're certainly going to see if we can 355 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 include them in one of the working groups that seems important, seems relevant.
This is a task force that's made up of Wacovia Bank, PNC...
...Citizens, the Reinvestment Fund which is the largest community development financial institution --
-- in the area. Philadelphia Association of Community Development Corporations represents up to 80 or 90 community development corporations, and a regional nonprofit like VPUAC. You can't tell me specifically how you would envision them being involved, after a year-and-a-half of work in their producing a report which has 356 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 recommendations that were unanimously adopted by Council?
No, I can't give you a specific answer now because we haven't constituted the working groups. But we certainly would like to have them participate.
From the members of that task force I just named, can you envision putting together a group with greater capacity, with regard to small business growth?
Certainly do. And I think that Jeremy Nowack, for example, is on the planning committee, and will have --
So can you imagine putting together a group with greater capacity than the task force I just named?
I don't know the answer to that. I don't know whether there 357 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 are not other people who have spent equal amounts of time, but we're certainly going to try to identify all of those who have the expertise in that area and get them involved.
Okay. Lastly, very quickly, explain to me what the Elm Street Main Street program that is being implemented through the state entails; what is the application process; where Commerce is at in that application process; and if there's a list of commercial corridors to be included in that application process, what those commercial corridors are.
Call on Duane Bumb, who has handled that project for our department.
My name is Duane Bumb, Deputy Commerce Director. Mjenzi Traylor and I have been working very closely on the Main Street application. You mentioned both Main Street and Elm Street programs. They are 358 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 complementary of each other. Main Street, as I'm sure you know, is a program that the state has run for several years now, that provides funding assistance to commercial corridors. The City has to this point not been a participant in that. That has been primarily because previous state administrations have not wanted to apply this program to large cities like Philadelphia, and in fact have treated it more like the National Trust for Historic Preservation model that it was based on, which was basically smaller cities. In Philadelphia we've got dozens of neighborhoods which each constitute a small city in its own right, each with their own vibrant commercial corridor. We... Just to go through the process, we've gone through to identify which corridors and then how to manage those corridors in the state's Main Street program. We did an inventory of corridors 359 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 that are receiving City funding or are receiving funding from City programs like the CDCs, the PPT tax credit program that you have -- Those are all indicators to us of commercial corridors or CDCs that work within commercial corridors that have some capacity that could be built upon. We came up with a short list of about 32 corridors in the City that we thought would be eligible applicants. We started going through a process of shortening that list. What the state told us just a week ago was that our application had to be in by April 30th. And so... And we, in fact, met with state officials, I think a week ago today. And they told us which of those 32 corridors we had first presented to them they felt were best positioned to participate in this first phase of the program.
They asked for -- Our application had seven corridors in, and there was one corridor that they had already approved in the City that was outside of our application. So there would be eight corridors within the City in this first...
Yes. The corridor outside of the application was Roxborough, Ridge Avenue. but the seven within were, if I can remember these, Main Street, Manyunk; Frankford Avenue; Mayfair which is also Frankford Avenue; Ogontz Avenue with Ork; Mount Airy USA on Germantown Avenue; 22nd Street corridor, 22nd and Indiana with Allegheny West. I think that's -- I think that's it.
I have Roxborough; Manyunk, Main Street; Frankford Mayfair; Ogontz; Mount Airy on Germantown Avenue; 22nd and Indiana --
So following the state's requirements, because they said that last week they were going to be getting their funding, and they were funding in the current fiscal year. But they're not waiting for the '05 to begin. And so, we unfortunately had to accelerate the process on Friday, as they required. We put an application in with those seven, to hold the place. And we will be negotiating with them to determine sort of how much money comes to each of those corridors, as the program rolls itself out. We've determined that the Main Street program will be administered directly within Commerce. I think there was some discussion 362 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 about, you know, should we outsource some of that? I think, for purposes of the first year, where we want to make sure we have direct control of it, and also since the program scope is smaller than we first would have wanted -- We'd have preferred 8 or more corridors in the first round. But 9 since there are seven, we can... we think 10 we can reasonably do that with -- in house. 11
After this 12 question, I was going to let you go. By 13 administer the program do you mean just 14 administer the funds or do you mean 15 actually design a Main Street program?
