And is there anything that the present users need to do in order to maintain their current use?
They will probably be approached about a permitting arrangement with Fairmount Park Commission, yes.
Could you restate that? I didn't hear you clearly.
We will probably be engaging in conversations -- there is an athletic use to that field right now -- about becoming part of the permitting process, as we at Fairmount Park Commission permit out use of fields.
Can I follow 80 12/8/04 - Bills 041037 & 041038 - Parks up, please?
Could you state for the record that the arrangement that they presently have, financial arrangement, whatever that may be, maintenance, will be grandfathered to that group?
I could say probably, Councilman. Because it is not in our -- it's just coming by virtue of this ordinance into our catalogue of assets, we will look at it as part of Fairmount Park Commission property going forward upon signing of this lease, which will mean that we have responsibilities for maintaining it.
Those tenants, again, I don't know what their responsibility is financially presently under the School District's arrangement, it would be unfair to them to transfer this property, then all of a sudden they have to deal with Fairmount Park Commission on a criteria that you presently use that may be a lot different 81 12/8/04 - Bills 041037 & 041038 - Parks than the arrangement that they have now. Whatever maintenance the School District does, if any, I would think that it would have to be a seamless transaction, as far as I'm concerned.
That's certainly our goal. We're not looking to upset the apple cart.
And I'll work with the Park Commission to make sure that they're at the same situation that they had before.
We'll see. Madam Chair, I just want to make one note for the record. I'm now switching back to the earlier Bill, 041037. There is a reference made in Section 2 of the Bill to an Exhibit A. Those materials were handed over to the Chief Clerk's office, I believe, as a part of the transmittal, but I would simply say that I believe that that material should be incorporated, as it is referenced as an Exhibit A to this particular Bill, and at the 82 12/8/04 - Bills 041037 & 041038 - Parks appropriate time -- and I have the documents. I'd like to put forward an amendment to incorporate these documents as an official part of this Bill so that we have a complete package.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Just one relative to security. I guess it's safe to assume that the internal security of the building, teachers, students, will play itself out as we find out who our students are and what their needs are, and I guess the long-range plan or hope is that the learning environment in the school will diminish the need for security down to a minimum. The question I have is relative to 83 12/8/04 - Bills 041037 & 041038 - Parks security of the building. Is there any design features or plan that exists relative to security of the building because of its location, which is not your traditional street-front location, and because of the high profile nature of the building and I assume because of the very expensive equipment that will be in there? Is there any either design issues that help with security for the building being broken into and things stolen or is there any plan?
Once again, Terry Wilson. The approach to security, as far as this building is concerned, is to try to be very non-evasive as far as how it's taken care of. We will still have the security checks, but instead of having the exposed walk-throughs that you would see in the airports, they're going to be built into the door frames. Instead of having the open conveyor belts that are in there, there will be holes in the wall when they walk into the foyer with 84 12/8/04 - Bills 041037 & 041038 - Parks a conveyor belt behind that to where it passes through and comes out. There will be cameras, where we spoke a great deal with Dexter Green and his group with the School District on security. The cameras are going to be covering such places as entrances, exits, stairwells, high-expense-type areas where there's major computer equipment, things of this nature. We're not going to be putting on what you've seen throughout the City, the jail bar type of grates. We're looking to -- and also for most of the schools that we will be proceeding on now, with a screening system, which is a security screen that looks very much like a window screen as opposed to the items that you've seen in other buildings. There will also be burglar-type devices at areas such as doors, such as windows, which can gain access and so forth. So it is being handled.
And it's interesting, though, that a lot of the design features keep the security equipment from 85 12/8/04 - Bills 041037 & 041038 - Parks being too intrusive or too apparent, especially the metal detectors in the doors make a lot more sense. The conveyor belt behind the wall, behind the blind I guess creates more of an atmosphere of learning as opposed to security.
Right. And the other thing that we're taking a look at is, we've asked the architects to take a look at site lines. You know, no matter what you do as far as cameras are concerned, someone has to monitor a camera. If you have too many cameras, they're not going to be able to monitor. Then their benefit is only for recording the problem, not to stop the problem. By developing good site lines throughout the building to where staff that's in there can observe what's going on, we feel it is a much more proactive way to handle these situations.
86 12/8/04 - Bills 041037 & 041038 - Parks You're welcome. Ellen Savitz?
I just wanted to add that we will be working with Microsoft's Department of Homeland Security on the issues of security both in and out of this building, another something that Microsoft has thrown in to make this project work.
