Committee Hearing, December 3, 1998

COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA PUBLIC HEARING AND PUBLIC MEETING BEFORE THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - - - Room 400, City Hall Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Thursday, December 3, 1998 9:30 a.m. - - - BILL 980784 - Amending Phila. Zoning Maps. . . BILL 980785 - Regarding Civic Center Land. . . BILL 980787 - Amending Phila. Code, entitled "Wage and Net Profits Tax". . . BILL 980788 - Amending Phila. Code to add "Keystone Opportunity Zone". . . BILL 980796 - (Being held.) Amending Phila. Code section on "Residence Requirements". . . BILL 980789 - Alternative Funding Mechanism. . . BILL 980843 - Amending Retirement System Ordinance. . . PRESENT: COUNCIL PRESIDENT JOHN F. STREET COUNCILWOMAN AUGUSTA A. CLARK COUNCILWOMAN JANNIE BLACKWELL COUNCILMAN DAVID COHEN COUNCILWOMAN JOAN L. KRAJEWSKI COUNCILWOMAN ANNA CIBOTTA VERNA COUNCILMAN JAMES F. KENNEY COUNCILWOMAN DONNA REED MILLER COUNCILMAN MICHAEL A. NUTTER COUNCILMAN FRANK DICICCO COUNCILMAN RICHARD T. MARIANO COUNCILMAN W. THACHER LONGSTRETH COUNCILMAN FRANK RIZZO - - - VINCENT VARALLO ASSOCIATES, INC. Registered Professional Reporters Eleven Penn Center, Suite 600 Philadelphia, PA 19103 (215) 561-2220 2 12/3/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE I N D E X All Bills Steve Mullin, Commerce Director. . . . . . . 6 City of Philadelphia 7 Bill 980788 8 Richard Feder, Esquire . . . . . . . . . . . 23 9 Philadelphia Law Department 10 Steve Mullin, Commerce Director. . . . . . . 27 City of Philadelphia 11 12 Bill No. 980843 13 Ben Hayllar, Director of Finance . . . . . . 38 City of Philadelphia 14 Deborah Butler, Esq., Deputy City Solicitor 41 15 Philadelphia Law Department 16 Joe Herkness, Executive Director . . . . . . 58 Pension Board 17 18 19 20 21 3 12/3/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Pub. Hearing (All Bills) P R O C E E D I N G S

Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. This is a recessed meeting of the Council Committee of the Whole. In front of us today, we have several items: We have Bill No. 980784d, which is an ordinance to amend zoning maps in West Philadelphia around Penn; We have Bill No. 908785, which is another ordinance related to the Penn area; We have in front of us Bill No. 980787, which is the Wage and Net Profits Tax bill; We have Bill No. 980788, which is the Keystone Opportunity Zone Ordinance; We have Bill No. 980796, which is the bill that relates to police hiring. We also have two pension ordinances: One is refinancing or a financing, and one is a comprehensive codification of the pension ordinances. Now if I could have every Councilmember's attention, what I would like to do is talk a little process here. If I could have your attention, Councilmembers, I need all of 4 12/3/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Pub. Hearing (All Bills) you. I would not like to have to go back over this. We're now talking process, we're talking process. It is my understanding and belief that the ordinances sponsored by Councilwoman Blackwell, 980784 and 980785, relating to her district, were -- that all the testimony on those bills has been taken and that those bills are ready for consideration. Is there any member of Council who disagrees with that? (No response.)

So Bill No. 980784 and 980785 are ready for a public meeting. If there's no member that disagrees with that, it will be noted that these bills are ready for a public hearing. It is also my understanding that Bill 19 No. 980787 is also ready for a public hearing. Is there anyone who disagrees with that? (No response.)

I mean a public meeting, I apologize. It's ready for a public meeting. It is my understanding that Bill No. 25 980787 is ready for a public meeting. 5 12/3/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Pub. Hearing (All Bills)

I would like to find out from Councilman Kenney whether he intends to proceed with the bill. My understanding was that there was going to be no actionon that bill. Have I drawn the wrong assumption or --

The Chair recognizes Councilman Kenney.

