John Taxin, President of Old Original Bookbinders Restaurant and Chairman of the Special Services District.
Rick Snyderman, on the Executive Committee of the Old City Special Services District and a business person in Old City.
Chris Sayer, resident of Old City, former president of Old City Civic Association, and Executive Community Member of the 124 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL NO. 980238 Old City District.
Before we begin, if I may, we have several copies of our written testimony that, for the sake of time, we would pass up now.
Yeah, we're making -- we're having other copies made at this time. We actually have them unless you --
Yes, can we have those, have the Sergeant-at-Arms please pick up that testimony.
Thank you, Mr. President. I'd also like to point out that included is the testimony of Joseph Aristone, a Vice President of Prett Reuben (ph.) who could not come back now, so we've included his written comments here for the record.
Sir, I need you to speak much louder and much more directly into the microphone.
I'm sorry, Mr. President. I was saying that included are the written 125 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL NO. 980238 comments of Joseph Aristone, the Vice President of Prett Reuben who would have liked to have presented testimony today but had to leave. However, his written comments have been passed out.
I thank you. We will make them a part of the record. Who will be first?
John Taxin. The goal of the Old City Special Services District is to create a well-managed and desirable environment in which to live work, visit, do business, and shop in. This will not be an easy task, but we must start somewhere, and that's why we are here today. We will begin our effort with increased presence of uniformed workers that will concentrate initially on street-cleaning and graffiti removal. The next step in our plan is to have our Executive Director work on bringing a police mini station into our neighborhood. In the years to come, or plan is to include the addition of community service 126 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL NO. 980238 representatives who will work as sidewalk concierges directing tourists and keeping the neighborhood informed of what's happening. We also hope to add street signage to the streetscape. Why is this important and why do we need this now. When I was first asked to attend a meeting to discuss the possibility of forming a special services district in Old City, I was very interested in the idea because of the positive effects such a service has had in Center City. Also, as a business opener and a resident, I felt it was my responsibility to get involved in my community for such a great cause. As time has gone by, I have seen the Center City District make great improvements and have seen other areas, such as South Street, Germantown Avenue, and City Avenue get established. Today, the Old City District has a great opportunity to see its dream come to fruition with the assistance of City government and the people who live and work in Old City. Now is the time to stand up and start assuming 127 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL NO. 980238 responsibility for our neighborhood. Thank you very much.
Thank you very much. Please identify yourself for the record.
My name is Chris Sayer. And I live at South Bank Street in Old City. I thank you, Mr. President, for the opportunity to meet with you and to urge the passage of this ordinance. More than six years ago, representatives of Old City Civic Association and the Old City Arts Association began meeting to explore the formation of a special services district. Several years ago, we were joined in these efforts by Historic East Market and leaders of the hospitality industry. During these years, people have given thousands of hours to make the Old City District a reality. Much assistance was received from government officials -- most notably here Council Frank DiCicco, Senator Vince Fumo, and Representative Marie Lederer. Also, we couldn't have gotten here without help from Center City 128 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL NO. 980238 District -- Paul Levy, Paul Stanke (ph.), Tony Pepitone (ph.). Old City is a unique neighborhood. It is a living community within America's most historic square mile. It has a thriving arts community and it is quickly becoming one of the City's premiere hospitality districts. Like it or not, we have been discovered. Philadelphia Magazine termed Old City the City's hottest new neighborhood. Player Magazine recently devoted a major article. Last month, the Washington Post travel section provided pages of coverage of Philadelphia and Old City. Utne Reader, a small but influential magazine has named us one of the ten most liveable neighborhoods. In short, people are finding out what many of us have known for some time -- that Old City is a great place to live and to work. But this new attention brings opportunities and problems. Traffic and parking will become an issue. Security problems in what has been one of the City's safest neighborhoods will grow. We will soon face additional pressures 129 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL NO. 980238 as major developments take place; both to our west, in Independence Park, and to our east, at Penn's Landing. These changes can and should be managed by us rather than us being managed by them. The formation of this district, this Old City Special Services District, is the first step. It is only a first step, however. It will provide additional levels of cleanup and security for Old City. It will not, and it cannot, solve all of the problems. Many of us who live or work within the District will need to be back to meet with you further down the line as we go forward. We all need -- and I think we all agree that we need to protect what is the most historic district in the City and is, in fact, the home, the start of the birthplace of our city and our nation, while still bringing new jobs and new development. People come from all over the country to visit Philadelphia because of the district and the buildings enshrined that dot our area. And I look forward to meeting with each of you to guarantee the success of the Old City 130 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL NO. 980238 District and to guarantee the further success of Old City.
My name is Rick Snyderman. I'm a business person in Old City. I am also a founding member of the Old City Arts Association and was involved in the development of the South Street Community many years ago as well. I see this as a logical next step in the development of the Center City as an economic engine for the City. And in order to do that, we have to have a coordinated program. And having a special services district like this will give us the tools in which to organize those kinds of programs for the future development of not only Old City, but I see Old City as one of the players in a larger drama that involves making the center of the city an economic engine that works for the entire city as an economic development program. In 1970, there were something like 200 or 220 residents in Old City. At the present time, there are more than 2500. At the present time, there are more than 400 active businesses in this area, which employ roughly 2500 people. The growth potential. Both for jobs 131 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL NO. 980238 and economic activity, for tax revenues, for economic development in general, and for cultural development as a way of using this area are enormous. And in order to do that kind of planning, we need this kind of a structure. So we think that this is the appropriate moment because we now have the kinds of resources and we have the kind of personnel and the kind of involvement of those people in that community to bring all of this together. So we thank you for this opportunity to present this bill to you and, we hope you will favorably rule on it. Thank you.
