Thank you, Madam Chair. Good afternoon. Mr. Katz, I just wanted to refer to a part of your testimony, when you talked about the big three, taxes, schools, and crime as being, you know, in terms of the survey. And I should probably think you should probably add quality of life to that, also. And there is a train of thought out there, most of the people I have talked to. I actually buy into. I just wanted to get your sentiments on it. As it relates to taxes, I believe that a 346 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 big problem associated with the tax burden on the existing residences is the simple reality that so many people have left these various communities. And we are now burdened with being taxed for a city, particularly as it relates to infrastructure, that was probably built for and a half, million people. As it relates to schools, we have this formula where our real estate taxes fund a substantial portion of our schools. So obviously we are underfunded as a result of not being able to get revenue from all people that have left and the land that is currently vacant. And my understanding, based on talking to, actually, police at the highest level, they talk about crime and conditions and communities breed crime more often than not. And deteriorated communities tends to be a higher level of crime as it relates to, you know, the policing and the comp stats. And the train of thought is that, if we somehow invest in communities, in areas where there is opportunities to increase housing, increase commercial development, decrease our inability to 347 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 collect revenues from currently vacant land, therefore, increasing our coffers, both at the wage-tax level -- because, as you know, resident wage tax, people pay a higher rate, as opposed to nonresidents -- increasing our School District coffers, because we now collect real estate from currently vacant land, neighborhoods that are stable and are not targets of people that like to create crime, do you agree with that train of thought? I understand that's not the entire reason why we have some of these problems.
No. I agree. And I think that your point about quality of life is a good one. And would add that, interestingly enough, probably 80-some percent of suburban and the region's residents think that this is a good place to be, this region. 64 percent of the city's residents think this is a good place to be. But there is a 20 percent spread between the two outlooks. And I agree with you. But I don't think that government is generally a great investor. I think when government is making the decisions about where to invest and what to invest in, absent a 348 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 private partner, or, better, absent a private leader about investment, that the investment decision tends to either not to be sustainable or not to be very good. No criticism intended of any particular government. But it isn't government's historic track record in investment that has been particularly good. So to the extent that there are -- that you used the word "stabilization," and I think that's a good word, but stabilization isn't just physical; it is economic, it is social, it is educational. That there are a lot of parties that needs to be at a table, including private parties, with real private dollars, making decisions about investment. Because simply creating a better environment in which to invest will not assure that you will get investment, if you have haven't identified a partner who has told you that if X, Y, and Z occurs in a place, their dollars, their energy, and their resources will flow into it.
And that can happen 349 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 as a result of a planning process, a clearly thought out planning process for communities, in partnership with potential investors?
Yes. And I think it is obvious in Philadelphia that one size doesn't fit all. That there are different neighborhoods that have different views about what it will take to stabilize them. And, you know, that's, I think -- and then obviously a high level of concern about having a seat at the table, when those decisions about how to stabilize them and where the investment is going to be made is undertaken.
Okay. You mention government investing. There are a couple of programs where government has made the decision to invest, essentially, in downtown areas. We recently -- and, actually, I guess I don't know when the legislation happened, it was a conversion abatement bill that was put in place that was, essentially, a government investment, where there were conversions of former commercial 350 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 properties into real estate properties, and it spurred a lot of development opportunities. We actually do have some tax increment finance projects that are online. I was actually just talking to Councilman Nutter about the old UDAG program, where we actually, I believe, invested UDAG in a couple of instances. And I am just concerned that, you know, in the past we have not hesitated, frankly speaking, to invest in Center City with government-financed programs, because that's what they are, in addition to 108 programs, invested in Center City, and without necessarily a clearly thought-out plan, which was some criticism associated with some of the Council hearings. We were able to do that, and we did have a substantial number of successes. And I am just concerned that now, when we are talking about investing using government investment to spur private investment in neighborhoods, there is this apprehension. And I just want to get a sense, do you think that that's fair? 351 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01
I think your observation is not accurate, actually. I don't think you can have a TIF unless you have a private investment. Because a TIF is a freezing of a tax base based on somebody making --
I didn't say you could have it without private investment. I am saying it is a subsidy.
If I misunderstood your question, I apologize. But I thought what you were saying was -- in Center City we invested public funds without a corollary private --
That's all I am saying. I am not arguing about a plan. I think the planning is important. Although I would argue, in Center City, the function of Center City as a combination commercial, retail, cultural, and residential community was established a long time ago. You might argue about whether the plan for 13th and Locust should be X or Y. But where uses will occur and what the function of streets are and the function of parks and neighborhoods are has 352 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 been, I think, actually was planned in Center City. Maybe it needs to be updated, I am not going to argue that. But where the only investor in a project is the government, with a couple of exceptions -- and I wouldn't argue that, for example, public housing is an exception. Where the only investor in a project, and particularly a transformation project, is a government, the chances of sustaining the transformation are probably not that good. That's all I am saying.
I agree a hundred percent. Okay. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you, Madam President. Mr. Katz, how are you doing. If you had to rank the reasons why, in your opinion, through your analysis and through your experience, the reasons why from first top five reasons why people have decided to move their families out of the city into the surrounding 353 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 suburbs and New Jersey, how would you rank them?
In the last ten years, I would say at the earlier part of the decade, I would say the number one concern was safety. And while I think we have definitely a better safety record today, I would probably suggest that people are still leaving because, in their particular spot, they don't feel safe. Or, number two, because they don't feel safe where their children go to school. And I would say, number three, particularly for young families, in addition to not feeling safe in many cases, they don't feel that their kids are going to get the best possible education, or they can't afford the choices that are available to them. Number four, I would say, they have left because they had a long commute to a job that relocated or got a job in a place that required a longer commute. 354 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 And while I would not argue that people tend to leave because of taxes, that taxes becomes a reason but not the principal reason. I would say businesses would leave for tax reasons more than the individual.
Yes. And I think that, unfortunately, you know, we were not aggressive in some parts of the last two decades in trying to get more of the business opportunities that we might have gotten here. You know, Philadelphia still doesn't have a business marketing strategy and/or much money, that I know of.
We are taking advantage of the new economy, which is now the old economy. The new economy is about 20 years old now, I think. So we are a little behind the curve, but better late than never, I guess.
We may be behind the curve in some respects, Councilman. But I think you obviously recognize the base assets to be a player 355 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 in the new economy are here. And they are more so in Philadelphia than they are in the suburbs. And increasingly -- here is the opportunity. And, Councilman Goode, I think you probably would recognize this. As people move further and further out, as you tear up more and more farmland in Exton and in Lancaster and in northern Bucks County, the costs of sprawl imposed on the taxpayers in those communities will make the city, if the city's economic development program and tax competitiveness are together, a much more attractive competitor than it has ever been. Because it isn't just the city that people are running away from. It is also the inner suburbs that they are now running away from. And one of the things that you found in this study, this survey, was that ten years ago the most important issue was safety regionally. This year the most important issue was sprawl and congestion. Because people who went out to the suburbs for a better quality of life are spending 45 minutes on 202, and that's no day at the beach. 356 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01
Let me put it a different way. Hypothetically over the last ten years or so, if we had paid attention to fixing schools, fixing our tax structure, creating a better environment on the crime scene -- which is something we probably have done to a large degree, which has cost us a lot of money doing it -- perhaps dealt with in some ways auto insurance issues vis-a-vis the suburbs and the city, blight may have taken care of itself?
I think you can look in New York and see evidence of how exactly those strategies have paid off for the city.
One of the issues that I have raised in the past, and have kind of put on kind of a sub radar screen these days because of September 11, is the issue of immigration and replacement people. I mean, New York City, with a 15 percent domestic out migration rate over the past decade, and a 9 percent net increase in population, is an amazing figure. And that 9 percent net increase in 357 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 population created, recreated, neighborhoods like Brooklyn, the Bronx, and Queens, and other parts of New York that we are trying to deal with in this whole process of NTI deliberations. Hindsight being 20/20, if we had all those factors in place in the last decade, years, 8 we may not need a blight program, we might have had 9 one already in creating an environment that fosters 10 retention of residents' jobs and attraction of new 11 residents. 12
Before you came in, 13 Councilman, I made the point that I thought the 14 attention to immigration was a critical component. 15
Tough these days. I got heckled on my immigration policy a couple of Sundays ago at, believe it or not, the Columbus Day Parade. Which kind of surprised me. Because I turned to the guy who was heckling me and said, "Well, who do you think all these people in this parade are? I mean, they are all immigrants, or former immigrants or relatives of immigrants and offspring of immigrants. We have had a more difficult time in promoting that, obviously, for obvious reasons. 358 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01
I don't think so. Let me ask you a question. I know you are familiar with the city's financial situation, both as a candidate for public office and as a person who is involved in public finance. We have embarked on a number of major projects in the city in the last four, five, six years, stadiums being one of the more high-profile once. But we are also contemplating beginning now the planning and engineering for the potential expansion of the Convention Center. Our schools are obviously a financial issue, both from an economic development and retention standpoint, but also from a city's financial standpoint. We need to probably pony up significant amounts of more money for the schools vis-a-vis Harrisburg's desires. We may face down the road investment needs for hospitality and tourism, as the federal government has begun to prop up the airlines and 359 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 some of the other industries affected by September 11. We here see that similar problem with three, four, five hotels in our city that are really in desperate shape and may need some assistance in some way or another, whether that is investment in advertising and promotion or whether it is direct subsidy or whether it is forgiveness, something to keep that pillar of our economy going while we work ourselves out of this problem. Obviously you testified the need, I think you have alluded to at least, the need to maybe accelerate the reduction of taxes. Because the way we were doing it so far has not been effective in retaining jobs or people. And some of the concerns that we are reading lately about the downward projections on wage taxes and sales tax flat-lining and some other issues that really since September 11 have put us in a very precarious situation in the short term and potentially in the long term. Do you believe that there may be a need for us to wait a little bit to kind of see how this shakes out economically in the city prior to the 360 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 investment and borrowing of $250 million of additional taxpayers' dollars, taxpayer-supported borrowing?