Thank you, Mr. President. The intention is to hold the bill 11 today with the on-the-record promise from the Personnel Director and the Police Commissioner to pursue what is appropriate and necessary to accomplish the goals envisioned in this bill.

Without a bill.

Through the vehicle of the Civil Service Commission. So I'm not withdrawing the bill; it's going to stay.

You're just going to hold it?

Hold it and see how that goes.

All right. Thank you very much. The Chair has no objection to that welcomes the idea that this is worked out. 6 12/3/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Pub. Hearing (All Bills)

Yes.

It is my understanding that we are not now ready for a public meeting on Bill No. 980788, which is the Keystone Opportunity Zone bill. We are not ready for a hearing. There are requests for inofrmation. Do I correctly understand there were requests for information on that bill and that we really do need to get that information?

Was the information given to anybody?

All the information that was sent to our office is automatically circulated to members of Council. I get a copy like everybody else. And, Mr. Mullin, has information been prepared and circulated?

Yes. It was sent to your office, yes.

Has it been circulated, Mr. President?

Any information that came to my office should have been circulated. If 7 12/3/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Pub. Hearing (All Bills) it comes as a result of a request of a public hearing, it's automatically circulated.

Did you get it?

Mr. President, I got a fax copy sometime yesterday.

I don't know, we'll find out; it's not an issue. If it came and was not circulated, it will be circulated. If it came and was circulate, it will be recirculated. But I know that there were -- there were -- there was a request for some information on Bill No. 908788. Now, Bill No. 908789, it is my understanding that this bill is ready for a public meeting. And Bill No. 980843 is ready for a public meeting with the proviso that there are some amendments that Councilman Cohen has -- at least two amendments -- and I think Councilman Nutter may have an amendment. I think the Administration may have an amendment. Councilwoman Blackwell?

I understand that we'll have hearings on your bill and my bill 24 on Monday.

Yes. 8 12/3/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Pub. Hearing (All Bills)

And that they -- however, these bills may have to be changed. And I have been advised that our dealing with these bills today won't affect that.

That's correct. There's nothing in these bills that would impact one way or another what we do with your bill, with the COLA bill for retirees, nothing whatsoever. As a matter of fact, Bill No. 980789 has to be approved if there will be any COLA for anyone. And Bill No. 980843 a recodification that is unrelated to either of those things. What we would like to do, if possible, is clean all of this up and get ready because I think the only real bill that we have any real need for further testimony on is Bill No. 980788. We'll know in a minute the extent to which we need more time.

Right.

The pension recodification bill, I thought, was ready for a public meeting. The activity we need to do is amendment activity, and that can only take place in a public meeting; is that correct? 9 12/3/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Pub. Hearing (All Bills)

Right.

So, I mean, we've heard the testimony and we now have to go in a public meeting on it in order to get all the amendments considered. Councilman Kenney?

Thank you. Are there going to be discussions of the amendments in the hearing or in the meeting?

In the meeting. You know, it just seems to me that we can recess the public hearing and go into a public meeting as a practical matter. All of these amendments are friendly amendments in the sense that Councilman Nutter has an amendment that's designed to deal with issues related to only three members of Council. It is my understanding that the rest of us really aren't impacted by it and the Administration has no 21 objection to it, but it's kind of clarification thing to try to keep everybody out of trouble.

I'll only raise the issue of -- I thought the other day one of Councilman Cohen's amendments possibly -- 10 12/3/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Pub. Hearing (All Bills)

It's a five-year vest provision.

Right. What I asked at the hearing was whether or not we were going to hear any testimony or response to that particular issue from the Administration so that we would have a better understanding of what their reaction is.

We can do that.

If the discussion is only in the public meeting, then it's only a discussion among us.