Good afternoon Mr. President and members of the committee. I am Joshua Grimes, Interim Executive of the Old City Special Services District. You've already heard several statements this afternoon of support for the Old City District. These statements from a small business owner, the proprietor of a world-renowned restaurant, a civic association head, and an executive of a major property owner and civic 132 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL NO. 980238 leader, whose testimony was submitted in writing, demonstrate the broad support throughout Old City for the special services district and for the services that it will provide. In fact, the directors of the district are particularly pleased that 86 percent of the commercial property owners in Old City expressed their support for our efforts during the district's recent opt-out period mandated by State law. With the growth in Old City's popularity, the services of a special services district will provide are essential. Old City remains a diverse business community, with restaurants doing business alongside warehouses, and hotels welcoming guests next to office buildings. Despite this diversity, there are several facts that ring true throughout the district. One, Old City welcomes more and more visitors each year. Two, Old City is becoming a more popular place for all types of businesses. Three, more and more people call Old City home every month. And, four, the development at Penn's 133 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL NO. 980238 Landing will only increase Old City's popularity even more. In creating the special services district, business leaders in Old City considered these facts and sought to create an agency that will provide important services to improve the business climate within reasonable budgetary means. We sought to ensure that the most urgent needs common to most business owners are met while remaining flexible enough to provide additional services in future years should the district's needs so warrant. It should be noted that the Old City District has a built-in guarantee to ensure that it operates efficiently and provides only the most essential services. By direction of the Board of Directors, the district may only assess a surcharge equal to 5 percent of the taxes assessed by the City and the School District on Old City's taxable commercial properties. This 5 percent figure is significantly lower than the surcharge currently paid by businesses belonging to the Center City 134 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL NO. 980238 District, the South Street Head House District, and probably all other special services districts in Philadelphia. By capping the surcharge at the 5 percent level, the Board sought to ensure that Old City's property owners will not be overly burdened by the district's costs. The district cannot consider a higher surcharge until its reauthorization in five years. The Old City District will be headed by a full-time and permanent executive director. This individual, who has yet to be hired, will be experienced in community and economic development. He or she will be responsible for implementing the district's operations and programming as well as overseeing all contractors. The executive director will also be accountable to Old City's businesses for the smooth provision of the district's services. While our budget for this position is not grandiose by any means, the many candidates that have already expressed an interest in heading the district prove that we will engage an individual with superior qualifications and 135 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL NO. 980238 skills. With this background, I'd like to briefly highlight some of the services that the district will provide. First is sidewalk- cleaning. The special services district will maintain Old City sidewalks through a seven-day-per-week program of sidewalk-cleaning, landscaping, graffiti removal from sidewalk, furniture, and building facades, and light bulb replacement on pedestrian lighting fixtures.
These services will be provided to the district through an agreement with Center City District, our neighbor to the west. Given the Center City's superlative track record in its home territory, we expect that Old City's outward appearance will improve dramatically in the weeks following the district's start-up. Daily sidewalk-cleaning and other maintenance activities will ensure that Old City retains a spruced-up look. Next is the security program. Another integral part of the Old City District will be enhanced security. As Old City becomes more and more popular with tourists, residents, shoppers, 136 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL NO. 980238 and office workers, we anticipate a related increase in crime, especially car break-ins and other crimes against property. Such incidents seems to be an inevitable part of life in popular parts of the City. To provide a permanent improved security presence, the district will work to enhance the current efforts of both the Philadelphia Police Department and the National Park Service Police within our boundaries. By better coordinating coverage of both commercial and residential areas, we hope to make Old City safer without demanding large amounts of additional resources. Over the long term, we plan to work with the police to establish a mini station within the district. Security will also enhanced by the constant presence of the district's uniformed maintenance workers and supervisors performing their sidewalk-cleaning duties. Merely by placing these individuals on the streets for several hours each day, we expect a significantly deterred graffiti, car break-ins, and other nuisance crimes. 137 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL NO. 980238 In subsequent years, the district hopes to provide community service representatives to serve as our ears and our eyes on the street and assist residents and visitors alike. This CSR component will be added to our program as the district's budget allows. Finally, we have a planning and development program. To further our goal of creating a safer, more attractive public environment, the district will work with local businesses and residents as well as a variety of government, private, and civic organizations to enhance the image of Old City. We plan to establish new informational signage, banners, transit shelter maps, and posters to enhance the attractiveness of the streetscape. The district will also support an ongoing marketing and promotional campaign directed towards historic and cultural tourism, shopping, and increased occupancy of commercial and residential buildings. This, in a nutshell, is the initial plan of the district. It is admittedly somewhat 138 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL NO. 980238 limited both in fiscal resources and scope. However, by starting with the most basic objective of making Old City clean and safe and augmenting our programming, once the district's initial tasks are underway, we expect that the district will become an essential player in the effort to make Old City a great place to live, shop, and do business. Before concluding, I want to thank Council Frank DiCicco for his leadership in helping to make the district a reality. I also want to thank the many other Members of Council whose support for this bill and the previous ordinance creating the district has been so important in our efforts. Mr. President, I ask for a suspension of the rules in this matter. My colleagues and I would be pleased to answer any questions you or any other members of the committee might have at this time.
Thank you very much. Are there any questions of any members of the committee? Are there any questions? (No questions.) 139 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - TIF BILLS
Thank you very much. There doesn't appear to be any questions.
With the permission of the committee, we will now go back to our other matters on our agenda. Is Mr. Peter Saligman in the room? Mr. Saligman? Mr. Cahill?
Mr. Cahill, would you please take the witness stand, please? (Mr. Cahill comes forward.)
I'm George Cahill. I'm a resident of Pier III. I'm also a businessman in the Penn's Landing area and I'm Democratic Committeeman for the 5th Ward.
I'm filling in for Peter Saligman, who stepped out for lunch. We didn't expect to be called this fast. So we're here to address concerns that we have related to the Penn's Landing project. 140 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - TIF BILLS Specifically Pier III will be the most impacted by the planned project if approved. So we have concerns that we would like to address today to the developer and to Council to get on record. (Peter Saligman comes forward.)
This is Peter Saligman, my colleague, and also a resident of Pier III.
I'm going to let Peter talk about the issues first, and then I'll address the parking and the traffic issues.
That's fine. Mr. Saligman, please identify yourself for the record .
Okay. Thank you, Mr. President. My name is Peter Saligman, S-A-L-I-G-M-A-N. I'm a resident of Pier III and also head up the Pier III Committee which has been interacting with the Councilman and the DeBartolo Group. 141 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - TIF BILLS As George said, I think Pier III is the most impacted by this development. As you can see on the model, we are in fact the only residential development shown on the model. Which shows you how close we are. I guess, just to summarize Pier III's concerns and what we would like to do, because we are the most directly impacted by this development, we would like to enter into and have discussed with the representatives of the DeBartolo Group -- enter into a developer's agreement whereby we actually put in writing some of the things that we've talked about: issues concerning traffic, noise, security, trash. And of also concern is the facade of the garage which will face Pier III. These are all issues that are of concern to Pier III. Also, I think Mr. Simon touched on this was -- of concern is that a future use of this site does not become a gambling casino. And I think Mr. Simon had indicated that it would not. You know, again, we're just looking for some assurances. And our hope is -- we've talked about a 142 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - TIF BILLS developer's agreement throughout this yearlong process of all the meetings, and we've been told yes, yes, we'll do it, we'll enter into it. It's a year later, we're here before City Council, and preparing to vote, and we still have no 7 agreement. So I guess we would look to Council or to somebody to enforce that had and to say, Hey, will you guys really enter into this agreement to address some of these concerns of your closest neighbor?