Gee, I didn't think that's where your question was going. Well, first of all, it is a lot easier to be here as a civic executive than it would be to be in your situation or the Mayor's situation to make those decisions. And so I would urge you to take my response with a grain of salt. The first part I would say is that when everybody else is being cautious, victory goes to the aggressive. And that's not -- that's counter to the Philadelphia way of doing business. But I would tell you that rather than wait and see, I would take bold action. Because Philadelphia always strikes me that we are on the verge of realizing this great potential. But I am 52, and I have been hearing about it for 52 years.
So that means to me that 361 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 there is a time -- you are 52, aren't you?
I heard you laughing awfully loudly over there, Darryl. There is a time when you sort of say, let's say we have this great opportunity now to rise above. And because I do think that the things that are happening at the universities, they are getting their act together and they are becoming much more aggressive in their recruitment, you have got this incredible infrastructure of arts and culture and community assets that very few communities outside of the older, established Bostons, New Yorks, and Chicagos have. Probably Durham will never have the kind of cultural facilities that we have. Now is the time to attack the things that are killing us.
But the things that are killing us, as you mentioned in my first part of the question, no one mentioned, you didn't mention blight. You mentioned schools and taxes and 362 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 reverse commutes and crime and employment retention issues. And a lot of it centers around taxes and the condition of our schools. I mean, of the top five things I asked you about, you didn't mention blight, per se. Not that we shouldn't try to correct our blight problem. However, if we are going to be aggressive, with limited resources, I would suspect, at least from your initial answer, that there are four or five areas we should be more aggressive on using our limited resources.
When one family decides to move out of a house or one landlord decides to stop investing in a building, and that begins the process of disinvestment, what drove that family away wasn't blight. What drove that landlord to disinvest wasn't blight. Blight is the outcome of what occurs when people don't have jobs, when their kids can't get an education, and when their parents don't feel safe. And, to me, I think the blight initiative is, based on all the information that I have seen about where the city will be in 50 years 363 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 if we don't do something, it is a natural response to want to put up walls around places where blight might be stopped. And I think that's probably, you know, to its credit, what the blight initiative or the Neighborhood Transformation Initiative is trying to do. It is the other side of that. So now you have done that. Where is the deal?
As Mark Allen used to say, the other side of the horizon after the demolition.
The question about Center City wasn't, let's clear that block between Market and Filbert and 12th and 11th and hope that somebody shows up with a good idea. There was somebody there ready to do a deal. And that's my --
But from my perspective, I have no problem with investment in Center City. Because I believe that when you watch people get off of the El and the subway and the various transit routes in our city who are coming from neighborhoods in Northwest, West, South, 364 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 Northeast Philadelphia, are coming to a major economic engine that needs to be primed and effective and productive, where those people living in those won't have a chance to maintain a quality of life or pay their mortgage or improve their home because they won't have a job in Center City. In fairness to Ed Rendell, I know he always used to get batted around by being Slick Eddie from Center City, which I think was unfair in many ways because the Center City economic engine is perhaps the most important. If you look at the level of taxes that are generated -- I know people in Northeast Philadelphia always tell me, "Why do we pay more taxes up here than anyplace in the city?" Not true. People in Chestnut Hill say, "We pay more taxes than anyplace in the city." Maybe after this last property tax assessment, that might be true. But in Center City, Spring Garden to South, River to River, is really where the economic engine in the city is. So from a perspective of keeping that healthy, I don't really have a problem with that at 365 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 all. My major concern is that we have limited resources. Should we be concentrating on the things that are truly driving the people out of the city? Albeit we will agree that fixing blighted neighborhoods is a moral responsibility that we have. However, we didn't fulfill that moral responsibility unless we have the resources necessary to do it. And without the other things that have not been done in the past 20, years, we are 13 continuing, going to continue, to lose people who 14 are paying taxes to surrounding communities, thus 15 further shrinking our base of tax-paying supporters 16 and increasing our base of people who use services. 17
In response to your first 18 question, obviously you are not going to have to 19 wait a whole lot longer to find out what the likely 20 outcome is going to be on financing the schools. 21 That report is due at the end of this month. 22 And it is clear that, you know, when the 23 plan -- when the problem was put on the table over 24 the next five years, it was billion 500 million 25 dollar accumulated operating deficit of the school 366 1 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 district, if we didn't do anything for five years. And clearly you are not going to be able to operate if you accumulate that kind of deficit. And the expectation is that that plan, that that problem might be solved one-third city, two-thirds state, which is going to be a political stretch for both interests. So your question is, well, wait to see what the bill is going to be for that before we commit ourselves to or million dollars a year 12 in debt service on the blight initiative. We are 13 not going to have to wait too much longer. 14
You are going to see very 17 shortly, I think, a very sizable financial 18 obligation which, whether the state is willing to 19 fund or not, politically its ability to fund it, I 20 think, is going to be limited. 21
From what your 22 knowledge of the NTI program is, which is I would 23 assume -- 24
It is not that good, to tell 25 you the truth. 367 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01
There are elements of that plan, as I talked with Mr. Pizzi before, who testified earlier, that require and suppose certain levels of additional funding, matching dollars, other types of new revenue that would be coming from the federal, state, and from private investment sources. Obviously $250,000,000 is not sufficient on itself, in itself, to take care of the problems of blight in the neighborhoods that are affected more intensely and those who are starting to be eaten around the edges. So those additional federal dollars coming from federal and state sources especially are going to be critical in making this whole plan work. As I expressed to Charlie when he was giving his testimony in favor of some type of NTI, some type of approval, is that, you know, a nation at war doesn't necessarily have Philadelphia's Neighborhood Transformation Initiative on its radar screen. 368 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 And a state that's wrestling with two-thirds/one-third politically difficult decisions on school funding certainly doesn't have Philadelphia's NTI program on their radar screen. And unless we fix some of the tax structure and cost of building replacement housing and market rate housing in Philadelphia through private investment, the $250 million won't go very far on its own. What's your opinion?
Well, the $250 million, as I understand it -- and my knowledge is limited not because of the facts being available, but just it hasn't been a focal point for Greater Philadelphia First.
They are not available, trust me. They are not available today.
I trust you. The fact is that $250 million, spread out over a city of this size, with the diversity of neighborhoods and interests, is obviously going to have a modest impact on every place that it is spent. What hopefully emerges from your process 369 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 in Council is that there is going to be a vision of what comes after the removal of the abandon houses and the clearing of streets that are subject to blight. And that vision is going to be critical to giving the city both the political capacity to go after these other dollars, as well as to be persuasive to federal, state, and private funders that there is something to be invested in here. And I think if there is a weakness now, that's it. I mean, I don't think there is a vision out there of, well, here is what we are going to look like, and this is how we can get there, and this is the first step. Because there is going to be a downpayment to get there, there is no question about it.
What's your opinion relative to the investment strategies of placing a large amount of money, most of the money, in one or two particular blighted areas, or using some of the dollars to stabilize currently stable and productive neighborhoods that may be kind of rotting around the edges? 370 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01
Well, as a strategy, I think that's the only way to do this. As a political matter, given the fact that there are ten districts, it may not be possible.
Concentrate on the places where you can make success, where you can assure and sustain the success, where you can provide models of success, where you can induce private investment, where you can make people feel like it is safe to come back, and then go to the next place. And I don't know if you can do that in Philadelphia. And I understand why that might not be possible. But at the end of the day, trying to spread $250 million over the city is going to be a drop in the bucket for most places.
And I would ask you the same question I asked Mr. Pizzi, because of your business acumen and your business experience. If you were the president of a bank, and this was a private entity coming to you for approval 371 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 on a $250 million loan, with the amount of information that's available to you or to us today, would you approve the loan?
I don't really know the answer to that, Jim. And I don't mean to punt. But the question is, if I was making an investment in a company that had products that it 9 was trying to start its business with, I would think 10 the prospect of succeeding in any one product would 11 be pretty small. 12
Thank you, Madam President. I still love my job. You gave me an opportunity to ask Mr. Katz the question again, which he didn't answer. You see, I let him off the hook. It was a great answer to the question. The question was, when you are talking about major development initiatives, major development, when you are one of the chief players in that, and from your experience, what percentage 372 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 is art and what percentage is science?
Well, first of all, there is many pieces to a deal. (Councilwoman Blackwell assumes the Chair).
But the vision is all art. Constructing a vision of where you can take a community, where you can take a business, where you can take a block is about art. Making the deal work, meaning you have got economics, meaning you have got cash flow, or you have got coverage ratios, or you have got any one of those things, is science. So everything is 50/50, I suppose, at the end of the day. Because if the business plan and the business economics and the coverage and cash flow don't work, the deal doesn't work.
Let's leave it at 50/50. And let's say the 50 percent art has been done in terms of, there's been a vision that has been put out there, that it has been sold to a certain extent that we have to do something, whether it is a larger scale, whether it is in the future or 373 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 whatever, let's get into the science of it. I will probably say some things I shouldn't say. But we talked about where you get the most bang for the buck in terms of development. You said that we should use the technology resources of the universities and other institutions that we have, and that's part of your vision. If we were to actually go in and, as part of this Neighborhood Transformation Initiative, decide to do our major concentration of development around universities, University of Pennsylvania, around Temple University, where there is a connection, Market Street El going down, Broad Street Subway going up, connections of Market Street, Broad Street, so many other economic development assets connected to that, what would be the -- is that or is that not the best prospect for success in terms of economic development concentration, if we were to decide we are going to go beyond that 50 percent vision and begin to work on the science of it?