What I just said was, we can recess the public hearing. See, we have the flexibility to recess the public hearing on that bill, go into a public meeting, let the bill be discussed at a public meeting, and then not act on it at that public meeting, then reconvene the public hearing on that bill. 'Cause as long as we keep our public hearing alive -- we can do it either way; it's not a big problem. It was my expectation, though, that that had been -- that there had been some discussions around all of that. It's not a big 11 12/3/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Pub. Hearing (All Bills) problem. What I would like to do really is try to get us to define what we have to do so that we can determine whether or not we can do it before the Council session or after the Council session. And it sounds to me like we need to have some additional testimony and discussion on Keystone Opportunity Zones, and we also need to have some additional testimony and discussions on the pension recodification. If that's the case, what we can do is have a meeting on all of the rest, get 'em out, recess the hearing and the public meeting on those two, and then we could have whatever discussion we need and testimony after a brief Council session and then decide what we want to do. 'Cause we have people here on some of these bills that are not here on other ones. So I'd like to just go ahead and let them -- I don't know.

So we'll have a Council session and then come back?

Yes. I have reservations about holding everybody up on the Keystone Opportunity Zones. I think that is going 12 12/3/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Pub. Hearing (All Bills) to take an hour or so, and I don't think that we can do that. It is now minutes to 10, and I 4 don't know that it makes any sense for us to try 5 to hold everything over. We won't have Council 6 till 11 or 11:30 if try to do this before Council. 7 My druthers are that we have a public 8 meeting on the bills that are are ready and then 9 recess the hearing, do the Council session, 10 reconvene the hearing, do what we have to do. And then if we report something out, go back into a session temporarily just to do that. Does anybody have any objection to our doing that? (No response.)

If not, then what I would like to do is recess the public hearing on all the bills and go into a public meeting on Bills No. 980784, 980785, 980787, and 980789, and do those bills now, and then recess the committee and then come back. Does anybody have any objections to that?

(Inaudible/off mike.) 13 12/3/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Public Meeting - 980784

Except the two bills, the Keystone bill and the recodification gives us a chance to get whatever information we want on the record, take whatever action we want to take, and we can still report it out to a recessed session if we want. Seeing no objections, the committee stands in recess. - - -

We will in now go into a public meeting on Bill No. 980784. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Verna for a motion on this bill.

Thank you, Mr. President. I move that the amendments, as presented to us on Monday, November 30th, be adopted. (Duly seconded.)

All those in favor, let it be known by saying aye. Those opposed, say nay. The ayes have it. The amendments are adopted. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Verna 14 12/3/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Public Meeting - 980784 for a motion on Bill No. 980784 as amended.

Mr. President, I move that Bill No. 980784 be reported out of committee with favorable recommendation, as amended; and a recommendation that the rules of Council be suspended so as to permit first reading at our next session of Council. (Duly seconded.)

All those in favor, let it be known by saying aye. Those opposed, say nay. The ayes have it. Bill No. 980784 will be reported from this committee with a favorable recommendation, as amended, and a recommendation that the rules of Council be suspended so as to permit first reading at our next session of Council. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Verna for a motion on Bill No. 980785.

Mr. Chairman, I move that the amendments, as presented to us on this bill on November the 30th, be adopted. (Duly seconded.)

All those in favor, 15 12/3/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Public Meeting - 980785 let it be known by saying aye. Those opposed, say nay. The ayes have it. The amendments are adopted. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Verna for a motion on the amended Bill No. 980785.

Mr. Chairman, I move that Bill No. 980785 be reported out of committee with a favorable recommendation, as amended; and a further that the rules of Council be suspended so as to permit first reading at our next session of Council. (Duly seconded.)

All those in favor, let it be known by saying aye. Those opposed, say nay. The ayes have it. Bill No. 980785 will be reported out with a favorable recommendation as amended and recommendation to permit first reading at our next session of Council. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Verna on Bill No. 980787.

Are you asking for a suspension of the rules? 16 12/3/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Public Meeting - 980787

Yes.

Mr. Chairman, I move that Bill No. 980787 be reported out of committee with a favorable; also a recommendation that the rules of Council be suspended so as to permit first reading at our next session of Council. (Duly seconded.)

All those in favor, let it be known by saying aye. Those opposed, say nay. The ayes have it. Then this bill, as amended -- there are no amendments, so this bill, as written, will be reported out with a favorable recommendation and a recommendation that the rules of Council be suspended so as to permit first reading at our next session of Council. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Verna for a motion on Bill No. 98078 the.