There's a whole planning process that the state will require that we go through. I think it means both parts of what you're asking me which is there are going to be seven CDCs that we will contract with, to provide services on those targeted corridors. But we will be spending a lot of time working with those CDCs to comply with the sort of plan that the state will 363 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 require to be put in place for Main Street.
And how similar is that Main Street plan to the National Main Street Program?
I think it is sort of... Well, again, it was based on the National Main Street Program. But in fact, I think our thinking is that we will --
Without going too deeply into it, we do have an organization here that is administering a National Main Street Program that probably has better capacity to implement that program. I'm not suggesting that the Commerce Department not administer the program or that they outsource all the program. But you don't think it's necessary to outsource part of the program to take advantage of their capacity?
Yes. We've talked with Lisk, and they certainly would like to 364 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 participate. I think that what I can't answer is -- and you may be right, that there may be components that we'd want to sort of utilize their expertise on. But I think the state needs to sort of tell us sort of officially how much money we're getting and what the sort of activities that we're going to have to perform, for us to sort of determine which of those can we do in-house and which could be better sort of leveraged, the program, by outsourcing.
I'm not sure what difference it would make how much money you get from the state, when you're already funding several areas, in terms of target area support through Community Development Block Grant dollars. You already have several areas through the CDC tax credit program. We already have a heavy investment there. And I've already made request to the Commerce Department that they consider capacity building, around how to service commercial 365 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 corridors. And basically Lisk gives an obvious choice, in terms of increasing capacity to service commercial corridors, and building that management capacity. Not that there aren't other options, I mean. But I mean, clearly there is enough of investment beyond the state investment. And my guess is the investment we already have through Community Development Block Grant dollars and the CDC tax credit program far outweighs any money that is coming from the state. And so, at what point are we going to build our capacity to actually manage commercial corridors and -- and -- and -- and consider an or organization like Lisk?
All right. I think that my... I think that we do want to sort of pursue that to further --
I mean, I'll just be blunt about it. I know that you want your cut of the money. But essentially if 366 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 there are management services that needs to be outsourced to build our capacity because we have other investments out there, then it needs to be done.
Right. I -- I -- I -- We will look into that and pursue it. I think we want to make sure that we're doing that in coordination with the state. And you're right: Lisk has a very good reputation with them as well, as I put this together.
You're welcome. Are there any other questions or comments from members of the Committee? (No response.)
Councilman Clarke, you had weren't wanted someone.
Thank you, Madam President. 367 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 Madam President, earlier in the questioning there was a request by myself to have someone from the Commerce Department talk about casino...
Gaming. And I understand that there is, in fact, a number of individuals working on some aspects of the potential of that happening. And I believe you wanted to make a response to that?
Again, Duane Bumb. Well, I apologize because I think we -- I misunderstood as well the sort of the question, because what we were looking to sort of get for you was the point person within the Administration coordinating all of the aspects of gaming -- and there are lots of those -- is George Burrell. But that is not to say that Commerce, the Director and myself included, are not very much involved in the task 368 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 force that is exploring aspects of that, those aspects being: What are the best locations within the City to facilitate that -- to accommodate gaming, that wouldn't have a detrimental impact on surrounding neighborhoods, that would best leverage the positive impact that gaming could produce; what kind of zoning that sort of district might need to have that we would want to sort of anticipate what sort of adjacent uses should be encouraged near those what we think at this point would be two gaming facilities within the City, based on the current status of the legislation. We're working with a task force that obviously includes the Director of the Planning Commission on some of those locational issues. The Law Department has been very much involved, as we also are wanting to fully explore how does the City maximize the amount of revenue it can generate from a gaming opportunity in the City. 369 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 And as is -- as have finance and budget been involved. I think that... And in response to your question, not knowing that we were going to be asked this today --
I know. I know. I'd actually like the opportunity to sort of -- I'm giving you the most current and correct information -- allow us to sort of go back and with the other sort of lead partners in that working group which -- and to come back to you even as early as tomorrow or the first opportunity that you're available, for us to give you sort of an update on where we are with that activity. I think there's some moving parts that we have not -- were not fully aware of. And I don't want to sort of misrepresent the status. But I did want to sort of clarify for the record that we are very much 370 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 actively a party to that working group.