Well, I think what made Philadelphia neighborhoods strong in the early part of the 20th Century were anchors. Whether it was 374 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 Stetson Hat in Fishtown or Frankford Arsenal or the Defense Depot or the Airport or the University. There was some anchor, hospital, there was something there. Why is Penn having a lot of success with employer-assisted housing? Because there are a lot of people --
What I am asking is, if you know you have the economic development vision and you understood the science of it, also, what are the development anchors currently in 2001 Philadelphia? Where would you go for the most bang for the buck in terms of economic development anchors?
Well, I think you obviously already answered the question in part by identifying the major economic development anchors in the city, at least the universities. They are not the only ones, but they are major ones.
Let's take an example of, I was talking to somebody yesterday about Parkside. You know, maybe Parkside, which is a 375 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 little bit off the track from Drexel and Penn, but equidistant from them and St. Joe's and maybe a place that the University of Sciences would have interest, and the zoo, and the Fairmount Park Commission, maybe there is an incubator opportunity there not for one university, but for four.
Yes. That's where you get away from, well, it is not just Broad and Columbia, Broad and Cecil B. Moore, it is, you know, there are other places where maybe Frankford Hospital and Temple, in a neighborhood between that North Philadelphia community and --
If somehow privately the Mayor had convened the president of Penn, President of Temple, Chamber of Commerce, the best minds in terms of academics, development, so forth, do you think they would be able to identify what that development nexus is? And do you think that whatever portion of $250 million, if applied there, given the vision and opportunity, should be applied there right now 376 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 at this point?
I don't know that that hasn't happened. I am not aware of it, but I don't know that it hasn't happened. But I would say if it happened, and if a sizable chunk of seed capital was available to kick-start that, that something would happen there. Yes, I would say yes. I just don't know. Maybe that has happened.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Mr. Katz, I just wanted to clarify our discussion.
Never believe what you read in the newspapers. With respect to the development in neighborhoods, in having had opportunities to work with community groups over the years and economic 377 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 development specialist both in and out of government, it is clearly my understanding that the best strategy should be pursuant to a development plan, be it residential or commercial development. And I just wanted to clarify in no way do I think, given that I am probably the Councilperson who is going to have the most opportunities to develop -- and I would like to characterize them as "opportunities," because I am this sunshiney kind of guy -- is that I would be opposed to any whole-scale demolition without a plan, without a strategy, without a realistic potential for investment. I actually had kind of been through that before in my prior life as a staff person at a particular location on Cecil B. Moore Avenue. And, by the way, we did clear a block in Center City, in all due respect to the last Administration, and invested government money. We did do that, and it has not been developed. But I just want you to have a sense where I am coming from as it relates to our ability out there. I agree with Councilman Goode. And 378 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 there has already been evidence of that, and in the near future you will be hearing a couple of great things about some private-sector investment around Temple University, one of them actually without any a distance from any government entity. I believe that if you look east of Broad south of Temple University, you will see land that has been cleared to the tune of possibly 10-square blocks to give you all kinds of opportunities. So I like the attempt to do that type of development with that type of strategy. But I just want you to be clear that I don't agree with just going out and demolishing properties, with no 15 strategies, with no plan, without real participation from community groups. And if that's what this is all about, then I would be opposed to it.
I am not saying it is. All I am suggesting is, yes, there are some vacant properties that have been acquired and where demolition occurred in North Philadelphia and in Center City. And in both cases I am aware of the developer that was identified at the outset, or 379 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 shortly after the decision was made, that the developer has failed to perform. That happens. I mean, that's going to happen. You know you have the same problem on Penn's Landing. That happens. Factors change in the life of the developer, the economics change, whatever. But it is rare that the occasion should be made that a healthy, substantial, municipal investment, in the hopes that something good might happen later, that would be, I think, a mistake.
One other point. The reference to the $250 million under the NTI program, I got at least two briefings. And my understanding is that the 250 was hopefully to be leveraged with additional resources, both private and government, both state and federal and municipal, that would ultimately end up being close to a $2 billion program. So I don't think there is anybody's sense that $250 million will even remotely resolve the problems associated with the entire City of Philadelphia. And I don't even believe the $2 billion 380 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 will, to be honest with you. But I don't think anybody thinks $250 million is intended to resolve the problems associated with the entire city. I am done.
Thank you very much. Are there any other questions for Mr. Katz? Thank you very much.
The next witness is Carlos Peraza. I believe he left him testimony, and we will give it to the stenographer. Christine Verrier, she left her testimony. And, again, we will give that to the stenographer. Michael Cunningham. MICHAEL CUNNINGHAM: My name is Michael Cunningham. I am a member of St. Helena's Catholic Church at 5th and Godfrey in Olney. And I am also a member of the EPOP team at the church. I have lived in East Oak Lane for 25 years. 381 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 And could I allow my fellow committee member introduce herself. MARIA ANTONIA: My name is Maria Antonia, and I represent the Incarnation, I am a member of EPOP. We have like about 90 0 members at Incarnation. We have so many cultures. They have service like in six languages. And what we want to say about blight is, we seeing people moving out of the city. We would like the people to stay. We would like to see changes. Where we live, I come from Guatemala and came here like years ago, living in the 15 neighborhood of Olney for 17 years. And I been 16 seeing so many changes. 17 I would like to see the streets clean. 18 I would like to see enforcement. You can see 19 like -- you passing 5th Street, that's the main 20 street, and is distressed. 21 We would like to see maybe some trash 22 pickup twice a week, and also daily clean-up. 23 Mike.
I would just like to emphasize that we are community members. And we 382 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 live in Olney, and we are very active in the EPOP. For those of you who don't our organization, EPOP is a citywide organization. It has member institutions in Roxborough, Frankford, Kensington, Manayunk, and throughout South Philadelphia. In fact, we have worked with many of the Councilmen and women in this room. EPOP represents about 35,000 people throughout the City of Philadelphia. And we have been working on blight issues on a citywide basis to make sure that community members voices are heard. And that when the Mayor's Transformation Initiative goes to a vote, that you guys really listen to what we have to say. What I will say is this: Olney is one of the few neighborhoods that has grown in the past ten years. If you look at our city, the only two neighborhoods that have increased in population are Olney and East Oak Lane. We have immigrants. We have people from every background you can think of. People come from New York, people come from Haiti, they come from Korea, they come from Logan, they come from North 383 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 Philadelphia because they love Olney and they think it is a great neighborhood and they think it is worth investing in. At the same time, while we love it, the number of abandoned houses has increased just within the past month from 109 abandoned houses to 125. You can just imagine at the rate of increase what that means for our neighborhood if it continues. Most of this increase in abandoned housing is due to predatory lending. And just, basically, the institution is taking advantage of community members in Olney and East Oak Lane who maybe don't know enough. I will tell you this, if city services are not improved, trash pick-up increased, and if abandoned houses are not bought up by investors -- or are not bought by families, and they are continued to be bought up by investors who have no 20 interest in our neighborhood, well, with all due respect, people are going to continue moving out of the neighborhood. And so, really, the last thing, I guess, I would like to say is that we at EPOP Incarnation at St. Helena's have done our own blight plan. We 384 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 have worked for well over a year. And this plan is very similar to the plan that EPOP has done citywide in terms of what we would like. We believe that the city needs to help us with acquisition of -- many of the blocks in our neighborhood have one or two abandoned houses. And we need in this plan to make sure that we fix up those houses to make sure there are no three abandoned houses on the block in our neighborhood. So, basically, we would like to let you know that we would like our voices to be heard. And furthermore, we would like to let City Council know that if you are really interested in stopping blight, if you really want to stop blight, if you really want to put vibrant, diverse neighborhoods like the neighborhoods you mentioned, the Mexican neighborhoods in Chicago and the Dominican Republic neighborhoods in New York, and if you want to really have neighborhoods where families can raise their kids, then you really have to look at Olney as a prime example. Because people are moving there. They 385 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 love Olney, and they want to live there. But if you do not invest in Olney, with all due respect, nobody wants to live in a parking lot in North Philadelphia. It is just not going to happen. So with that as a closing note, I would like to ask you all to really consider investing in neighborhoods where people live, investing in neighborhoods that you know are kind of on the brink and need some support. And that's where we stand.
Another concern is about safety. Poor lighting, especially the alleyways, and you do not feel like you can walk there. So what we like is to see some changes in our neighborhood. We wouldn't like to be moving. Before I live in Kensington. And when we moving, it was nice neighborhood, then it start changing, and we keep moving. We are not going to be doing that. We want to stay and we want to improve our neighborhood.
We will be passing out 386 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 a plan so everyone can talk about and see for themselves what we have put together. And, hopefully, we ask for your support. Thank you for your time.
Thank you very much. Councilwoman Tasco has something to say.
Yes. I would like to thank you for coming down to testify today. And to say that I was listening on my squawk box. To say that Olney is a great neighborhood, it is quite diverse, and presents a patchwork quilt of the wonderful people who live in the City of Philadelphia. And it is a neighborhood that does need stabilization. And if we don't concentrate on neighborhoods like Olney and support initiatives over there to stem the blight, rehabbing, and just, as they talked about, the delivery of service, which has nothing to do with NTI. A lot of the issues that are raised in the Olney area just has to deal with enforcement of the Zoning Code and enforcement of L & I codes, just basic day-to-day needs that are required to maintain a community. 387 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 So with that, in terms of enforcement, and certainly dealing with the trash, if we don't look at neighborhoods like Olney and Feltonville, then the blight is just going to get worse and worse. And those people who live in those communities, some of whom are leaving, we want them to stay. And if they call the city for services, they want the city to respond. And that is one of the major complaints in the community, is the lack of response to just day-to-day city services. So they are here because they have a plan for the Olney area. We have been supportive of their plan and want to help them work to, you know, implement the plan. And I appreciate their involvement in the community. (Council President Verna resumes the Chair.)