Mr. Chairman, I move that Bill No. 980789 be reported out of committee with a favorable recommendation; also a recommendation that the rules of Council be suspended so as to permit first reading at our 17 12/3/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Public Meeting - 980789 next session of Council. (Duly seconded.)

All those in favor, let it be known by saying aye. Those opposed, say nay. The ayes have it. This bill will be reported out with a favorable recommendation and a recommendation that rules of Council be suspended so as to permit first reading. This record should note that Bill No. 12 980796 held at the request of the sponsor of the bill on the basis that the Civil Service Commission and any other administrative body, as needed, will take the appropriate steps take the appropriate steps to see to it that the substance of this bill is implemented; is that correct, Councilman?

Yes, sir.

But the bill will be held in committee in case there are any problems. Now, it seems to me that that leaves for our further consideration as a committee Bill 24 No. 980788, which is the Keystone Opportunity Zone bill, and then there is Bill No. 980843. These 18 12/3/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Public Meeting - 980789 bills will stand in front of the committee. This committee will stand in recess until 12:00. Until o'clock, the committee will 5 stand in recess. We will now prepare for our City 6 Council session. 7 - - - 8 (Stated Council Session held, then 9 adjourned at 12:16 p.m.) 10 - - - 11 (Recessed Council Committee of the 12 Whole reconvenes.) - - - 19 12/3/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Public Hearing - 980788

This is a recessed hearing of the Council Committee of the Whole. We have two items in front of us: We have Bill No. 980788, which is an ordinance amending Title of the Philadelphia 7 Code, entitled "Finances, Taxes and Collections"; 8 And we also have Bill No. 980843, which 9 is an ordinance adopting a comprehensive new 10 pension plan for City employees by restating and 11 amending their retirement system ordinance 12 approved. . . a long time ago. 13 Are the Administration witnesses 14 present? 15 (Administration witnesses come 16 forward.) 17

The first bill I'd 18 like to consider is Bill No. 980788, the Keystone 19 Opportunity Zone bill. Is there any member of Council that has a question for the Administration on Bill No. 22 980788? The Chair recognizes Councilman Cohen.

At this point, I just want clarification from the Chair of the 20 12/3/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Public Hearing - 980788 general content of the bill. Which is it; is the pension bonds, the pension recodification, or Keystone Opportunities?

It's the Keystone Opportunity Zone bill.

Okay, very good.

Does any member of Council have questions about Bill No. 980 --

I know Councilwoman Blackwell stated to me that she had questions. If this is the Keystone Opportunity --

I'm okay, I'm fine.

She's okay.

She's okay. I have no questions.

You have no 19 questions?

I have none.

Any other member have any questions about Bill No. 980788. (No response.)

Now, I understand a series of amendments was offered. Do the 21 12/3/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Public Hearing - 980788 Councilmembers have the amendments? There's a big package of amendments. Do the Councilmembers have these proposed amendments? This -- fundamentally, these are -- these amendments. . . clear up some technical questions, and it is my understanding that they offer -- the description of the sites are actually defined by metes and bounds?

Yes, Council President. My name is Steve Mullin, Commerce Director with the City. Where we do not have a BRT parcel number, we have to put in the metes and bounds or other description. The vast bulk of the verbage that you see there are the non-BRT parcel number -- information.

All right. Now, it is my understanding that -- does everyone have a copy of the amendment that says at the top, "Exhibit 2, , Line 31?" And then it says "insert," and there's a bunch of detail there. And then there is amendments to Bill 24 No. 980788, Exhibit 1, , Line 25; Exhibit 1, , Lines 2, 3, and 5, does everyone have 22 12/3/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Public Hearing - 980788 that? Do you have all of those? And then you have the big amendment to the one bill. These are all amendments to the Keystone Opportunity bill. Is there anybody that has any question about any other proposed amendments? There's a large packet of amendments.

Where is it?

It was given to you at the public hearing. If we don't have extras, somebody dies. The extras are now being distributed, so nobody has to die; we can all live. This is a whole series of amendments that are fundamentally technical. And the Chair wishes to have a motion that these amendments not be read into the record but that they're available to all members of Council and that all members of Council have them.