That's fine with me, if it's okay with the Council President. I understand it. But when you do come back, please be prepared to answer some very pointed questions on all aspects of the issue.
When will you be coming back? How long will it take you to get the information that the Councilman is seeking?
Well, I think we can be back within a day or two, I think. So it very much will depend on Council's availability. I just want the opportunity for us to go quickly back to pull the information that has been assembled by the working group, and make sure that the parties who have been actively involved can be available to answer questions, so it's not just Commerce that would be responding.
Supposing 371 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 we schedule you for tomorrow afternoon at 1 o'clock? Is that giving you ample time?
Very well. The Chair recognizes Councilman Rizzo.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I have a question for PIDC, I believe. Director, it's a question about the Navy Yard, so I assume it's PIDC. I have a question referencing the move of the Philadelphia Police Department to the site of in the Navy Yard. So what I'd like you to do is explain to me what the commitment at that location, how long it will be, who paid to move the Traffic Division of the Philadelphia Police Department to that site, how permanent is it, how did that all get put together. I understand there was a commitment which I understand that we needed a police presence down around the two new stadiums. But I'm really curious how that got 372 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 all engineered, and how now the Philadelphia Police Department have a facility at that site.
Well, Councilman, I think you're correct; it was part of the stadium deal when the Eagles new stadium and the Phillies ballpark was negotiated. And because of the traffic problems that probably will be created by all of the activity in the area, I think it was important to the community that Traffic Police have a permanent presence or at least as much of a presence as possible. They looked for sites in the area. Naturally, owning the Navy Yard, we were a potential site. And we worked with the Capital Program Office and Department of Public Property, identified a building close to the front gate. And I believe there's City Capital funds used to renovate the building. And we've entered into a lease with the City for the Traffic Police. I'm not sure what the term of the lease is, but I can find 373 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 that out.
So we renovated a building. Explain to me: Who's the landlord?
I'd like to know how much we spent to renovate that facility. And I'd like to know... And that information, as you know, goes to the Chair. What will that do to the further development? Will they have to eventually move out if something occurs there, more tenants? What will be... What will have to occur for them not to be able to stay at that site?
Well, I think they can stay as long as we have a lease in effect.
No. I'm talking 374 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 about for development. I mean, the building that they're in, is it just their building or is there any other potential use, private sector, at that location? My question is, is this temporary? Is this permanent? What does it do long term to other projects that may be developed, having a police station there?
Well, I think it's something that we have to look at. I mean, obviously, as a property manager, we think this is the best site for them right now. If other developments occur, and we feel may be beneficial, both to the landlord and to the tenant to move them, we would look for another location within the Navy Yard. We try and be flexible. We try and work with the tenants. And I can't say it will never be relocated, but I think right now we see them as being a pretty long-term tenant there.
When was this money for this renovation put in the 375 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 budget?
I think the money was in the City's Capital Budget. I can't --
Is Mr. McPherson able to help with that? Can you identify where in the budget that renovation expense was? MR. McPHERSON: I don't know.
It was in the Capital Budget a couple years ago. It may have been listed in Commerce, but I'll find out for you and get you the exact...
But it wasn't listed for that particular -- 376 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04
I hope that I'm making myself clear, that I'm concerned about the long-term... the commitment that we have. In other words, is that just a place to park them for a while because of new things happened down at the Navy Yard or are they going to get tossed out of there, since they're a City agency? That's my concern. And I haven't heard whether or not that particular environment could change and force them out of there, and then we'd have to consider a new place to house that unit.