Thank you, Councilwoman Tasco. I would like to point out that Councilwoman Tasco has been working with us for 388 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 quite a while. She has recently helped to get trash cans up and down 5th Street, which is starting to improve the cleanliness of the street. I would like to add Council President Verna, thank you very much for helping us here. We really appreciate it. I would like to also ask that, I agree with Councilwoman Tasco wholeheartedly, that we have to work on some of the little issues in terms of L & I support and police support. Together we all have to make sure that housing and housing rehab is done in Olney. Thank you.
Thank you, Madam President. I want the people testifying to understand, and all those who are in the audience waiting to testify, and those who have criticized this Council and its President and leadership for not moving forward without any delay in passing this $250 million bond ordinance, that unless and until we get involved in this and have the ability to 389 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 contribute and to write and to amend, there is no 3 guarantee that your neighborhood or any other neighborhood in this city will get anything. And the thing that I am frustrated with about the criticism, some of it coming from the media and some of it coming from the Administration, is that unless we do our job here, there is no 9 guarantee that at the end of this process Councilwoman Tasco's district or Councilwoman Blackwell's district or Councilman Clarke's district is going to have any specific program that we are going to be able to track and monitor and make sure it gets done right. So in some ways I think -- not in some. In many ways I think we are doing our job by slowing this process down a little bit; not forever, but until we have an opportunity to deal with the problems you have raised in your testimony and the other complaints coming from various neighborhoods around the city. For us to simply without strings say, here is $250 million, we are out of the process now, you will be back here in a year complaining that nothing got done in your neighborhood and we should 390 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 have stood up and done something about that. So thank you for your testimony.
Thank you both very much for coming in. We appreciate it. Claudia Sherrod. Claudia, thank you so much for your patience. I appreciate your coming in to testify. CLAUDIA SHERROD: Thank you for the opportunity to come in and testify. I am the President of the Point Breeze Community Development Coalition and South Philadelphia H.O.M.E.S., and I would like to read my testimony. The Neighborhood Transition Initiative has given Point Breeze the drive to more forward and plan for the change we feel will make our community more secure. Through the Neighborhood Initiative, we look to gain quality, affordable housing and a better quality of life for our residents. We realize that the money the Mayor proposes is not simply for reconstruction, but also 391 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 for tearing down buildings. Our concern is what is being torn down versus what is targeted for reconstruction. At one time we were told by the leaders of the NTI, Ms. Patricia Smith, Esquire, and Mr. Ray Jones, that the community would be involved with this plan to the extent that a joint decision would be made concerning houses targeted for demolition. That has not happened. And the houses that should have been saved are now gone. Most recently, one two-story house took over a week to tear down. It is of our opinion that it could have been saved. How do we take a collaborative approach towards saving our community? Our community needs to be reconstructed and rebuilt. However, we need to be a physical part of the process. The quality of life for all the residents is at stake. Whether rich or poor, we all feel the effects of not being treated fairly through this process. We have been standing in limbo. The population loss will continue to go on as long as we ignore the real issue, a dilapidated community. 392 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 Lack of funds for the low to moderate income and no real planning geared at holding the people in the city of brotherly love and sisterly affect. The commercial corridors are struggling and the community CDCs are reaching out to get our city's representatives' support. The support the CDCs are looking for is partnering with our elected officials as a community development partnership designed to rebuild through a comprehensive and collaborative effort. We will be able to streamline and improve the development system. We will create a system capable of producing positive results. The mirror effect from this approach will heighten the positive exposure to our community and send out positive messages to the surrounding communities. Positive approaches will open avenues of hope and challenges that are presently not here. The property acquisition. There is definitely a need for new funding to support acquisition for development projects in the pipeline. 393 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 The city's decision not to allocate new funds for this purpose so far this Fiscal Year is resulting in many lost development opportunities which would have leveraged millions of dollars in funding from noncity sources; such as, federal low income housing tax credits, Penn Homes, and other state funds, Section 202 HUD funds, as well as funding from the Federal Home Loan Bank Acquisition. The more the production system comes to a halt, the more development capacity we risk losing, and the longer it will take to regain momentum for neighborhood revitalization. The city should allocate new funds for property acquisition as soon as possible. As we move to a more lucrative environment, I pray, let us do in harmony and justice for all. Let us move quickly. Time is moving on, and let us do what is right for the people in this city. That is my testimony. And I pray that you take it seriously, because it is with great concerns for a lot of people all over the City of Philadelphia.
Thank you. Thank you 394 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 very much. And I certainly want to publicly thank you for your involvement in the Point Breeze area. You have done a marvelous job. And I look forward to continuing to work with you so that we can reach the goals that we have all set. Thank you so much. Our next witness is Dee Phillips. And Gloria Guard will be next, so perhaps she could approach the table, also. Good afternoon. Please identify yourself for the record and proceed with your testimony. DEE PHILLIPS: Thank you, Council President Verna and Council Members, for permitting the Philadelphia Federation of Teachers to testify today. I am Dee Phillips, Vice-President of Middle schools, and Assistant to the President, Ted Kirsch. Ted is in Washington today, and so is Jerry Jordan, and both of them regret not being able to be here. If you were an employee considering a new job in Philadelphia, you might begin your 395 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 relocation research by visiting the National Board of Realtors web site to help you select a new neighborhood for you and your family. Using the online Find a Neighborhood feature, the very first question the realtor's web site asked you is about the quality of schools you want in the neighborhood where you live. Whether or not you have school-aged children, most people choose to live in communities with good schools because the quality of education is not only a tangible commodity, it reflects deeply held values in American society. The quality of educational opportunity speaks to our principles, philosophy, and aspirations as a community. Unfortunately, if you were middle-income parents looking for an urban neighborhood with good schools, a low crime rate, and affordable housing in the Philadelphia area, the National Board of Realtors Neighborhood Locator would send you to Collingswood, Audubon, and Haddon Heights, New Jersey; to Bala Cynwyd, Lansdowne, and Cheltenham, Pennsylvania; or to ten other suburban communities before it would identify a single Philadelphia 396 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 neighborhood where you might find what you are looking for. And then it says you would have only a 50 percent chance of finding all you seek in a handful of Philadelphia neighborhoods. Continuing your research on the Internet, you would learn that Philadelphia has many excellent schools, some of them like Masterman, Carver, Greenfield, and Central ranked among the top schools in the Commonwealth. But more often you would find that Philadelphia has the largest schools, housed in the shabbiest old buildings, with overcrowded classrooms and lower-than-average spending per pupil on classroom instruction. For more than 30 years, too many of our excellent neighborhood public schools have been permitted to decline. We believe this is a major cause of urban flight and why families who remain in Philadelphia are nearly twice as likely as families nationwide to take on the added expense of placing their children in private schools. This doesn't have to be the case. We 397 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 could provide the same high-quality education in Philadelphia that suburban districts provide, if we had the same resources that suburban districts take for granted. First let me take a moment to dispel a common myth, the myth that public education is failing. In the United States, 90 percent of all children attend public schools. And 30 years of research shows no significant difference in achievement between comparable public and private school students. Furthermore, more students today are completing high school than ever before. Student achievement in math and science is up. More students are taking advanced placement exams. And SAT and ACT scores have been rising for a decade. 93 percent of all teachers of the United States today have at least a Bachelor's Degree and are certified, and serious crime at school is on the decline.
Yet, as we look around us, we see enormous challenges, along with the successes, particularly in urban districts like ours. 398 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 Sometimes the challenges facing urban education seems so intractable we are inclined to throw up our hands or reach for the quick fix or gimmick. Yet the solutions to our most entrenched problems are well within our grasp, if we focus on proven reforms. First, every child must enter school ready to learn. Second, school districts must provide environments conducive for learning. And, finally, policymakers must not only set high standards of achievement statewide, but they also must provide students and teachers with the same resources provided in other districts to reach those standards. Too many children come to kindergarten eager, but ill-prepared. High-quality pre-school programs, particularly for children living in poverty, have demonstrated lasting benefits. Children enrolled in good early-education programs are less likely to be placed in special education, retained in a grade, require Welfare assistance, or give birth out of 399 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 wedlock. And they are significantly more likely to graduate from high school, own a home and a second car, and have higher monthly earnings. Not only should kindergarten be compulsory and fully funded by the state, but also high-quality pre-school must be available from birth to age 5. Not only would children arrive in kindergarten prepared to learn, but parents in Philadelphia could go to work every day knowing that their children were receiving high-quality child care. When children arrive at kindergarten, we must provide them with a supportive environment where learning can take place. And there are two reforms both parents and educators believe are crucial to success. Number one, reducing class size in early grades. And, number two, providing intensive literacy programs that ensure every child is reading fluently by age 9. Reducing class size in kindergarten through third grade is the most effective education 400 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 reform. Teachers and parents have always believed that students perform better in smaller classes; now we can prove it. A Tennessee study has been tracking the progress of students in smaller classes since 1985. And independent research has found that students in classes of to students in kindergarten through 9 third grades outperform children in regular-size 10 classes. 11 Students who attended small classes in K 12 to 3 were more than a year ahead in math, reading, 13 and science by the 8th grade. 14 The improvements in testing continued 15 throughout their school years, even when they moved 16 to larger class size. 17 In each grade, minority students and those attending innercity schools showed the greatest gains from small classes. Finally, students in small K to 3 classes were more likely to graduate on time and take advanced placement courses in college admissions exams. Children in Philadelphia sit in classes that are among the largest in the state and nation. 401 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 Kindergarten through third grade classes in Philadelphia have 30 students in a class, compared with the national average of and a state average 5 of 25 in elementary school. 6 The School District of Philadelphia has 7 attempted to improve the ratio of adults to students 8 in kindergarten and first grades through the 9 appointment of literacy intern teachers. 10 However, the program is funded with 11 special federal funds that could vanish. And while 12 helping to improve reading test scores, it is 13 unlikely to have a long-lasting effect that is shown 14 in Tennessee.