So moved.

Is there any objection to our including these amendments in the record but not reading them laboriously into the record? There are many, many, many, many pages. 23 12/3/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Public Hearing - 980788 The Chair recognizes Councilman Cohen.

Mr. President, do I understand that there are two sets of amendments to this bill? First those outlined in this very heavy package.

Yes.

And then, secondly, a two-page additional supplement.

Those are all of the amendments.

Very good.

Those are all of them. You know, these lawyers get on my nerves. I tell you, they really do get on my nerves 'cause they -- now, Richie, come and tell us what you want to say now. (Richard Feder comes forward.)

Thank you, Mr. President. Richie Feder from the--

Please identify yourself.

Identify yourself for the record. 24 12/3/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Public Hearing - 980788

I was trying to. Thank you, Mr. President. Richie Feder from the Law Department. At the public hearing earlier this week, Mr. Mullin --

Make it brief.

Mr. Mullin distributed large package of amendments as well as that Exhibit A -- the exhibit -- Charlie, what does that say?

It says "Exhibit A to Exhibit 5."

Right, that was distributed last week as part of the package. That was a last-minute description which we --

Is it in the package?

It is not in the package, but it was distributed.

All right, make copies. (Copies of amendment made and distributed to all present Councilmembers).

Does everyone now 25 12/3/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Public Hearing - 980788 have Exhibit A to Exhibit 5? Does everyone have it? Does anyone have any questions on it? (No questions.)

The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Verna.

Thank you, Mr. President. I just wanted to make the record very clear. Mr. Mullin, we are not deleting, as it would appear, on of the Navy Yard Girard Point Philadelphia Naval Hospital. We're very simply referring to that area now as "Lower Delaware River?"

That is correct.

Thank you.

The Chair recognizes Councilman Cohen.

Mr. President, I have a single sheet of paper entitled "Exhibit A to Exhibit 5."

That's it, that's it.

So we now have -- 12/3/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Public Hearing - 980788 and that's going to be offered as an amendment?

Yes, it has been 00 it was already previously offered, but it wasn't a part of the package, and we are now making sure that everyone has it.

'Cause that's -- nothing on that sheet indicates it's an amendment; it doesn't indicate what it is.

Well, I understand that, but it has previously been -- it is an amendment.

Okay, very good, sir.

Any questions? The Chair recognizes Councilman Rizzo.

Just one question to Mr. Mullin. And I understand that this may not be applicable right now, but in the futre, is the liquor-by-the-drink tax exempt?

No. 22

Thank you.

Any questions from any other members of Council on any of these proposed amendments? 27 12/3/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Public Hearing - 980788 (No response.)

If not, we will stand in recess on Bill No. 980788.

Mr. President.

We are now out of recess and back on the record.

Thank you, Mr. President. Mr. Mullin, at a later date, if there are other areas that want to be included in this ordinance, would that be possible?

No. This is -- this will be the final version of what the City will allow to go into our application.

Thank you.

Thank you very much. Any other questions? The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Clark.

Mr. Mullin, all of this submission is on the assumption that we will be selected as a Keystone Opportunity Zone, yes?

Well, it's -- I don't want to assume that we will be accepted, but this is 28 12/3/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Public Hearing - 980788 all so that we will be able to submit an application. This is a required step in that application. And perhaps I'll also note, none of this is in effect if we are not selected by the State.

But it's a nullity if you don't get accepted.

Exactly.

But to follow up on the question that Councilwoman Verna asked, perhaps we would not be permitted to enlarge our scope, but would it ever be possible to substitute? I mean, are we locked to these specific sites exclusively and only forever?

Yes, we are, on that. We can, as I testified on Monday, we can drop a portion of what we agree here from putting in the application. And, again, if there are things that come up, like developments we know or things like that, we cannot include something in the application. But once the application goes in on December 31st, that's locked out for the next is 12 years, yes. 29 12/3/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Public Hearing - 980788

Councilman Cohen.

Wait a minute.