My concern, in addition to Peter's, are the fact that -- and I would like to step up to the model for a minute to point this out to City Council, if I may.
This is Mr. Cahill for the record and for those Council Members who may not have been here.
My concerns are as you travel south on Columbus Boulevard to Market 143 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - TIF BILLS Street, there's only one way to access Pier III and Pier V; and that is by making a U-turn at Market Street. If this project comes to pass, the traffic will be exiting out of this very intersection that I'm talking about. We will virtually -- when I say "we," residents of Pier III and Pier V, in my opinion, will be virtually land-locked out of our units, our homes because of traffic congestion entering and exiting into this project. My question to -- and we've talked about this in the past -- Councilman DiCicco is how will we be assured that we as residents of Pier III and Pier V will not be in essence land-locked from our homes? That's my question.
Thank you, Mr. President. I think we have discussed during the past year, and I think, for the record, it's important to note that in addition to the working 144 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - TIF BILLS committee that is made up of the ten various civic associations, we had a separate subcommittee, of which there are two or three by now, to deal with the issues pertinent to the Pier III residents because they are, in fact, the most immediate neighbors. And someone from Penn's Landing or maybe Mr. Dick Orth could fill us in a little more on this. We have been talking about possibly sliding back the area of ingress and egress going from south -- from north to south on Columbus Boulevard where you now make that turn to make a U-turn or make a left-hand turn going east across Columbus Boulevard. I think preliminary plans call for sliding that further north, which will give the residents of Pier III and Pier V better access to your facilities, away from the project. And I'm not sure what the length of that is, but we already talked about that. And before Mr. Dick Orth does his presentation on the traffic control study and how it affects Pier III and Pier V, I think it's also important to understand, the reason we haven't 145 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - TIF BILLS reduced all of this to writing is, this project, as you both know, has continually been changing -- the size and scope of it, the areas of ingress and egress. Although we are pretty certain they're going to be where they are, with the exception of the viaducts, this thing is constantly changing. And I don't think it would be fair to any of us to enter into an agreement until we have it nailed down specifically as to what the esthetics of the building are 'cause that is of great concern to you. One of my first comments to Mel Simon a year ago was, If I live in Pier III and I live at the southern side of Pier III and I look out my window, what do I see? This is important to you, and we've been sensitive to that. And you're a part of that separate committee that are going to deal with the issues of esthetics. We've even talked about, when we talk about trash, we even talked about what we will be able to do to maintain the area of waterway between the proposed project and Penn's Landing when trash may blow off the roof of this 146 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - TIF BILLS entertainment center because people are up there having a soda, whatever. And who will maintain the waterway? We've talked about some of those things. And I think we're going to have some significant solutions to that and we're going to reduce all of that to writing at the proper time, and I think we're getting close to that. We have a Traffic Study Committee, which is another subcommittee that I created to deal with the issues related to traffic. And people from your -- I'm not sure if it was Mr. Cahill or Pete, one of you, I think, are on that committee. We had a meeting scheduled for the 10th of June. This will be ongoing during the construction phase of the project and even when the project is completed. I want to keep a committee in place as long, as I'm your Councilperson, that will deal with issues related to this project forever and a day concern. And I pledged that to you at the other meetings, and I'm on record today to continue to work with you. And I understand your concerns. I've 147 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - TIF BILLS never tried to dismiss the concern that there will be an increase of traffic and there will be a need for additional parking, but we're working to accommodate some of those problems. For the record, in addition to the 7 to 2500 parking spaces on site, Penn's Landing is 8 now managing two additional parking venues -- one 9 to the north, which was the former police 10 impoundment lot, and the South Street pedestrian 11 bridge parking lot on Columbus Boulevard is now 12 under the control of Penn's Landing.
We were able 13 to get that parking lot down at South Street out 14 of the management control of the Parking Authority 15 and in the control of Penn's Landing. 16 And the reason for that, so my 17 colleagues and everyone understands, we were 18 trying to find additional off-site parking for the 19 project. And what this will mean to the project 20 is we will be able to create a shuttle system 21 along Columbus Boulevard to take people from the 22 other parking venues to and from the Penn's 23 Landing Entertainment Center, all in the effort to 24 eliminate some of the impact of vehicular traffic on a daily basis. 148 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - TIF BILLS So my answer to you is, and I think, with the President's permission, Mr. Dick Orth, from Orth Rogers, the traffic consultant, could speak to the issue of you being possibly land-locked and the issue of the area of ingress. And I see my colleague Councilwoman Clark wants me to yield. I will yield.
One, because I have to go. And as much as I'd like to hear your presentation, I'm not going to be able to. I think that when reasonable efforts have been made to accommodate a community, that community is going to have to realize in the final analysis that it will not be the same community as before. There will --
I understand that. There are going to be some changes that everybody has to make in the interest of progress. Now, we're having these hearings to determine whether this is indeed progress. If it is, then all of us are going to be different. You, because you live closest, are going to 149 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - TIF BILLS perhaps have to put up with more traffic. Now, there are some options available to you, okay. We hope you don't exercise them, all right? But part of going to what had to be an attractive area should also have put you on notice that one day you were going to get some more neighbors. And this is the one day. We owe you a sensitive hearing, we owe you the best reasonable efforts to minimize the disastrous impact on your life-style as you have come to know it. But it is unfair to you to paint you a pretty picture that's not real. No matter how many parking lots we put in, no matter how many over-the-street pedestrian bridges, you are going to deal with additional parking, additional traffic, additional smog, additional noise. It is, quote, the price of progress.
I think I'm speaking for myself as a resident of Pier III. I just want to be able to get into my home.
You know, I have concerns 150 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - TIF BILLS about all the other issues, but I want to be able to come home at night and get into my home.
And I think you have a right to do that, but I need to tell you that you will probably have to work a little harder. It will probably take you a little longer to get into your home at night. Now, if you're willing to take that as a fair representation of a government that cares about you, we've got the basis of an agreement. But if you think that we can paint you a Pollyanna picture that says, Yeah, this is good and we want it but it's not going to change your life-style, that's not fair. I want it to be on record as having told you that that's not real.