I have to check this, too. I think we made a commitment to leave them there. I think that was part of the 377 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 deal, that we were committing to leave that unit down there.
I guess the problem that I'm having, I don't envision where they are or whether they're sharing a facility. Is it a stand-alone building? Because I was led to believe by a person that called me about this that they're not as permanent there as I believe they are, because if something would occur where more tenants would come, they'd be displaced. Not correct?
I don't think -- I don't think that's true. I think you have to take a look at the lease and see what kind of provisions there may be for relocating them. I think that happens all the time in real estate, within office buildings. They have a nice location. They appear to be happy with it. We're happy to have them there. We got the building renovated. It's a stand-alone building.
Again, I guess 378 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 I'm not getting to you. Could that operation, a City police station being in there, interfere with something better?
It -- It I mean, anything's possible, Councilman. I don't want to sound unresponsive, but... I mean, it could, and it may be there for ten years and never interfere with anything. Right now it doesn't interfere.
So, in other words, there's nothing really exciting going to happen down there that could bump them out of that spot.
Well, let's... Well, what... I'm asking you a question. Again, is there right now -- And I'm going to ride down there, now that I obviously can get --
I would like to 379 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 know -- and I can't get it here, I guess -- is that when we leased that ground or that building to the Police Department, did that situation -- did that lease create a situation where other better use could occur? Am I making myself clear?
You're asking me if the police presence there is an enhancement to the yard?
I'll tell you, I've been doing this for a while, and this is the toughest communication I've ever had. Is that location -- Is the lease of that police facility...
...if you wanted to do something different... In other words, there's a private sector that wanted to come in there, is that facility possibly going to interfere with some other 380 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 significant project or growth that could happen at that immediate site of that building that you referred to just inside the gate?
I can't -- It's not interfering with anything now. If there were a better use for the building, we would look at the -- I don't have a copy of the lease with me right now. But we would go to the Police Department, the Department of Public Property, and work with them. And if they wanted to stay there. I mean, whatever the lease is, the lease is. I'm not going to say something that isn't in the document.
Well, I never -- Of all the good things I'm hearing about the development of the Navy Yard --
-- to plug in a police station there sounds to me like there isn't a lot happening, if we have the ability to put a City facility, a police 381 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 station, at a Navy Yard that we're talking about business development. Again, if it's a stopgap, just a short term, that we're going to do that until the whole place is occupied, then that's okay. But I'm just curious about long term what effect it could have on the development of the Navy Yard. Am I getting a little clearer?
I think I'm going to need to meet with you about it, go down there and see it, because I'm told that this building, that this operation could potentially interfere with other development --
Could I ask you who was telling you that? 382 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04
Okay. Thank you very much. Are there any other questions or comments? (No response.)
Do we have any questions regarding the Civic Center, as long as you're here? Any questions regarding the Civic Center? No. 17 Very well. Thank you. Thank you very much. SEPTA is next. Good afternoon. Kindly identify yourself for the record and proceed with your testimony.
Good afternoon. I'm Faye Moore. I'm SEPTA's General Manager. I'm joined today by Frances Jones from our Government Affairs Area and Joe Casey, our 383 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 Chief Financial Officer. Council President Verna and members of City Council --
Excuse me. We do have a copy of your testimony. It will be given to the stenographer. It will be transcribed in whole. I would ask that you please abbreviate our testimony.