I certainly appreciate that questioning as well. I have a couple more questions during this public hearing. I want to go back to Councilman Michael Nutter's line of questioning regarding our continuing interest and concern with MBE/WBE participation, and let me put it in context for you of what we don't want. We don't want to be back here in four years, as we are going to be today in the second half of this hearing to discuss what's not happening with the stadiums, and be in a position where we have to advocate for subcontractors who are not being treated fairly. And so that puts in context the 87 12/8/04 - Bills 041037 & 041038 - Parks concerns raised by Councilman Nutter. To have to reexamine all of this four years from now simply blemishes what is expected to be a very exciting initiative on a number of different levels, from the business of running a school system to the academics of running a school system. And so I'd be remiss not to put that on the record. My final question, I think, because I took a bunch of notes, parking. Could you please address for a moment the issue of parking and accommodating staff at all times of day? What sparks that question for me is today's Daily News story with what we're seeing over at University City High School.
Yes. Parking does become an issue just because of the area, and we have given a lot of thought to it so far and probably more to come. But as it stands right now, there are 30 spaces leased physically on the premises, which is the number -- I'm sure the School District would have liked more, but that we could accommodate within this new architecture. 88 12/8/04 - Bills 041037 & 041038 - Parks In addition to that, we are working on agreements with the Zoo, who has a parking lot adjacent to this facility that they also have an arrangement with Fairmount Park for, to have 30 spaces available in that lot. Because of the different time usages for each of these institutions, we believe we'll be able to accommodate 30 spaces in the Zoo lot. Additionally, as you may know, there is a plan being looked at for the entire Centennial District, and we have asked them to also take another look at what parking needs might generate in the years to come just from even -- the real fact of the matter is that in a high school, you may get some students, particularly in perhaps their senior year, who will find themselves driving to school. And because of the nature of the roads and the park setting, parking is consistently an issue, something that we know we're going to have to continue to address.
The one 89 12/8/04 - Bills 041037 & 041038 - Parks element which has been brought up in a number of community meetings and so forth, and just to expand upon what Karen was talking about, is, we do have the auditorium, we do have the gymnasium. This is a place where there was a concern. And generally in the meetings between the Fairmount Park Commission, Zoo and the School District, it was determined that the hours of use of the gymnasium, of the auditorium when we would expect heavier amounts of traffic would be at a point in time to where additional spaces in the Zoo lot will be made available. So as a result, there is no 16 anticipation of causing any problems as far as more on-street parking or anything else of this nature within the area. The whole thing has gone through the Streets Department. They feel very comfortable with what we're doing. Through Planning Commission. They feel comfortable with what we're doing. And I think it's a real good solution and good cooperation.
90 12/8/04 - Bills 041037 & 041038 - Parks That all the partners are okay with?
Very well. Finally for me, back to the issue of enrollment and the integrity of that process, and it really segues from Councilman Nutter's mention of teachers already in the system having a fair opportunity. I want to speak to students already in the system having a fair opportunity. Many children attend Philadelphia public schools either, A, because the ideology of their parents who believe in the public school system or, B, because their parents simply don't have the resources to go elsewhere. And as much as we want the system to be open to all students, in the enrollment process has there been consideration to parents who have been in the public school system along the way and want the opportunity to go here, stacking that against students who are coming from non-public schools and now want to be in this jewel of an institution? 91 12/8/04 - Bills 041037 & 041038 - Parks
I have to be honest. We have not addressed that, because we normally determine an area and take kids who live in that area. Whether or not we would be able to deny --
I'm not asking denial at all. I'm not suggesting that.
No, but in other words, deny the same equity to parents who pay taxes as much as their neighbors, no 13 matter where they send their kids to school. I think we'd run into more issues if people have put their kids into a private school K to 8 and now want to come back into the system for high school not being in that general first lottery with equity with the kids who have attended. If I'm hearing you, you're suggesting that perhaps only kids who attended our schools --
All students should have opportunity. Students who have been in the system from K through 8, in the public school system from K through 8, I'm suggesting for consideration some additional consideration versus parents whose students were elsewhere, for whatever the reason, and now want to transfer in to a public school setting. So I don't know if during your discussions that was ever mentioned, but I, for one, have considered sending my daughter to a private school at a certain juncture, to then re-enroll her in public schools. And let the record show she's currently in public schools. So I know that parents think that way, because I think that way. And so for parents who have either because of ideology or lack of resources have not been able to send their students to non-public schools, consider as part of the enrollment process, lottery process -- and I don't know what that form looks like yet, because I think I've only had 93 12/8/04 - Bills 041037 & 041038 - Parks to do it one time for kindergarten, the EH 36. As you look to the integrity of that process, giving consideration to students who have been in the system from K through 6 versus students -- and I know Councilman 7 Kenney and I have a running friendly debate 8 about that.