The other issue I wanted to address before Mr. Dick Orth gives his presentation is that we have already worked out an agreement -- I have already worked out an agreement. It's not in writing, but it will be 151 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - TIF BILLS part of a written agreement with Penn's Landing Corporation. We'll assume the maintenance responsibility for the common or public area of going from the north end of the project all the way down as far north as Pier III to maintain the sidewalk and keep that clean. That will be a part of the regular daily maintenance in addition to what they will be doing at their facilities that exist today and the future facility of Penn's Landing. Thank you.
I understand what you're saying and I agree with you that it is the price of progress and the price of change. And I guess what we at Pier III are simply looking for is a written agreement, as has been indicated to us, that we could enter into -- that they would enter with us between the Pier III Homeowners Association and the Simon DeBartolo Group, which would be separate from any written lease that exists between the two parties, that simply puts in writing a lot of things that these committees and subcommittees are discussing. 152 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - TIF BILLS Because we leave the committee meetings and we all feel pretty good that here's how we'll deal with the trash, here's how we'll deal with this and that, understanding that there will be an increase. We just want to make sure that on a going-forward basis that people will change -- you know, everybody will be different parties here but that what we were promised and what we were told is documented and is of record and will happen that way. And that's -- and it's not that we -- if I could live with only the players that are involved today, that would be fine. But as time moves on, this is a permanent thing. That's the concern of Pier III, that we just want to make sure that everything is and stays as it's proposed.
Well, it is very difficult to reduce to writing a proposed project. And when you do, you build in a problem. Why don't -- essentially, this project works only because of faith. Now, I ain't big on faith; you've heard me say what I think about 153 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - TIF BILLS faith. But to have this project have to work around a written promise to you this early in it would be to shackle it to the point that the promise wouldn't be worth very much. What you have to commit yourself to is constantly watching and monitoring it. And even if you had it in writing, still have to constantly monitor and watch it. But I would encourage my colleague not to commit to writing something that is as tenuous as this must be at this time. You have our commitment on this public record that we have heard your concerns, that we are not your enemies; we are trying to accommodate them. But I don't think that it's clearly understood well enough to put it in writing, and I would be against putting it in writing at this time beyond what we've said.
Right. At this time, I can understand that and certainly agree with that, but I guess we would look to at some point, once some of these committees work through and finalize how some one these issues will be dealt with, and once we sit down and agree on it after the process, at that point, do you think it would be 154 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - TIF BILLS appropriate to reduce it to writing?
I think that at some point, there will be a written document. But as the Councilwoman indicated, because this is all new to us and things will constantly be changing, eventual change, what I would like to see is some early announcement as to a major event that may be taking place, where the community is made aware of that 30 days before, similar to what we do at the stadium, when the Eagles and the hockey team -- the Flyers and maybe another event is taking place, people down at the stadium, who live in the stadium area, are given advance notice so that we can prepare for what will be expected will happen. But I don't have the answer to those today. I can only tell you that certain things will be in writing. And that's why I want to keep a working committee in place at all times, to deal with issues as they come about. And you have my commitment on that. And, again, I think from Day One, you know I supported the project, there was never any hidden agenda on my part. Even though there's a lot of disagreement from the community about whether this 155 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - TIF BILLS thing should happen or not, I've committed to one thing and I will live up to that commitment, you know, going forward, that you will always be a part of the process -- at least as long as I represent the district.
I should just add, for the record, that the Councilman has been very up-front. I mean, I really applaud the way that he has handled the whole thing. He brought all the community groups in from the very beginning and has kept us involved, and I applaud and commend that. I think that's been a great thing. Even though we don't sometimes see eye to eye on how it should happen, he's --
I think, Mr. President, Mr. Orth, who's been the consultant on the traffic study, might be able to answer their specific questions related to --
Mr. Orth, please 156 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - TIF BILLS identify yourself for the record and proceed.
Yes. My name is Richard Orth. I'm a principal of Orth Rogers & Associates. We're traffic engineers and transportation planners, with offices --
I understand, sir. I was going to do that. I think -- and I'm not sure I've got it right. I think Mr. Cahill has raised the point that currently the residents of Pier III coming southbound on Columbus Boulevard now use the traffic signal at Market Street to be able to make a U-turn to travel back northbound and then to turn into Pier III. As Councilman DiCicco has pointed out, it's the intent of the plan to shift that intersection a little further north -- the exact distance, we're not certain of, but it goes somewhat further north, but the movement -- there 157 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - TIF BILLS is no reason that I know of that that movement, the U-turn movement, could still not be permitted in the future. There will be more traffic making the move because there will be more traffic turning into the garage. But also, at this point, I don't see any reason why that U-turn movement that takes place today would not still be permitted in the future. And that's something, again, that can certainly continue to be worked out. It's a valid question. Councilman DiCicco's comment about the ongoing traffic committee is the kind of thing we will certainly keep at the top of the list. And, again, at this point, I see no 17 reason why that movement couldn't be maintained.
Isn't it fair to say, though, that in addition to Pier III and Pier V residents, there may be some other commercial establishments that have an interest in people being able to go south and then come north?
There may be some 158 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - TIF BILLS other -- I only say that to point out -- actually, I'm familiar with that turn, and it -- it just -- I think it underlines Councilman DiCicco's point that there really is work to be done on some of these problems, and it's not an unimportant detail that you are interested in and that the committee will certainly follow and we will, of course, support the District Councilperson. It's primarily his responsibility. But I think you have made your point here, and we appreciate your coming. And, you know, we will be mindful of the need to consider your specific problems in all of this.
Doris Casper, Miss Casper? She's here. I see her -- I see someone who, I believe, has identified herself as being 159 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - TIF BILLS Miss Casper.