15 Here in Philadelphia, the University of 16 Pennsylvania Assisted School that opened this year, 17 through the cooperative efforts of Penn, the 18 Federation and the District, one of Pennsylvania's 19 first initiatives was to reduce class size and 20 augment school district funding with an additional 21 $1,000 per pupil per year because Penn recognizes 22 that smaller classes would benefit children. 23 Smaller class sizes clearly are a form 24 that works and one that parents will leave the city to obtain for their children. 402 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 Next we must address the serious problems created when children fail to master reading and writing in elementary school. Philadelphia is among the only school districts in the state that has permitted the use of hundreds of different reading programs. This hurts our students, 30 percent of who will move at least once during the school year, and it hurts teachers who must be trained and retrained in different programs when they are transferred or a new principal takes over. Through the Federation's advocacy during contract talks last year, the district has this month introduced a uniform curriculum and is moving to adopt a few proven reading programs across the city. It is our belief that if we implement proven, comprehensive, balanced literacy programs in every elementary school now, we can ensure that virtually every child will be reading proficiently by the age of 9. In 1998, the Federation took a bold step in this direction by bringing in an internationally acclaimed program called Reading Recovery to 403 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 Philadelphia public schools. Reading Recovery is an early intervention that gets 75 percent of the lowest-achieving first-grade students reading at grade level within weeks. 7 Since 1998, we have trained dozens of 8 new Reading Recovery teachers. And this year we 9 received more than $1 million from the district to 10 put Reading Recovery into low-performing elementary 11 schools. 12 Further, Philadelphia must pioneer 13 intervention programs to help thousands of middle 14 and high school students who have not benefited from 15 recent reforms and who continue to struggle with 16 basic skills. 17 We know that students who cannot work at 18 grade level are likely to be frustrated, disruptive, 19 and ultimately leave school before graduation. 20 Intervention programs to help older students master basic skills will improve their self-esteem and, in turn, improve school climate. In addition, parents want more support to help their children meet rising expectations, including, tutoring, mentoring, after-school 404 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 activities linked to the curriculum, and mandatory summer school; safe and orderly schools, with consistent rules and effective alternative schools for disruptive students; they want better recruitment, mentoring, and training of new teachers; and, meaningful, professional development to help all teachers improve their skills throughout their careers; and equal educational opportunities and equitable education funding that ensures a good education, no matter where a child lives or attends school. In Philadelphia, there are many examples of schools that encourage parents to stay and send their children to Philadelphia public schools. We have excellent magnet school programs at CAPA, Masterman and schools that are just unrivaled anyplace else. Expanding this magnet school program would appeal to middle-class parents who want learning opportunities tailored to their children's individual needs and interests. We must build our capacity to offer advanced placement courses, which are crucial for students who want to apply to top universities. 405 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 Instead, with fragmentation of large schools into small learning communities, we are seeing the availability of such courses diminish across the system.
Finally, we must be able to provide technology, books and resources, well-stocked libraries, and full art programs at every school to give students the kind of well-rounded education parents want for their children. Of course, the only thing that stands in the way of providing such programs is money. Philadelphia public schools spend nearly $2,000 less per pupil in Philadelphia than in neighboring districts. We have 11 extra children in every classroom. We short-change our students daily by not providing sufficient textbooks, educational materials, technology and enrichment opportunities that other children take for granted. These are the things that chase families out of the city, erode our tax base, and decimate our work force. With so many challenges facing our schools and our city, it's tempting to reach for the 406 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 latest gimmick or quick fix. Last year it was charter schools, this year it's privatization. But we must resist the urge to fob off our responsibility for providing a quality education on to someone else. Because as we carve up our school system and sell our children and our schools to the highest bidder, we will drive even more families away from Philadelphia and to the suburbs. There are many things we can do to improve schools and keep families in Philadelphia. Privatization is not one of them. There is no evidence that charter schools or private management of public schools produces significant improvement in student achievement. To the contrary, independent research has shown that students in charter schools and privately managed public schools perform no better than students in traditional public schools. And some school districts are finding now that private management is more costly than public management. It is no accident that successful school 407 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 districts are not flocking to hire for-profit management companies or charter schools. Nor is it surprising that research shows that, given a choice, parents choose quality public schools over vouchers and privatization. With a $250 million school deficit threatening the closure of our schools by March, we have tough choices to make. The Federation has long believed that parents and educators want the same things: Free, high-quality public schools accountable to parents and taxpayers. It is within our reach to make every public school in Philadelphia rival any school available in the suburbs. It is a tall order, but only such a commitment will stop urban flight. I thank you.
Thank you for being here today. I know you have covered this in your testimony, but maybe you could elaborate on a specific that I have. 408 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 Last night I visited West Philadelphia High School. And I was there for a meeting. And one of the teachers I knew was very, very disappointed because apparently recently those reading scores that you mentioned came out. And I don't know if the statistic is correct, but he indicated at West Philadelphia High School that 60 percent of the students tested were very, very below the norm. 60 percent. Could you elaborate on how that could be fixed?
Councilman Rizzo, we think that children in middle and high schools who don't have basic skills need strong remedial programs that they are not getting. We talked about smaller class size in the K to 3 area, where we give kids a strong foundation. We think that in the middle and high schools, at this time, more focus has to be on remedial reading and proven reading programs for kids who did not get it in the early grades. And the Federation is pushing for those kind of programs. 409 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01
Could you clean that up a bit for me, and explain exactly what the results were? If you could be specific. I am asking you to pull this from left field. But I was told that the test scores had recently been announced, that 60 percent of the students at West Philadelphia High could not read, they were below the norm. Is that the best way to describe it?
That's the best way to describe it. Now we have two tests by which we are monitored. And one is the SAT 9 and one is the state, the PSSA. So your statistics are correct, and I don't have the exact data.
It appears as though that is correct. And I don't have the exact data for you, and I would have to research that. 410 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01
But that obviously is accurate, as we can discuss today. But I walked out of there very depressed.
And I said to myself, could all the money in the world fix that problem? I just didn't know which way to -- I was at that point very disturbed by what I heard there.
Well, there are numerous factors that we can talk about that sort of point to why our students are failing or are not making progress in reading. And, again, one of them is that they lack the basic skills. We talk about the truancy. We talk about the curriculum. We talk about meeting their needs. And that is something that, I think, since this year is the first time in almost six years that the district, the school district, has a focused curriculum -- in the past we have had a framework which did not speak to reaching those children at various levels, reaching them to help them get their basic skills.
Thank you. It is 411 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 obviously troubling to you and troubling to everyone in this room to hear that statistic.
Council President, I only wanted to note that West Philadelphia is in the heart of my district, and I live two blocks from there. And we do have a new principal, who is really going to do a great job, and also a new vice-principal that we worked with a long time, Eric Neidermeyer, a vice-principal, and Mr. Yancey, principal. And we really think that they are going to do a great job for us there.
We agree. We see a difference. We see team building in the school. We see new programs being brought in. We see participation from the community, which will be of great help in helping to turn that around.
Absolutely. 412 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 And we have already talked with them about working with them in a collaborative way in any way we can. Thank you.
Thank you. Please identify yourself for the record and proceed with your testimony. GLORIA GUARD: Hi, Madam President. I am Gloria Guard, the Executive Director of People's Emergency Center and also here with my hat on as the Director of the People's Emergency Community Development Corporation. I have given you my written testimony, and want to just hit the highlights. Because I know that you have had a long day, and there are plenty of more people behind me.
I realize that one of the most important and major challenges facing Council and the Administration is to determine how to best allocate limited resources to address the alarming problem of depopulation of the city. Nonetheless, I will not attempt to speak to the relative importance of various potential 413 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 interventions. I believe that the flight of people and resources in a city like ours is both complex and multi-faceted, and it requires a comprehensive, coordinated approach. There is no single simple magic bullet. My testimony today is focused on the Neighborhood Transformation Initiative. Not because I feel that NTI is necessarily more important than other interventions, but because I realize and think that it is an essential part of the solution. And it is particularly essential to West Philadelphia, where PEC and PECCDC is, because we are in a neighborhood that has been affected by flight, but also has a tremendous amount of potential for being restabilized. And being so close to the University of Pennsylvania, we have a tremendous amount of potential of being a real center for economic growth. My understanding is that there will be a more appropriate time in the future to come in on the more detailed aspects of NTI, so my comments today are relatively general. 414 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 First, I wanted to support the intent of NTI and its general goals. Which is, we support its long-term commitment to having a strategy to revitalize our neighborhoods, to ensure that that strategy includes coordinated neighborhood and citywide planning, eradicating blight, enforcing codes, abating public nuisance, streamlining and expediting the property acquisition and disposition processes, simplifying the development financing system, and attracting private market, the private market factor into our communities. I think these are the right goals and that these goals should be able to generate widespread public support. Second I want to emphasize that a strong partnership between the city and Community Development Corporations, or CDCs, is critical to successful implementation of the NTI. Our city is truly a city of neighborhoods, and our future is inextricably tied to the health of those very neighborhoods. CDCs have a long-term commitment to working with community residents to rebuild the physical, economic, and social fabric of our 415 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 respective neighborhoods. We have the capacity, as well as the commitment, and we are able and uniquely positioned to leverage the resources that are needed. Third, the NTI has already been an important catalyst for CDCs. There has been momentum developed. I think we need to take advantage of that. For example, in our neighborhood, over a year and a half ago we pulled together a Neighborhood Transformation Initiative Advisory Council, including everyone from block captains, to the University of Pennsylvania, from the West Powelton Concerned Community Council, to the City Planning Commission; to people from Jannie Blackwell's office and people who are greening experts. And we started that process. We went block by block identifying every single vacant property and lot in our area. This was a painstaking process. And today we have a full report on the incidents of blight and proposed blight elimination intervention report that we can provide to you. It shows that there is 175 vacant 416 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 properties in our area. It assesses their physical condition and proposes a specific blight elimination treatment for each property, whether or not that be demolition and encapsulation, lot clean-up, or whatever. The second phase of our process is the neighborhood transformation phase, in which we will plan re-uses for each of these blighted properties.