I'm sorry, Councilwoman.

Then, in looking at your map, was an attempt made to apply for a Keystone Opportunity Zone in places other than where there have been other developmental efforts such as Model Cities or the Enterprise Zone?

I think we actually attempted to look at all 145 square miles of the city to find out whether there would be appropriate subzones at a minimum of acres 15 under the guidelines, so we didn't restrict 16 ourselves to any particular areas. 17 Now, the fact that a lot of these areas 18 that would be appropriate also fall in Enterprise 19 Zones or Empowerment Zones because those are areas 20 where there's -- (Unintelligible; parties speaking over each other.)

Exactly. So there is a lot of coincidental. But our initial search was through the entire city to find any areas that we 30 12/3/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Public Hearing - 980788 could possibly include.

And the smallest site is acres? 5

The minimum for any of the 6 12 subzones has to be 20 acres. And I think the 7 smallest is about 35 acres or so. 8 And it's not completely contiguous. We 9 had to gerrymander a little bit of that, which is 10 allowed by the State. 11

Okay. When are 12 you expected to make your submission? 13

December 31, 1998 is the 14 last day that we can submit, so we will have it in 15 before then. And we expect the State to make 16 their decision sometime in either February, March, 17 and it would be retroactive to January 1st of 18 1999. 19

But you have an 20 estimated completion date in mind; what is it? For submission.

For our submission?

Mm-hmm.

I'd like to say that we're not racing up there on the 31st, so I hope that 31 12/3/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Public Hearing - 980788 we'll have it done the week between Christmas and New Year's for our application.

Okay. And we have until then -- what we do today is the last word that we have on it; is that what you're saying?

Uh, yes.

Okay.

The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Krajewski.

I just want to make sure I understand. The Northern Shipping will be known as the "Upper"?

It will be in a group in upper Delaware, yes.

And also, the I-95 will be known as what, the --

The I-95 will be --

Is it Lower Delaware --

The area below up Tioga would be known as "Middle Delaware."

Right. And then we have Northern Shipping, which is --

Which we are now calling 32 12/3/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Public Hearing - 980788 "the Upper Delaware."

Thank you.

Sure.

The Chair recognizes Councilman Cohen.

Mr. Mullin, would it be a fair characterization of the bill to say that it is narrowly tailored to cover only blighted areas?

If I could amend that by saying only blighted areas and certain that the City owns now that aren't necessarily blighted, like in our industrial parks. With that one adjustment, I would say I think that's a good characterization.

Well, are you saying the City-owned property are also blighted? Or they may not be; is that what you're saying? I'm just not clear.

They're deteriorated, but they might not be in as bad a condition as the private parcels, correct.

But all the privately owned parcels are blighted areas; is 33 12/3/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Public Hearing - 980788 that correct?

I don't know if you mean legally blighted through our City Planning. But are they all dilapidated and vacant and underutilized?

Yes.

Yes.

All right, thank you.

The Chair recognizes Councilman Nutter. Councilman Nutter, your light is on; do you wish to be recognized?

Yes, I'm sorry. I didn't hear you, Mr. President.

The Chair recognizes Councilman Nutter, then Councilman Rizzo.

Thank you. Mr. Mullin in the response that we received to the questions raised the other day -- this is the December 1st letter -- on question number 4, if you would expand your research effort beyond just the Michigan Renaissance Zones to -- again, it's my understanding that possibly subsequent to the passage of the Michigan 34 12/3/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Public Hearing - 980788 Renaissance Zones that in Michigan, there may be some legislation that has been passed that does prohibit municipalities in Michigan from offering incentives that abate school taxes for economic development purposes. So if you could expand your search beyond the Renaissance Zone legislation, I would appreciate it.

Okay.

Secondly, I do not completely understand the response to question number 7 where you say, "Attached is a memo from Mr. Feder that a person who does not own the property living on a non-residentially-zoned KOZ property would be eligible for the wage tax and income tax exemption." What -- where is this person living under that description? Are we talking about in an apartment?