My name is Doris Casper. And I live at Society Hill Towers, north building I formerly had a townhouse in Queen Village, which, unfortunately, I had to get out of because I couldn't walk the stairs anymore. I am very happy living at the Towers; I am unhappy with what's going on at Penn's Landing. Number one, I am against the hotel because of the traffic it's going to bring and because I object to $10 million of HUD money required for it. And my idea was that the hotel belonged at Market Street, where the DeBartolo project is now being proposed. And at first, I was against it, but I went to the town meeting with the Old City Civic Center. And there, they expressed their very great displeasure with the proposed restaurants 20 that were going to be in the DeBartolo project. By the time the DeBartolo people presented their presentation to the Society Hill Civic Association, which was held at Pennsylvania Hospital, they had decreased the 20 restaurants to 8, which they said would be very large 160 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - TIF BILLS family-oriented restaurants, which sounded a lot better and seemed to be less competitive with the Old City restaurants. It seems to me that the DeBartolo people are accommodating themselves to community interests and so I've come to think that I probably support it. My only concern is that the Riverview is developing a family-oriented project. They're now we're going to have, I don't know, movies, and they're going to put something 12 across the road. 13 What upset me was, at the Society Hill 14 Civic Association, we were told that no City money 15 would go into DeBartolo. And then I see in the 16 paper that 60 million, or whatever it was, of City 17 money is going to go. 18 And so I came today to find out what that meant, and I discovered that TIF money is different than City money. And I presume that we'd get it back, if I understand it correctly. So, by and large, I think I am now for the DeBartolo. I just hope we don't have two family-oriented entertainment centers one mile apart Market Street and Riverview. 161 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - TIF BILLS But I'm still very much against the hotel -- not because it's going to block my view, I don't have that view, but because it's going to make Dock Street a major thoroughfare. I don't care what the person who was in charge of the road projections says, cabs are going to go in and out of that hotel, straight up and down Dock Street, which is going to become a main street leading either to Walnut or to Spruce. And I think the amount of traffic it's going to bring to our community, on top of DeBartolo and on top of South Street, is going to be absolutely untenable. Thank you.
I just want you to know you're ahead of me. You apparently know the difference between City money and TIF money. But I must tell you that as of now, I do not know the difference, so you have some company. I'm hoping that this will become more clarified to me as --
It sounds to me like TIF money we get back. 162 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - TIF BILLS
Ladies and gentlemen and Members of City Council, my name is Bertha Barksdale. I'm here on behalf of ACORN and the Living Wage Campaign. As many of you know, the Living Wage Campaign is a grass-roots effort of 50 organizations who believe that corporations should be accountable to the City of Philadelphia. Bill No. 970586 would require companies that want our tax dollars to pay a living wage with benefits, and I hope you will support the bill on June 3rd. I am a low-income person. And when I read about the amount of money these companies are getting, I was appalled, and I would have made preference of allocation of monies to schools, payment of health care, to hire more police, or to 163 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - TIF BILLS get jobs for the neighborhood. Instead, we are here today because this money is going to corporations that claim they are bringing jobs to the City. And you, as Members of City Council, must decide if these companies are good for the City or not. My insight of the economic development plan for the City does not work. Let me say it again -- it does not work. Homelessness and joblessness are important issues that are evident. But, to my understanding, this project would supply X-amount of jobs. And I do commend them for this. As Members of Council, what I am asking from you is this: Before you say yes or no, demand to know from these companies what are they paying? Are they paying a living wage? Are you paying health care? There are already 165,000 jobs that pay below $7.50 an hour in Philadelphia. We don't need 100 more of them. Before my tax dollars go to another company, make sure this company is giving back to Philadelphia. Don't sell us out. It's our future. Make companies pay a living wage. 164 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - TIF BILLS Thank you.
I would like the record to reflect that there was previously- scheduled a hearing of the Council's Committee on Commerce and Economic Development. Miss Barks was here for that hearing. And I would like for most of her testimony to be made available to the Council Committee on Commerce and Economic Development, which is hearing the bill that Miss Barksdale spoke to. We appreciate her coming here and her patience and would like to make sure that her testimony is a part of the appropriate record. At this time, the Chair recognizes Councilman Nutter who would like to make an announcement.
Thank you, Mr. President, and I will follow up as Committee Chair on Commerce and Economic Development on making sure that that testimony gets over to where it's supposed to be. Mr. President, there was an 165 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - TIF BILLS announcement made earlier about a continuation of a previously-recessed hearing on Commerce and Economic Development regarding the bill that has generally been referred to as "the living wage bill." It had originally been recessed till today, at o'clock. There was an earlier 9 announcement that it was being recessed until June 10 3rd, at 2 o'clock. There has been a change. That bill and its hearing has now been recessed to the call of the Chair. The various parties have a fair amount of work to do on the bills, and we're going to take some time to make sure they get squared away properly. Thank you very much.
Thank you very much. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Fernandez.
Thank you, Mr. President. We're going back to the --
We are now going back to the testimony on the various TIFs that are currently in front of the Council unless -- and I really would like to get Mr. Steven Zwick, an 166 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - TIF BILLS architect. Could we get him? I think he's a member of the general public who wishes to testify.
I just had a couple of questions on the Penn's Landing one, which I wanted to get in.
We'll get Mr. Hankowsky and then we'll get right back to it.