Again, thank you for the opportunity to speak about SEPTA's fiscal 2005 57.3 million operating budget request and key authority initiatives and milestones. The request provides funding for operating subsidy, and that subsidy further leverages state operating assistance. I will just give you highlights. We are pleased to announce that we did indeed settle with one of our biggest unions, Transport Workers Union 234. It was a one-year agreement, and that was done successfully in March. 384 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 Our biggest concern going forward obviously is the budget that we just released in the first part of April. We are going to public hearings in May with a $70 million operating budget deficit. We just recently formed a coalition or joined with a coalition where we are going after or hoping to get state subsidy so that we don't have to consider some of the painful cuts and fare increases that we considered last year. So that is going to be our biggest priority going forth in the next 30 to 60 days. And again, I'm attempting to very much abbreviate, in the interest of time. Another piece I want to highlight is our bus accessibility. We will become 100 percent accessible sometime in June with, the acquisition of 120 new ADA compliant buses. Again, that makes us 100 percent accessible for the bus. I will not talk about some of the projects that we had. Another highlight during the year 385 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 was the successful opening of the Frankford Transportation Center. For the first time in 80 years our neighbors in the Frankford area have the opportunity to see direct sunlight, so we're very proud about that one. For the first time since 1989 we did experience a slight increase in the number of part one crimes that were reported. The majority related to cashier booth burglaries and a spike in aggravated assaults. We will also send an amended testimony because the following is new and a clarification. Simple assaults have increased, and I think we might have misstated that in our testimony. And that is predominantly perpetrated by school age children. We have other highlights where we have increased our employee awareness with Keystone Transit Career Ladder Partnership that, again, is internally focused, to make sure that our technical skills training for 386 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 our rank and file is in place. We have a comfortable program on our railroad side, for mechanical apprenticeship programs. So we're very proud of those accomplishments over the past year. Our DBE as of March 31st -- Well, our goal for fiscal year 2004 is slightly over percent. That's 15.15 percent. 11 And I'm happy to report that as of March 12 31st, that DBE participation rate is 24.6 13 percent. 14 Last year when we were before you, 15 we had slightly under 300 certified minority firms. This year we are, again, happy to report we have 489 as of March of 2004. So, a nice increase. One thing I did fail to mention earlier, we have two board members for the City, Christian DiCicco and Jeddie Newkirk. I apologize on their behalf. We had a major schedule just mess up in my office. So they have reminded me in length, in detail, about how that cannot happen again. 387 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 So, I do want to apologize. They were very much interested in being with us today. With that, I thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony. I look forward to working with you, Councilman Nutter from Transportation and Public Utilities Committee, and other members of Council on transit issues. And we're here to answer any questions.
Thank you, Miss Moore. You've been extremely patient, and we're appreciative. Thank you so much. The Chair recognizes Councilman Nutter.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Good afternoon, Miss Moore, Miss Jones, Mr. Casey. What I'd like to do is go through a couple preliminary items, just to make sure that I understand your process. I appreciate the opportunities I've had to talk with Miss Jones and Mr. Casey, and look forward to spending more time with 388 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 you, Miss Moore. Why don't we go to in your proposed budget. As I understand it, the way your budget lays out, you put your revenues which are coming from the passengers from a variety of services. And that's at $421 million; is that correct?
I'm going to refer all the questions on the budget to Mr. Casey.
All right. And then your total operating expenses are the 899?
Well, I'm sorry. Total expenses. I'm looking at the operating expense line of 899. Then you have depreciation, then your contributed capital at 20, and that gets you to approximately the 920; is that correct?
All right. And 389 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 then you have a deficit, and then you bring in all the other governmental funding sources, and then that gives you the bottom line of the $70 million deficit.
Is that correct? Okay. And so let's go back up at the top. Is that considered the fare box revenue?
Okay. And out of the passenger revenue, that's a portion of the budget here, I think, that lays out what the sources for those dollars are; is that correct, by the different transit systems?
Okay. And that is a little further back on, like, 18 or something?
Councilman, is 390 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04 the Consolidated Budget.
Right. So of the $326,900,000 in passenger revenue, $217 million of that is from the City Transit Division?
And then you have other revenue sources within City Transit for seniors and shared ride and all that.
So is that 296 out of the 326 is from City Transit in Philadelphia?
Okay. What is that; about high 60, 70 some odd percent?
...is the City Transit Division. Okay. All right. So, City Transit, is it fair to say it's a somewhat significant...
Very significant. Okay. How many people ride the system in the City on a daily basis?
I have annual numbers, but it's close to a million trips a day. 392 Whole - Operating Budget - 5/4/04