Let me give you the flipside of the argument. I understand exactly where the Councilwoman is coming from as far as loyalty to the District and that kind of thing.
But I think the opposite under the argument that I want to offer --
-- is, is that I think what we want to see our School District become is a more diversified district, where parents instead of moving out of the City will say, You know what, that 94 12/8/04 - Bills 041037 & 041038 - Parks Microsoft School is something, I think I'm going to keep my family here, and send that student there. So I think what my hope is and goal for the District is to be a district as the District of choice, so that you wouldn't even think about sending your kid to a private school, unless you had some -- in my particular situation, maybe Councilman Nutter, if he had a son high school age, would be considering our alma mater, because that's where we went, but a parent who has really no 14 connection to a school, I would like them to be able to say, You know what, the School District of Philadelphia is wonderful, I wouldn't think of sending my kid anywhere else.
And I think the way we start getting those families back in is through projects like this. So while I understand maybe the concept of weighting admission or weighting 95 12/8/04 - Bills 041037 & 041038 - Parks lottery towards people who are matriculating through the public system, I really want to be equally active in trying to attract people who are outside the system. One of the things that Ellen Savitz --
Okay. Outside the system, not outside the City.
Outside the system. Well, I'll even go one step further. When Ms. Savitz was the principal of CAPA, it was one of the schools where we had numbers of applications for students who live in the suburbs. And to me, I felt that was a wonderful compliment to that school, that someone who lives in the suburbs would want to send their kids to an inner city school in South Philadelphia. So I would really, long term, would love to be in a situation where even our suburban neighbors say, You know what, the School District of Philadelphia is that good, I'd rather send my kid there. 96 12/8/04 - Bills 041037 & 041038 - Parks
And that is the ideal to which we move to become. I thank you for that, because that is a perspective I did not consider.
Unfortunately, I was, as was the case when I was in school, I was slightly distracted during the last exchange. I was talking when I shouldn't have been. So I just want to make sure that I'm clear. What is the policy with regard to -- you have boundaries. Some parents send their kids to the local Philadelphia public school today, some parents send their kids to charter school, parochial school, private school, but they live within the boundaries, they're in Philly, they're within the boundaries of this school. Is there any line of demarcation when the various applications come in from these 97 12/8/04 - Bills 041037 & 041038 - Parks now seventh grade, for the moment, kids' parents and the apps come in and clearly you have a kid that goes to --
I wasn't going to make it so personal. -- Beeber, who lives in, let's say, the Winfield section right now and another parent whose kid goes to Our Lady of Lourdes, who lives in Winfield? They just go in, right? I mean, is there any distinction in those applications because both live in the area attached to that school?
There has not been any consideration of having a weighted kind of thing for kids who are in the district currently. The idea is that if a child attends Mann or Beeber or Powel or wherever in that district, they'll get an equal chance to apply. The only difference would be that if we pull out an application to be part of the student body and it is not a student currently 98 12/8/04 - Bills 041037 & 041038 - Parks attending our schools, we will ask for address verification. But, frankly, for those folks -- just to make sure they really do live where they say they live. The assumption is that --
Well, I think you're going to want address verification for everybody.
John Candy said, Trust everybody, but cut the cards. You send in an application, we really want to know that that's where you live.
So you do that, but the apps all go in and they're all the same. Because, I mean, I think a part of this discussion is, no matter where you presently send your child to school today, if you are a resident of Philadelphia, you are paying for this system, whether you choose to 99 12/8/04 - Bills 041037 & 041038 - Parks use it or not. You don't get a discount on your real estate tax if you don't send your kid to public school. You pay the same old bill. So I think that we want to make sure that there is that sense of equal opportunity. And I think that we will draw some parents, not just because of the financial issue, but because of the educational excellence issue, you will have some parents taking their kids out of other school systems to try to go to this school. I think that's good for us. And to the extent that we replicate this model, whether it's with Microsoft or others, that's how we're going to compete for people. We have a great City. We're improving our school system, and when we become more and more of the system of choice, we're going to have something to offer that even places like two blocks away from us -- there's no Microsoft School in Lower Merion. If you want to go to Microsoft School, it's in Philadelphia at Fairmount Park. 100 12/8/04 - Bills 041037 & 041038 - Parks
Thank you, Councilman Nutter. And thank you again, Councilman Kenney, for that important perspective. Is there anyone else here to testify on these bills? (No response.)