Excuse me, Council President Street, I'm also a member of the AIA Urban Affairs Committee. Don't represent them, but I do take part in that organization. Now, I just want to say from the outset, I'm not against development; I'm against -- oh, I'm sorry. For the record, my name is Steven Zwick. I own my own practice which is called Z Texture P.C. and I formerly worked at a firm called J. Curilla (ph.) Architects, who currently is expanding the Riverview Complex. I did the original design for the Riverview Complex. In addition, I've designed a number of the more successful entertainment venues along riverfront, including the Maui Club, the Engine 46 167 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - TIF BILLS Steak House. And I also currently do work for Electric Factory. I designed the Electric Factory and also the renovation of the TLA, which has just occurred. In addition, the Philly Rock at the airport. In that context, I've also worked in bringing an $80 million+ project to my home town of Evanston, which is a project that includes 130,000 square feet of retail and --
Okay. In that context, I think what Mr. Simon said is correct. Philadelphia is underdeveloped, and I'm glad that he's willing to come here and spend the money. I have some queries or questions about why he was the exclusive developer, thus giving away any negotiating power if there had been an RFP issue process. Consequently, I don't disagree with the TIF; I disagree with the amount of the TIF almost being 36 percent of the total cost of the project. 168 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - TIF BILLS If there had been an RFP process, if it had been negotiated, I think the terms could have been more favorable. As for the specifics of the design of this project, I think the designer has missed a lot of the cues of what already exceeds at the riverfront. Specifically looking at the garage -- I mean, I wrote a short letter. And in this letter to my buddy, Ed, I cited these flaws with what I feel are design flaws of the project. First, 50 percent of the river frontage is the back of a parking garage. Second, the placement of the outdoor public space on the roof of the structure disconnects people from the river. As an analogy, compare a roof garden to sitting in Rittenhouse Square. Three, the promenade along the river is not developed. This quay is juxtaposed next to -- it's either a 35- or 55-foot wall that detracts from the pedestrian experience. Four, the elevations presented especially along the river are monotonous and are 169 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - TIF BILLS scaled to be perceived from New Jersey and afar; they are not scaled for the pedestrian and, thus, will not be friendly. As are the existing peers are not scaled for the pedestrian, as walking down Chestnut or Walnut is scaled for the pedestrian. The campo is inward-looking. The retail follows a path to the quote/unquote, campo not to the river. , movies are already split among the existing theaters. Plus patrons want to go where the movie they want to see is being shown. Consequently, with the product split, there is no assurance that a movie theater at this location will be the draw anticipated. Furthermore, where would you go to a movie; one that offered free parking or one that you had to pay an additional $5 for parking? Again, the draw is the river. I don't think the designers who designed this project have spent enough time down there and understood what the actual draw is. 170 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - TIF BILLS And, also, in terms of creating traffic from the promenade, you would want to design what I call "draws" at both ends of the promenade -- potentially a hotel at one side and an entertainment attraction at the other end. And that would create traffic to and from along the riverfront and create a strolling process. Consequently, my unfortunate conclusions as to what is being proposed with this design is that it is an approximation of a suburban mall placed in an urban location, that the users of this facility may not necessarily spill over into the nearby areas, and those nearby areas already are a draw in and of themselves and are successful. The concentration of exclusive retailers and restaurants that may locate in this facility may be detrimental to the fabric of the City where such retailers would be better placed on Chestnut, on Walnut, on Market Street. And, consequently, I don't think the project in its current form -- not that it can't be as successful as it potentially can be. And let me emphasize this. I think if there's a 171 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - TIF BILLS little bit more thought -- well, actually, a lot more thought and input from people who live in this community or designers in this community interacting with the, you know, project's architect, that we can have a very successful project there. So, therefore, as opposed to my initial reaction, which Mr. DiCicco had to withstand, I am not against it; I am for it but, I want to say it developed properly.
And if this means opening up the design process or bringing in the likes of (unintelligible) a consultant to the City who worked with -- who's doing the project in Evanston as a consultant -- I think he has designed projects in Denver, Portland, in the Philippines, and several other locations that I can't call to mind right now. He's based in Berkley, California. So not only do I question the amount of the TIF money that's used, but I do have a lot of problems with the development and the amount of TIF money that's being proposed today. Thank you.
Thank you very much. 172 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - TIF BILLS
The Chair recognizes -- reluctantly recognizes Councilman DiCicco.
Thank you. And you and I did have -- you attended the Queen's Village presentation last week.
I currently reside on South 16th Street, near Rittenhouse Square, but I don't think that in any way --
No, that's not my question. I just wanted to know where you reside. You had indicated -- Thursday evening, you showed me a number of projects that you had designed. And today you indicated -- described a few of those places -- Maui, Engine 56.
Correct, the original Riverview. 173 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - TIF BILLS
Are they projects that are owned and developed by Mr. Blattstein (ph.)?
The Blattstein family. I do not -- I will currently not do any work for Bart because me and Bart do not get along, and I have no allegiance to Bart. And I am not here on Bart's behalf, if that's what your inference is.
No, I just wanted -- I was curious as to -- I noticed most of the pieces that you showed me, the developments you've showed me are --
And I know that Mr. Blattstein has had an interest in --
Mr. Zwick, Mr. Zwick, we don't -- 174 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - TIF BILLS
This is a hearing on Penn's Landing development, nothing else.
Thank you, thank you very much. Are there any other members of the general public who are here who wish to testify on any of the bills that are in front of us, any member of the general public: I want to get the members of the general public on the record before we go back to Mr. Hankowsky and the professional staff.
Mr. President, I'm Robert Fina with PIDC, but I have testimony that was provided by E.F. Muronda on the Cecil B. Moore Avenue TIF. It's in writing, and there are a 175 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - TIF BILLS number of copies, if I could just present that to you for the record.
Is there any other member of the general public that's here? Going once, going twice. Any member of the general public? I see a distinguished gentleman approaching the Chair and would appreciate if you would identify yourself for the record, sir. He is now about to be joined by another man who himself is dapperly dressed in a three-piece suit.
Yes, I'm Jonathon Rubin of R.J. Cousins Contracting and Vice President of the Contractors and Small Business Association. My company, R.J. Cousins, performs demolition work and is located at 1633 West Bristol Street, in Philadelphia. We currently employ 16 people, of which are minority. And without us, I feel they would be left out of the (unintelligible). We have only been in business for two years. One of my concerns and why I'm speaking 176 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - TIF BILLS here is the contract and opportunities for Section 3 and small businesses in the City of Philadelphia. It is my understanding that whenever HUD money and the 108 is involved, that there is a federal mandate which requires 7 percent of the contracting dollars to go to 8 Section 3 City small businesses. Me, along with 9 Councilman Cohen, I'm still kind of unclear on the 10 TIF and exactly the 108 money in terms of the entertainment center. But, basically, I was here to voice my concern in terms of the PIDC administering the 108 funds and the lack thereof. And I just wanted to state for the record that Section 3 businesses were overlooked. I've heard my minority women, DBEs but nowhere have I heard Section 3 businesses mentioned throughout the whole course of the day.
My name is David Rodgers. And I am President of the Contractors and Small Businesses Association. And I am here in regards to that same matter. And it is to my understanding that PIDC 177 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - TIF BILLS was to administer, but from the hearings that I've been listening to thus far, there will be no CDBG funds funded for the Penn's Landing project. However, PIDC has a poor track record in implementing requirements for utilization of City Section 3 small businesses controlled by lower-income persons. PIDC has no enforcement of federal requirements and no staff to enforce this rule or these rules. We recommend that the City should provide assurances that the City Section 3 small businesses shall receive appropriate shares of contracts. All bids and contract should include requirements to utilize City Section 3 small businesses and independent organization such as the Contractors and Small Businesses Association should monitor the bidding and contracts to ensure the implementation of the federal law and City Section 3 small businesses. And with that, we'd just like to also say that on behalf of our membership, we haven't heard anything in regards to this Section 3 mentioned here today, as Mr. Rubin had made mention of. There was mention of minority- and 178 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - TIF BILLS women-owned businesses but nothing in regard to Section 3, and that's a major concern of ours that we need to address with the City of Philadelphia.