Although we are in the very early stages of this, we have identified temporarily at least 30 new units of special-needs housing, 50 units of homeownerships which would be for moderate-income families, hopefully those working at nearby Penn or Presbyterian Hospital, and 35 units of affordable rental housing, among other plans. So we have substantial momentum and a lot of expectations block by block. We don't want to lose that. Fourth, I urge City Council to work with the Administration and other neighborhood stakeholders to finalize the details and improve funding so that implementation can proceed in the near future. I don't know whether people realize how 417 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 much of the state and federal money is going to other parts of the region and missing Philadelphia, while we have held our development pipeline in abeyance. Without precious acquisition funds, CDCs cannot move forward. Without owning the property or having site control, we can't even ask people for money. Foundation's years are calendar year. We are pushing towards December. We will have lost a good year for the ability to ask foundations for money to put into developments. S. money from the state, tax credit financing is going to other regions because we don't have that threshold ability to acquire properties. And until we have that, our production system has ground to a halt. Development opportunities are missed, available resources have gone unleveraged, and momentum has waned. Finally, NTI must balance the needs of existing residents and potential new residents at all income levels. And we are all worried about losing 418 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 existing residents and gaining new residents. But we can't forget to keep our neighborhoods safe for our low-income residents who have no choice but to remain. We need to balance their quality of life against any plan for neighborhood revitalization. Again, thank you so much for the opportunity to testify. I am confident that under your leadership, Madam President, and in partnership with the Administration, City Council will work to implement NTI in a manner that will enable Philadelphia to more fully realize its potential.
Thank you so very much. Are there any questions from members of the committee? The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Blackwell.
Thank you, Madam President. I could not but take the opportunity to again always thank Gloria Guard for all People's Emergency Center and People's Emergency CDC does to help people. 419 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 I am so proud of the fact that they are the oldest organization in our city. They are in my district, and they do a fabulous job. Thank you.
Thank you very much. Our next witness is Jeff Ordower from ACORN. Good afternoon. Someone will distribute them. Would you identify yourself for the record, please. THERESA MORRIS: Good afternoon, Council President Verna and members of the Council. Thank you for taking the opportunity to hear me. I do have a handout that I am going to read. It is very brief. But I would also like to make a short statement following.
I'm sorry. Could you identify yourself for the record, please.
My name is Theresa Morris, and I am with ACORN. And I have a statement that I would like to read. And following the statement, I have a brief personal statement I would like to make to Council Members. Again, my name is Theresa Morris, and I am a member of the ACORN, 5,600-member family 420 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 organization of Philadelphia. The issue of blight and why people are leaving Philadelphia is obviously complicated. Education, job opportunities, and many other factors play a role in people leaving Philadelphia. However, there are some realities about housing of Philadelphia that make the housing most important issue for an anti-blight plan. First, the foreclosure rate has gone up 2 and a half times over the past five years. This is largely a result of homeowners taking out predatory loans and not being able to repay them. Second, there are tens of thousands of houses which will go vacant in the near future if the owners are not able to make needed repairs. These homes are located in low- and moderate-income neighborhoods. Right now, many of these homeowners are not getting work done, or are going to predatory lenders. What this means is that we can demolish all the houses we want now. But unless we save the houses we've still got, we will have the same problem of vacancies again three years from now. 421 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 Despite the efforts of ACORN and the City Council, the city has no power to prosecute predatory lenders. We need to treat the other side of this problem. As a result, the anti-blight program needs to include substantial money for home repair. Some of that money should be in the form of grants, and other money in the form of city-backed loans. Banks have been unwilling to lend money in low- and moderate-income neighborhoods. And the city should back those loans, particularly if the banks relax their underwriting to give more loans to more people. Again, our city does not face a shortage of affordable housing. What we do face is the increasing number of vacant houses, block by block, neighborhood by neighborhood. We can demolish houses every year and treat the symptoms, or we can encourage home repair and treat the cause. Thank you.
Thank you very much. And I understand you want to make a very brief statement? 422 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01
I currently live in North Philadelphia. And I listened to Mr. Mondesire talk about how much he has gone through and how much he has spent to acquire deeds and titles to properties. He has money to back him to do these things. But these homeowners who are here in North Philadelphia and other areas do not have the kind of money that commercial building has to back them to help them do remodeling and revitalization for their neighborhoods. So that's why we are asking City Council to help the homeowner not only keep their homes, but bring the homes up to standards which they enjoy living and will remain here in the city. I myself am trying to buy a piece of property that I am currently living in. It was a beautiful home in North Philadelphia, a beautifully tree-lined block. But if you look past the trees, you will see abandoned houses. And in a minute the whole block will be abandoned, because no one wants to continue to live in those substandard conditions. 423 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 But without those people, we end up with empty lots. Sure you can continue to tear down or we can try to build up. And I personally go through a trial every day trying to acquire a loan from the bank. The interest rates are too high, I don't have enough backing. And I too would like to have a grant to help me fix up that home. It is a multi-family dwelling. So not only am I trying to fix up this home for myself, but I can bring a few other families in with me. And next to me I have four homes on one side and two on the opposite side of me. To look out my front window, I have three across the street. This is just in one block at the 1900 block of Erie Avenue. It is a beautiful block. You don't find many blocks today with trees that line the block. And it makes it so beautiful. But if we continue to tear down, we won't be able to find a tree anywhere. So Council Members and Madam President, 424 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 we just ask that you think about allocating some of that money to home grants for people to repair rather than tear down.
Thank you. JEFF ORDOWER: I am Jeff Ordower. I am the Head Organizer of ACORN. And I just want to add, based on the conversations that have been happening earlier today, particularly what Councilman Kenney was saying, if we want to look at the most cost-effective way to spend a limited pot of money, we need to leverage it. And home repair, repairing existing housing stock, is really the most effective way. Because you can do that with a combination of grants and loans. $250 million isn't enough to do large-scale development that really needs to be done. Thank you.
Thank you. Are there any questions or comments from members of the committee? Thank you both very much for your patience. Thank you for coming in to testify. 425 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 Our next witness is Melissa Weiler-Gerber. And after Melissa will be Melinia Page-Gaither. Is Ms. Gaither here? Sheldon Rich? Please identify yourself for the record. MELISSA WEILER-GERBER: My name is Melissa Weiler-Gerber. Members of City Council, interested citizens of Philadelphia, and particularly Council President Verna, thank you for the opportunity to appear today to participate in a critical dialogue about the health, growth, and vitality of our city. As one who lives, works, and plays in Philadelphia, I am deeply committed to this conversation and to this city. My name is Melissa Weiler-Gerber. I work in Center City, just a few blocks from City Hall, as the Executive Director of Women's Way the national oldest and largest women's funding federation. For nearly years, Women's Way has 24 been a pioneering cornerstone in this city, raising 25 funds and mobilizing community resources to assist a 426 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 network of agencies providing advocacy and social services to effect meaningful social change for women and girls in our community. Women's Way supports women and girls throughout their lives. Funding agencies that struggle with a diversity of compelling issues, such as, domestic violence, rape, child abuse, aging, reproductive health and freedom, job training, discrimination, breast cancer, and affordable housing. We recently polled our member agencies asking, if you could change one thing to improve the lives of women, what would it be? Although this poll was conducted to assist Women's Way with program design, the answers it yielded also may illuminate the broader discussion in which we are engaged today. Our agencies are concerned that Welfare Reform has left many in this city without incentive or ability to pursue an education or a meaningful career, indefinitely relegating these citizens to unsatisfying jobs and lifestyles. They are concerned that healthcare and insurance systems don't address adequately the needs 427 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 of women, particularly older women and women for whom English is not their primary language. They are concerned about a lack of affordable, safe housing for women and their children in our city. And a significant number of Women's Way agencies listed as their number one concern the physical safety of women. Women's Way thanks City Council for its leadership last year in conducting hearings about the police department's treatment of sex crimes in this city. Two Women's Way agencies, the Women's Law Project and Women Organized Against Rape took the lead in testifying at those hearings and in working with Commissioner Timoney to establish an unprecedented partnership between a police department and women and children's advocates. Women's Way is proud to have supported this critical work, but we suggest that there is much more to be done to ensure the safety of women and girls in our city. Women and girls are too often the victims of violence in their homes at the hands of 428 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 persons they once trusted and perhaps loved. They walk in fear on the streets of this city, knowing that rape can happen at any time and that rapists do not discriminate against women based on age, color, religion, economic standing, shape, or size. More foot patrols are needed to ensure the safety of our neighborhoods, to learn the nuances of relationships on each block, to be a presence. More and better quality counseling is needed to assist women who have survived violent encounters, with additional training for officers in dealing with these situations. Women's Way agencies have been working in this area for a quarter of a century and will continue to do so.