I think the intent of that answer, Councilman Nutter, was in response to Councilman Cohen's concern that someone might be unlawfully living in a non-residential zone, yes, in a rental property, one that he does not own -- 35 12/3/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Public Hearing - 980788 a squatter, perhaps, or a rental property.

Well, are there any any rental properties in non-residentially-zoned KOZs?

There certainly should not be any, but the question was asked, What if someone is living there, even if not zoned for residential?

Okay.

And the answer is: if they're living, they are entitled to the exemption, and it's our job to get them out because they're violating the zoning laws. But they are entitled to the exemption; that was the answer to the question.

Okay. All right, thank you.

The Chair recognizes Councilman Rizzo.

Mr. Mullin, the area that we're designating as Keystone, do we have any knowledge whether or not any of the -- any of the area are hazardous waste, or have any of them been identified as being potential problematic areas 36 12/3/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Public Hearing - 980788 where there would be remediation? Or do we know of any situations like that that exist anywhere in the zone?

I think, in some cases, we do know that there's environmental problems; and in some cases, we have a real strong suspicion, even though we haven't gotten in there. These are dilapidated buildings that one -- they're on our on demolition list, and we probably have a good suspicion that there could be environmental problems there. And especially if it's not our land. If it's private, we wouldn't have necessarily checked. But we do know that there's probably a very good chance. And, in fact, one of our guidelines was to try to identify parcels that do have -- that do have environmental problems that are hindering redevelopment of those parcels.

So all of the City L&I requirements, all of the requirements that would be needed for construction of a new facility would hold -- stay in place? There would be no 25 exception or no laxing off of any of these 37 12/3/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Public Hearing - 980788 regulations because a company would want to come into a -- or a business would want to come into the Keystone areas?

Absolutely. They would all hold. And in fact, the current owner of the property -- if it is not us, the current owner of the property has to have everything -- all code violations taken care of, all liens paid off, all taxes paid off before they can take one minute's worth of the benefits.

Thank you. Thank you, Mr. President.

Are there any other questions from any other members? (No further questions.)

Is there anyone else in the chamber who wishes to speak on this bill? (No response.)

Seeing no one, we will take it all under advisement. Council will now consider Bill No. 23 980843. The Chair recognizes Mr. Mullin.

When I said it has to be 38 12/3/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Public Hearing - 980843 paid off for delinquent taxes, they have to be under agreement is what I mean; not that it does not have to be fully paid. Thanks.

Any other questions? (No further questions.)

We will now consider Bill No. 980843, pension recodification. (Administration witnesses come forward.)

Please identify yourself for the record.

Ben Hayllar, Director of Finance. And in that capacity, Chairman of the Pension Board. With me is Joe Herkness, the Executive Director of the Pension Board; and Deputy City Solicitor Deborah Butler from the Law Department.

Does anybody have any questions for this team of witnesses that are here to give us anything we want except lunch? The Chair recognizes Councilman Cohen.

Mr. President, I 39 12/3/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Public Hearing - 980843 offered hearing two proposed amendments, and I would like to hear from the Administration what their position is.

Councilman Cohen, I need you to speak into that microphone. Hold it up just a little bit.

All right, I'll try again. I offered two amendments to this bill 11 during the previous public hearing stage. My general impression was that it's at least, as to one of them, that the Administration was in agreement; that is the select group of or 15 people. 16

We're never in agreement 17 Councilman, Cohen. We have no objection to the 18 amendment concerning the people in Local 2186. 19

Well, then, at the 20 appropriate time, I would introduce the amendment 21 and we can attach the statement that there would 22 be no objection to it by the Administration, all 23 right?. 24 And as to the second one, I will offer 25 a revised version of that amendment. Mr. 40 12/3/98 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Public Hearing - 980843 President, on the five-year vesting provision, I have a proposed amendment which is different than the amendment I presented the other day in that it makes it very clear that if there's a five-year vesting period for anybody, it ought to apply to all City employees, and that will be the purpose of the amendment. I can circulate it at this time or ask that it be circulated.

All right. Can we get copies of the amendment. This isn't an amendment to an amendment; this is a new amendment, right?

Well, this is a -- I'm going to substitute this amendment for the previous amendment.