Thank you very much. I'm familiar -- maybe not quite as familiar as you are, but I'm familiar with the problem that's raised by the Section 3 Program. And I have asked Joyce Wilkerson and Marla Hamilton in my office to work with PIDC, developers, and other people to make sure your that your concerns are covered. As you know, the details of the minority participation in employment and contracting and the like are all being worked out. I would appreciate very much if you could be sure to leave -- be sure to leave your names and phone numbers with Miss Diaz here so that, you know, you can be among the groups that have an opportunity to participate, you know, in the economic development that's going on here and other places. Its refreshing to have you here. So often people who have an interest -- and you 179 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - TIF BILLS certainly have a stake in all of this. Too often, we only hear from you long after a public hearing, long after things are done. But, hopefully, we can take care of your concerns. You have our commitment that we will look into it and make sure we can do what we can do.
Yes. We thank you very much, Council President. And your statement is very well received. And it is very true that these things have occurred long after the fact. However, we intend to make an abrupt change to that as we go along.
Is there anyone else here from the general public? (No response.)
Seeing no one, Mr. Hankowsky, I think it's time for you and your team. 180 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - TIF BILLS The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Fernandez.
Thank you, Mr. President. I have two major questions. One was regarding the jobs that are estimated to be created. And the background information says there's an estimated 1300 -- no -- yeah, 1350 full-time equivalence. Could you explain what this "full-time equivalence" means?
Yes. As you know, in certain situations, some things may be staffed with part-time people. For example, the garage might be active -- more active on a Saturday night than it would be on a Wednesday morning. And, therefore, there may be people who would -- extra people who would be employed in that function during that time frame. So what we looked at was the equivalency of a full work week and how many full work weeks of jobs are created. And that's 1350. There well might be more people employed because some of those jobs might be part-time in nature. 181 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - TIF BILLS A restaurant, for example, might have waiters on a Saturday night that aren't full-time because you're just busier then.
I believe I shared my comments at a separate hearing on that subject.
You know, certainly, this full-time equivalency does raise questions about what pay scales might be and benefits and stuff like that.
But I don't think that we want to go into that for five hours right now.
I think not. And I think it was seven since I was here the whole hearing.
One other thing I wanted to clarify. In the background materials, you talk about a lot of the other traffic improvements that would be made, and there's always cost involved. Could you, for the record, clarify if 182 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - TIF BILLS there are any City capital dollars going into these traffic improvements?
There are none. You might excuse me, I apologize. In the project plan, you might note that the TIF district, in fact, is slightly larger than the area that Simon DeBartolo is going to actually lease, that actually goes out into the street to make use of the TIF dollars eligible. So, for example, the traffic lights, stop lights, etc., that were discussed just a moment ago with regard to Pier III and moving them and all of that is part of the cost of the project. It's termed in the budget "off-site." And it's funded from the TIF proceeds. And to be very specific to your question, we are using no City capital dollars. My only amendment to that is the project underway today that's dealing with the Market Street ramp, that was a previously-approved City capital project, that's happening. But the TIF project we've described today is not using City capital dollars.
And do you 183 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - TIF BILLS have an estimate of the cost of these traffic improvements, even though they're covered by the TIF?
Yes, we do. The off-site improvements are $4.6 million, which includes the ramp that will take you from Christopher Columbus up to the viaduct, the new viaduct, the new traffic intersections.
So if someone were trying to make a favorable case for this TIF, you could argue then that not even City capital dollars are used for these traffic improvements, even though that would be customary with a lot of other projects.
And, lastly, I think we had in some of the briefing discussions issues about engaging SEPTA actively in dealing with some of the traffic potential and congestion down there, and I would just like the record to note that I hope there will be serious discussions about whether it is attractive, tourist trolleys going up and down Delaware Avenue and whatever. I 184 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - TIF BILLS think dealing with traffic down there to try to reduce car congestion as much as possible would be great for the whole waterfront.
Yeah. I'll just note for the record, Councilwoman, that SEPTA has been involved in the planning process from the beginning. We've made allowances, for example, that in the new viaduct, that there would be pull-off lanes so that, for example, the buses can easily drop off people, the loop buses that work Center City, the Phlash, or should there be some subsequent modes. And I believe -- I'll do this simply because I believe the gentleman from SEPTA has left, but he had indicated that this was the most transit-accessible project he's seen in 15 years. And, as we know, we have the Market subway stop right at the end of Market Street, which would now come across this bridge and bring you right into the project.
When SEPTA was brought in, it was not just to deal specifically with Penn's Landing, but to deal with the entire area, as what we referred to as the "Historical 185 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - TIF BILLS District," everything east of Market Street, maybe as far south as Washington Avenue, as far north as probably Vine Street or thereabouts, to talk about how we move people around, as we begin to continue to attract people to the City -- conventioneers and people to the Simon DeBartolo project, to the historical district, how to better utilize public transportation and move people in and about the area, to hopefully reduce some of impact that we would normally anticipate with visitors coming by car. Once they park their car, how do we get them to move from one venue to another? And that was part of what the agreement was with Mr. Simon and the Simon DeBartolo Group and Penn's Landing Corporation, that we needed to include public transportation, and SEPTA has been at all but one of the meetings, I think the first meeting that I convened in June. We didn't even think about it until some time thereafter. But at every other meeting, they've been present. They don't have a plan in place, but they are working with us to develop a plan. And the Streets Department traffic engineer people, they're a part of this 186 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - TIF BILLS transportation committee to talk about what we may need to do in terms of the impact on neighboring communities in Society Hill, when you come off of Columbus Boulevard onto Spruce Street, Walnut Street, how to utilize the traffic signals. Do we need to change directions, do we need the increase? And Mr. Orth, Dick Orth, spoke at all of our meetings. We may even need to, just by simply changing some of the traffic devices, the timing on them to get people to move quicker through the area.
But I'm also thinking, like you say, once you get people there, say they're parked, my dream would be that there would be maybe built into the parking cost then a transit pass so that it would basically be free to keep moving around, 'cause my sense would be that the more people can move around without having to walk huge, long distances, they're more likely to move around to different things and spend money in a whole lot of different ways.
Well, that's part of the whole thing, incorporating shuttle 187 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - TIF BILLS systems. And, you know, it's all in the designing stage right now. And at some point, I think we'll have something that will be really futuristic as far as what we're used to having in Philadelphia in moving people around.