However, as our agency's work with the police department has demonstrated, we can accomplish so much more, ensuring the safety of so many more women and girls, when the city is our partner. I must now switch hats. For not only do I work within a few blocks of City Hall, I also live a short walk away. 429 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 Two and a half years ago my husband John and I took the plunge and purchased a home in Center City. The purchase was the manifestation of a shared commitment to city life and to living in this city in particular. Since then we have invested time, energy, and funds into making our house a home, first for us and now more completely for our eight-month-old daughter, Bee. For us, two key issues dictate our comfort or discomfort on any given day with our decision to live and raise a child in Center City. The first ties back to the concerns expressed by many Women's Way agencies, personal safety. We feel safest when we see a regular patrolling of our neighborhood, when the Center City District representatives are out and about keeping the area safe and clean, when controlled strategic leads to more foot traffic in the neighborhoods where we live, work, eat, and shop. Increased funding to enhance and expand foot and car patrols and the service areas of those 430 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 charged with keeping the city clean would be funds wisely spent. Continued funding of economic development initiatives is also critical to resuscitating and sustaining neighborhood safety and vitality. The second issue we deal with seems much harder to address, the public education system. Last year my husband and I extended an invitation to a few like-minded, city-dwelling couples to come to our house to speak with David Hornbeck about the problems facing public education in this city and this state. The couples we invited told a few more couples. And before we knew it, our living room was teaming with young couples and families committed to the city, but sorely concerned that the education system their tax dollars are helping to fund will not meet their expectations in time for their young or yet-to-be-born kids to be educated within it. For many young couples like us, there comes the ultimate choice. Do I sell out now by moving to the suburbs, where at least I can send my kids to public school, or do I stay in the city and 431 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 sell out later by sending my child to private school? We have opted for the latter, with heavy hearts, since both my husband and I are public-schooled and firm believes in a public school education. We hold out hope that in a few years, when Bee is ready to head off to kindergarten, there will be a public school in which we feel confident. However, that hope is faint. Realistically, our friends who have opted to purchase homes in the city have done so with the expectation that they will either privately school their children or that they will move out of the city when their children reach school age. We are committed to being part of a dialogue about changing the way public education is funded, if that proves to be the solution. However, it falls upon the city to find a way to work with the state to reinvigorate this public school system and to correct the disparities that exist between an education in the city and an education in the suburbs. Otherwise, continued urban flight is all but guaranteed. 432 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 In both my personal and professional capacities, I have committed to working with city leadership to make the city a better place for my daughter and for all of Philadelphia's babies, children, mothers, and families. We live in an amazing city, with a wealth of nonprofit or for-profit leadership that can partner with city officials to improve life for all who live here. We must seize this opportunity. Thank you very much.
Thank you very much. Are there any questions from members of the committee? Thank you for your patience. And I do thank you for coming in to testify. Sheldon Rich? He left. Gregory Jenkins. GREGORY JENKINS: Good afternoon.
My name is Gregory Jenkins. I am a private citizen. I live in Mt. 433 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 Airy. I have lived in South Philadelphia and West Philadelphia. I have lived in Philadelphia my entire life. And I came down here because I wanted to talk about what I have seen and the people I know, and why people, why I see people, wanting to leave this city. And I think for families, the number one reason is the public education system. And I have been listening and I have heard other people address the same points I wanted to make. I have also heard people talk about taxes and the wage tax, the property tax, and the cost of utilities. But when you add those all up, they don't come close to the price of a private education. And, yet, I see working families who struggle to pay for a private education. And, to me, that's proof that that's a primary decision that parents and families have to make. And a lot of people are making the 434 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 decision that it is easier to go out to the suburbs or to move to another city and get a better public education. I would put it to City Council that if Philadelphia had a reputation for guaranteeing every child a quality education, that people would be flowing to this city, that that alone would be enough to bring people here. The second thing I wanted to talk about -- it is not as important, but I think it is significant -- and that is the fact of auto insurance in this city is a very big disincentive. Six years ago a former coworker of mine told me he was a young man who was a new driver, and he was living at home with his parents. He told me that he calculated that by moving to the suburbs, what he saved on auto insurance would cover the cost of having his own apartment. For a new driver, that's not unusual. When I was a new driver, I was paying 15 percent of my net income for auto insurance. Now, to me, this basically comes down to enforcement of the laws. And I know that there is a law on the books that people caught without 435 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 insurance should have their cars seized. I don't see that happening. From what I hear, it is not happening. I would also like to ask the people who are present, how many people do you know who have been hit in an auto accident and then the other driver just drives off? And that's treated like a minor offense in this city. I think it is a 200, 250 dollar fine. I think that's less than what the fine is for abandoning a car. And the reason people do that is because they are driving without insurance. I will make this brief. But before I go, I would like to address something that Councilman Ortiz said about his daughter -- I am sorry, it was about his niece. And the reason I want to comment on it is because it echoes something that one of my best friends said to me. And she is my age, so she is not in the same generation that he was talking about. But she has lived for more than 15 years in Los Angeles. And she told me that she could never 436 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 move back to Philadelphia because it was too close-minded a city. And I'm not sure how you address a problem like that. But, you know, I have been -- I have worked in city government for years. And one of 7 the things that I have heard that I find most 8 frustrating is when somebody says to you, "We don't 9 do it like that," and they think that's the end of 10 the conversation. 11 So I know that's an intangible thing, 12 but I wanted to sort of say that there is a 13 mentality there that contributes to making it hard 14 to get new businesses to start in this city and to 15 keeping our young people here. 16 Thank you. 17
Thank you. I know you have been very patient. You have been sitting in the audience for quite some time. And we want you to know we appreciate your patience and your coming in to testify. Thank you so much.
Our next witness is Todd Kimmel. 437 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 Good evening.
Thank you. TODD KIMMEL: It is late in the day. Thank you to the folks that are still here and thank you for putting this all together. I just wanted to say first off, I love Philadelphia so much, I really do, but I am also moving. I absolutely adore this town. I am going to stay and work here. You will not find a bigger booster for Philadelphia than me. I have talked up this town. I have dragged people into this town back here who moved away. And I love the place.
Number one is the schools. It is as simple as that. And my wife taught school in a middle school in West Philly. She lasted ten weeks. Her phone was cut, she was locked in her room twice with a broken broom handle, she was hit. And she is a good teacher, and she is a 438 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 doll, and I love her. She was devoted. The other teachers were amazed that she was able to teach, she was teaching art, that she was able to do the things that she was doing and get the kids to do the work that they were doing. " You know, but she was teaching art, she lept right in. But after ten weeks, she finally gave up. It was killing her. She stopped eating and, you know, was losing weight, and her skin was sallow. And this is a bright and beautiful gal. Anyway, the main problem in Philadelphia is the schools. And it is not just because I don't want my kids to go to public school. The schools are a problem. And it is a problem then that all sorts of bad things come from that. Because there is not a good solid base that we are building off of. The class sizes, as other people have said already, are much too large. And even all the trouble she would come home and tell me about, we weren't blaming the kids, 439 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 either. " Yes, partly it is the kids, sure. You know you want to give them a little smack, but you are not going to. But you know what I mean. But good parents. " But my wife said that the parents would come in. And often, as often as not or more often than not, two-parent families. It is not always the single-mom syndrome, even though there are hard-working single moms doing their thing. So it was not an easy-blame thing. And those parents would sit there and they would say, "My child does not talk this way at home. " And my wife would believe that, you know. But in a class of 34, 35 kids in a room 21 with nothing to dampen the sound, and every desk without a plastic on the bottom so that every single desk goes, rrrrrr, when you move it. And the kids, that many kids in one class, even if she is a terrific teacher, which she 440 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 is, you can't keep them, not when they are or however old they are in middle school, you can't keep them focused when there is that many kids. And it was mayhem, and it was a shame. And it made we want to cry, the stories that she would bring home. So out of that, though, comes a general disregard for other people and the community in general. I mean, if there is no effective discipline in the school -- and there wasn't; there was absolutely no effective discipline in that school, and the kids knew that. And if I was a 12-year-old in a school that had no effective discipline at all, I would have run rough-shot over the whole thing. Because that's what you do when you are 12. I am not saying all the problems are 12-year-old problems. But his is an experience that we had. Anyway, the problem, as far as I am concerned, the main problem, is, and the main thing that we need help with, because it is not going -- you can't squeeze it out of anywhere else here. We 441 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 need help from the state level, from the national level. You all know this. I am just expressing it. But the problem is the schools. Kids in school, in smaller classes, you could get them involved in civics and democracy and understand what it means to be a Philadelphian, an American. I mean, here is an opportunity when people are starting to talk about that kind of thing. Well, apply that to kids so that they feel that they have some worth in their neighborhood. That they feel if there is a problem in their neighborhood, they can get together and make it happen, in conjunction with your Councilpeople, and get involved with them. There is a lot of sort of us versus them in neighborhoods, people feeling there is no 19 connection, often, to their Councilpeople and to Council and to City Hall.