Very well. While my colleagues move to return, let me just underscore Councilman Jim Kenney's remarks, in that the District and the Fairmount Park Commission and the City of Philadelphia really are to be commended, A for being so very, very proactive in discussing and walking through the little bumps and hurdles that sort of blindside you further down the road. I am excited about the partnership, and as I learn more and more about it, I trust that I'll be one of those cheerleaders for you as I go around the City and talk about this, the first of which will be Monday evening at 101 12/8/04 - Bills 041037 & 041038 - Parks Zion Baptist Church speaking to members of that clergy's trustee leadership about this wonderful new opportunity for the Philadelphia public school system. This will conclude testimony on Bill 7 No. 041037 and Bill No. 041038. This concludes our public hearing, and we will now move into a public meeting in about three minutes. Please stay tuned.
It may not be on the record, but let me just thank you and all the members here for, again, your support. We really appreciate your quick action, and we look forward to that ribbon cutting. So thank you.
Very well. We're waiting for the return of a couple of colleagues and we'll proceed with the public meeting. (Brief pause.)
We have an amendment on Bill No. 040137. Councilman Nutter? 102 12/8/04 - Bills 041037 & 041038 - Parks
Thank you, Madam Chair. Pursuant to the reference in the Bill, I think at Section 2, there's a reference made to Exhibit A. That exhibit is embodied in a half-inch-thick series of documents that I'd like to move forward as the Exhibit A. It's my understanding that they are complete and represent all of the exhibits that should be attached to this particular Bill, and I'd like to hand them forward and then move the adoption of these exhibits as amendments to the Bill.
Can I have a motion to approve the amendments on Bill No. 041037?
I move that the amendment as offered by Councilman Nutter to Bill 041037 be approved.
103 12/8/04 - Bills 041037 & 041038 - Parks Let the record reflect that we have in attendance a quorum to move on these Bills, Councilman Darrell Clark, Councilman W. Wilson Goode, Councilwoman Blondell Reynolds Brown and Councilman Frank Rizzo. Can I have a motion on Bill No. 8 04 --
Councilman Darrell Clark seconded the amendment on Bill No. 041037. All in favor? MEMBERS: Aye.
Can I have a motion on Bill No. 041037 with the Bill as amended?
Thank you, Madam Chair. I move that Bill 041037 as amended be reported out of the Committee with a 104 12/8/04 - Bills 041037 & 041038 - Parks favorable recommendation and the rules of Council be suspended so as to permit first reading at our next Council session.
Councilman Darrell Clark seconds. All in favor? MEMBERS: Aye.
Therefore, Bill No. 041037 will be reported out of this Committee with a favorable recommendation and a further recommendation that the rules of Council be suspended to allow first reading at our next scheduled Council meeting. I will ask Councilman W. Wilson Goode to please give us a motion on Bill No. 24 041038.
Thank you, 105 12/8/04 - Bills 041037 & 041038 - Parks Madam Chair. I move that Bill 041038 be reported out of the Committee with a favorable recommendation and the rules of Council be suspended so as to permit first reading at our next Council session.
Councilman Darrell Clark has seconded. Bill No. 041038 has been moved and properly seconded. All in favor say aye. MEMBERS: Aye.
Bill No. 041038 will be reported out of this Committee with a favorable recommendation and a further recommendation that the rules of City Council be suspended to allow first reading at our next scheduled Council meeting. Again, Bill No. 040912 has been held in this Committee at the request of the 106 12/8/04 - Bills 041037 & 041038 - Parks sponsor. This concludes the meeting of the Committee on Parks, Recreation and Cultural Affairs. Thank you for your attendance and your interests. (Meeting adjourned at 12:05 p.m.) - - - 107 CERTIFICATE I HEREBY CERTIFY that the proceedings, evidence and objections are contained fully and accurately in the stenographic notes taken by me upon the foregoing matter on December 8, 2004, and that this is a true and correct transcript of same. ______________________________ MICHELE L. MURPHY RPR-Notary Public (The foregoing certification of this transcript does not apply to any reproduction of the same by any means, unless under the direct control and/or supervision of the certifying reporter.)