I think, as we know, Penn's Landing does own a series of rubber-wheeled trolleys that now operate seasonally. But in this plan, long-term, they would operate year round. Because now, you're right, we would have this anchor that would bring people year-round and would move people be up and down the waterfront.
Those are now -- those are owned by Penn's Landing Corporation.
I think that's where we have to move. Because sometimes, say, if you have a family of five, and you say, Oh, you know, it's an extra five bucks. But if it's free, it's sometimes a real attraction. 188 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - TIF BILLS
Right. The last question was in the -- when the feds passed the transportation bill last week, I noticed on the list was the money for the tram, the Philadelphia-to-Camden tram, and it's also mentioned in your proposal. From what you know of what you've been working on here and now that there's some federal dollars, what's your estimate of the financing and do you have a sense of a time line of when this tram might become a reality?
Right. The Delaware River Port Authority has engaged an engineering firm, Fredrick R. Harris. They've engaged them in a series of phases. They completed Phase I, which is an initial analysis of what might be doable now. They are now in Phase II, which was to do more detailed cost estimates of the physical construction costs, as well as the financial feasibility, what would you have to charge for the tram to make it pay for itself operationally. And they're to conclude that work 189 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - TIF BILLS somewhere, I believe, in the next 30 days, fairly shortly. The indications are that the cost of constructing the tram on both sides of the river is probably somewhere in the order of magnitude of, say, to $25 million, somewhere in that 8 order of magnitude. That the Delaware River Port 9 Authority, actually when they approved the 10 Kvaerner transaction, also basically agreed that 11 they would look at putting in up to 15 million for 12 a tram. 13 If you add the 8 that you noticed in 14 the ISTE bill, you're at 23, which looks like, if 15 the numbers are in that 20-to-25 range, that there 16 is the funding resources that would equal the 17 cost. I can't sit here and tell you it's a done 18 deal, but it's clearly in striking distance. 19 The timing -- and there been a series 20 of meetings DRPA and the Simon DeBartolo organization, Penn's Landing looking at literally where would you land it, where would you drop columns so that it could be integrated with this project? I think the hope of everybody is that 190 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - TIF BILLS you would be building both projects simultaneously, in part, because it would very difficult to come back later and add the tram. So you might see construction of the tram also occurring in calendar '99 as well as the construction of this project.
That would be one of the fastest projects. When I first heard of the tram I thought, Oh, my God, you know, I hope I live long enough.
I agree with that. It would be one of the fastest projects.
Mr. Hankowsky, how many years have you been coming to City Council on various projects?
Watch yourself, Mr. Hankowsky. The lawyer in him is coming out.
I can see it, I can see it. I've been coming to City Council 15 years. 191 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - TIF BILLS
For years. You have seniority in presenting these programs. I have the general sense that if -- and I think I've been at many of these hearings, maybe most of them, maybe even all of them.
And I have a sense 9 that if I added up all the job projections of all 10 the various proposals you gave, which Council 11 approved, that Philadelphia would be bursting at 12 the seams with respect to population -- that's a 13 comment, you don't have to answer that one. 14 But have you ever made an analysis of 15 the programs that went ahead? I don't mean the programs, you know, that faltered along the way and never got built, like any number of them, but those that went ahead. Has there ever been any analysis by PIDC as to what the actual job production was?
There have been different analyses, to answer that question in part, and I do want to in fact comment on your comment.
Okay, very good. 192 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - TIF BILLS
Because it is integrative. We all know that the City has lost thousands, tens of thousands of jobs.
Now, if we look back 30 years, hundreds of thousands. And I think we must all be cognizant of the fact that what is causing that to happen. And there are a variety of factors; some are corporate behavior, some are the cost of doing business here, the environment in certain areas, and whatever. And the City's economy is a vibrant, dynamic engine. So, in effect you're right. Last year, we gained 1300 jobs. That does not mean that every job stayed static and we added 1300 jobs. It may mean we lost 9,000 and gained 10,300. Every year, there's an addition and a subtraction. And over the years, for example, the programs where we're directly lending money, money that you have provided us or provided to us through the federal government to grant to the City, there are job reports that companies are required to file over a three-year period. 193 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - TIF BILLS I can't tell you honestly I've kept track of the first deal we did 40 years ago, but we do keep track over somewhere between a three- and five-year period of projects have financed to see whether they have created the jobs they were supposed to or they did not. I don't have that information with me today, but I'd be happy to provide it. And what it shows us is that some companies didn't do what they said they were going to do. They went out of business, they made bad business decisions, their business went under. But overall, if you take the collection, the portfolio of transactions, we have exceeded the number of jobs we said would get created by those projects. There's also been particular studies. For example, the Convention Center, which was why I was here 15 years ago for the first time. You know, there's now been a look back that has been done by the Pennsylvania Economy League that, in fact, has looked at, Did the jobs come out of that project that we thought would come out of that project? And in attempt to 194 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - TIF BILLS document, in fact, Did it make sense for us to do these things? And, overall, the answer is that by the net collection of what we do, we do meet these job projections. What would be most dramatic, of course, is if we could also make sure we don't lose any jobs because then they would all be a net gain. So the exercise has --
Well, I'm not asking you to be responsible for the job losses. All I would like to see is -- the latest thing I saw was -- maybe it was a year or maybe two years ago. It was a newspaper article that said that the -- it was either The Inquirer or The Daily News saying that they had made a study and kind of found no jobs, and that maybe was before they considered the Convention Center. But I'm just saying I think it would be good to come up with an answer.
Because it's so easy to come before us and say there are going to be these jobs. And I think by this time, there ought 195 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - TIF BILLS to be a performance record. I'm not speaking against this particular proposal; I'm just saying that we don't really do our job if all that happens is folks come before us and say, We're going to give you 500 jobs or 300 or 50, whatever the number, and nobody watches what happens. We ought to have a performance record, and I would like to request that you prepare it or have your staff prepare it, send it to the President of City Council so we can circulate it and have something that can be used as a serious basis for discussion.
Now, from what you've been saying today, would it be fair to say that if you had to compare the Kvaerner project and this project, that this would be the biggest bargain imaginable? Because I've seen projections that have indicated that Kvaerner is costing anywhere between 100 to $400,000 to produce a job. I'm talking of total -- not just City money, but governmental money -- City, State and federal. 196 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - TIF BILLS And from what you're saying, this is, by your definition of what is City money, this isn't costing anything. Is that about right?