But the basic things, like littering, which drives me bananas, that should be covered in school. That should be covered in elementary school. " 442 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 And if they are not getting it from their mom, they are getting it from their classmates, and so there is peer pressure. There is all this opportunity for positive peer pressure that we are not seeing, and I believe that that comes out of the school, if it is not coming from home. " Well, that has this terrible bugaboo that goes with it. You know, who is moral? Okay? Whose morals? But at the same time, if you present it as sort of civic education, and get that started from the very beginning, kids will feel involved. And that's terribly important. One other reason I am leaving Philadelphia. I grew up, all my childhood years and teenage years, on the campus of Cheyney State College. And that was during the whole civil rights era. And I absolutely cringe every time, this is not -- every time I hear the N word, I go bananas. And it is used on the street constantly. It is pouring out of cars. People use it while 443 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 hollering at each other. I don't mean white people addressing black people. I mean black folks talking to each other. It is a cultural thing, but it is not a cultural thing that I have gotten to. And I have real trouble with that. And it just drives me bananas. And in other places besides Philadelphia, that doesn't happen. Maybe a little bit, but not in the level that it is happening here. That is just a little thing. I will leave you just with a last odd bit, but an example. I mean, I could ramble about city services not performing. But an odd thing -- and I turn to you, Councilman Kenney, to perhaps put the good word in with our Police Commissioner, who I think is a terrific guy -- white guys on motorcycles. White guys on motorcycles are a problem in Philadelphia because they have, often as not, have straight drag pipes. And you will not have that in the suburbs. You will not have that in any other town 444 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 but Philadelphia. I don't know if your aware of this, but that's against the law everywhere. And even places like Harley Davidson recommend you not have straight drag pipes, that you have a muffler. But to spend two hours trying to get a cranky baby to sleep, and then have a motorcycle with straight drag pipes go tearing up the street, shaking all the shutters and all the car alarms going off, and then roaring right past the police, and the police don't stop and write a ticket, gives a general feel. That is one of a thousand of a little things. But it gives a general feel like, okay, nobody has my back here. Nobody is looking out for me. And so that's just, again, one small example. I wanted to leave you with that thought. And thank you for putting this forum together.
Believe it or not, Burlington, of all places. It is a small city. And if there is an 445 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 abandoned car in front of my house, I bet if I call up about it, it might get moved in less than one month's time. But I will continue to work at 3rd and market. I am a historian. We have a space there. We have a blast. I love this town, but I need to breathe. Thank you.
Thank you very much. John Chin. JOHN CHIN: Madam President and City Council members, thanks for keeping me company. If I had known, maybe we can close up City Council and go to Chinatown for dinner.
All right. I think everything that needs to be said has been said the last two days, I guess. One thing that I haven't heard today, while sitting here listening to testimony, is the fact that there are neighborhoods in the City of Philadelphia that are growing. And I want to point to the fact that 446 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 Councilman Kenney had sort of raised that issue in his report that he has done this past year. He has referred to other cities like New York and Boston, where immigration has brought benefits to the cities in Boston and New York, and to some extent here in Philadelphia. I know in Chinatown, we have had a 9 percent increase in population just in our three 10 census tracts. 11 The City of Philadelphia overall has 12 seen a little over 50 percent increase in the Asian 13 population, and Pennsylvania has seen about 61 14 percent increase in Asian population. 15 So in Chinatown we really do believe 16 that public investment spurs private investment and 17 brings a return to the City of Philadelphia. 18 We practice it, and we plan future 19 developments that will also do the same thing for 20 the City of Philadelphia. If you look at what Chinatown has in terms of public services, there really are none. And you have heard this in the past. There is no health services, no youth services, no senior citizen services, and there is 447 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 no community center. We are limited in the amount of space that we have for growth. We are boxed in by different developments on the southeast, north and west sides. But we have been fortunate that we have been able to jump over the Vine Street Expressway. And three years ago we developed 51 units of home-ownership housing. That was a $7 million project. And on an annual basis that brings over $100,000 in real estate taxes to the City of Philadelphia. So the home funds that we do receive to build affordable housing in Chinatown does have a return for the city. In addition to that, I think Chinatown is unique in the fact that we're one of only two or three neighborhoods in the City of Philadelphia that provides a product to our constituents, which is culturally-sensitive services and other needs. PCDC, as a nonprofit organization, has a five-year strategic plan to grow the community north up to Spring Garden Street, and we have a vision for the growth of the overall city. 448 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 I think Philadelphia needs to be sold to the public not only as a destination for companies and businesses, but also as a destination for other residents and immigrants specifically. You know, there has been a lot of concentration on population loss and how to bring the people back. I think there also needs to be a concentration of people that have remained in Philadelphia, have made a commitment to stay. And these are probably the people that can't afford to leave. So affordable housing and economic and commercial development in neighborhoods are very, very important tools that we need to use to revitalize communities. And I think the city agencies really need to work with CDCs like Chinatown Development Corporation and other CDCs across the city. Because we know our communities best and we know how best to apply funding, if and when there is funding, from the City of Philadelphia, for acquisition and for future development. And, I mean, right now we are working on 449 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 Chinatown North Phase Two, which is housing units, but has taken us four years. And we are not at ground-breaking yet, but we are very close. We have been working on the Chinatown Community Center, which is our Phase Three project, for a couple of years. And because there are no 8 acquisition dollars, that project has been stalled. So these are the things we really need to look at.
We need to concentrate on the people 11 that remain in the City of Philadelphia and see how we can help them, because they will help revitalize and rebuild the neighborhoods and eventually rebuild the city.
Thank you. I appreciate your testimony. Any questions or comments from members of the committee? Mr. Chin, thank you very much. Our last witness, Jovida Hill. JOVIDA HILL: Thank you, Councilwoman Verna, for this opportunity. What I am going to say, really, you have heard several people just before me. And I will just be reiterating and putting my two cents in. 450 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 The loss of the city's population has been tremendously devastating to our local economy and to our city's tax base. What is most telling is that young people love the city until it is time for them to have children. And when faced with the prospect of enrolling them in poor schools, they opt out and flee to the suburbs. I love Philadelphia. I love our wonderful cultural and educational institutions. I love the vitality of many of our neighborhoods, the magnificent architecture, and the revitalization of Center City. I love the convenience of the city, of not being enslaved by my automobile. And I am a life-long resident. And over the course of four decades, I have lived in several neighborhoods in the city. I am a Philadelphia resident by choice. Years ago my husband and I agonized over staying or leaving. And our discussions always came back to the schools, always. But we stayed anyway. I raised two sons here. Both of them graduated from Philadelphia public schools. And we 451 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 consider ourselves quite lucky, they did very well. But you heard Ms. Phillips earlier today. And she mentioned some of our marvelous magnet schools. Well, I don't think an education should be a matter of luck. I don't think it is right that getting a quality education isn't guaranteed to every single child. By not delivering on this guarantee, our politicians and civic leaders have let us down. What is happening in our schools and what is happening to our children should be a matter of shared blame and shared shame. I am offended that public dollars are being spent to pay for a private, for-profit corporation to audit our school system so that they can recommend hiring themselves to privatize all or a portion of our schools. I am offended that prominent voices in our community are rallying around privatization and charter schools, even though they remain unproven solutions to poor student performance. I am offended that classroom teachers are being forced to teach children how to take 452 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 standardized tests, instead of engaging students and challenging them with inquisitiveness, critical thinking, and the pure joy of learning. All are hallmarks of a good education. I fear that we will be turning out a generation of marvelous test-takers who have yet to be educated. I am offended that dedicated, caring teachers -- and you heard the gentleman before me talk about his wife -- are amongst the lowest paid in the region. They have to struggle daily in dilapidated buildings with tainted water. They have few textbooks, inadequate classroom materials, and they are being scapegoated by a School Board and city and state officials who have consistently underfunded our most important institutions, which remain our schools. If City Council is really serious about keeping people in the city, then City Council needs to make school improvement its top priority. It is no secret that study after study shows that there is a definite correlation between student performance and smaller class size. " Well, I challenge Council and the Mayor to look at a totally new funding stream for education. If keeping residents in the city is critical to the economic health of Philadelphia, why not look at school improvement as a long-term economic development program?
Use economic development dollars to reduce class size, make teacher salaries more competitive to attract the best and the brightest, reinstitute residency requirements for teachers, renovate deteriorating schools, build new ones, invigorate the curriculum, upgrade textbooks, install technology in the classroom, improve in-service teacher training, institute after-school remedial and enrichment programs. In other words, adequately fund the Philadelphia school system to create a world-class education system that produces world-class students and world-class citizens. 454 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 Use local, state, and federal economic development dollars to create a nationally recognized school system that becomes so attractive that people want to move here just so their kids can go to the best public schools in the nation. A highly educated work force is attractive to employers who know they can fill jobs with young people who are educated in our school system. It becomes an additional incentive for businesses looking to relocate here. This, to me, gives us more of a return than the urban blight proposal. That seems to me -- and I don't know much about it -- but it seems to me it is more of a demolition project than a rebuilding project. It gives us more of a return than the resources that go into building the tourism industry that has turned our city's wage structure into that of a service economy, which provides low-wage jobs with high turnover and few benefits. We need to position our city to attract employers that can provide our young people with careers, not jobs. And there is a distinction. Looking at school improvement as an 455 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 economic development project provides us with a far better return than building new sports stadiums and entertainment complexes. If we do not find a way to adequately fund our schools and make the necessary financial sacrifices needed to improve the Philadelphia public school system, we will have failed our children, and that would be the biggest abuse of public trust that I can imagine. Thank you very much.
Thank you. Any questions or comments from members of the committee?
Before I leave, I would also like to add, I couldn't leave without taking this opportunity to thank the City Council members who voted against Bill 629. I thank you so much. Thank you. And I hope the Mayor vetoes it.
Thank you. Is there anyone else to testify? Do we have anyone else to testify? Seeing none, this committee will stand in recess until the call of the Chair. 456 RESOLUTION 010562 - 10/17/01 Thank you very much. (Public Hearing adjourned at 5:30 p.m.) - - - 457 C E R T I F I C A T I O N I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing proceedings of the Council of the City of Philadelphia of Wednesday, October 17, 2001, were reported fully and accurately by me, and that this is a correct transcript of same. RE: COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE _____________________________________ DEBRA A. WHITEHEAD