Thank you so much, Chairwoman. I just have a couple questions that could be really helpful for residents who are interested in the Turn the Key program. How do you plan to market the Turn the Key program to moderate income residents, just residents in general in this budget process -- I mean, in this H.O.M.E. Initiative? A lot of people are interested in it. How do you find ways to get the word out to the people that you're trying to target?
Well, I mean right now again it being an existing program, there is already marketing mechanisms in place. I believe there's an open house this weekend, but I'd like to call up Angel Rodriguez to talk about their existing strategy around marketing and what they're looking to do on the horizon.
Great. And as he comes up I just want to ask you, Jesse, if you could explain, a lot of this work is going to be upgrades to the housing initiatives that we're doing in the city. Can you provide -- and it's important for efficiency and accessibility. Can you provide how much of the budget will be allocated to technology upgrades within the Department of Planning and Development, particularly to help with application processing, data-sharing and service delivery across housing? Those are my only two questions.
Sure. So I'll let Angel answer his question first. And then I'll pull up this information that you need.
Thanks, Jesse. MR. RODRIGUEZ Good afternoon, Councilman. Angel Rodriguez, PHDC Land Bank. We utilize a high touch and low touch marketing process. High touch being we have a team of outreach personnel that go out weekly, go to local churches, faith-based groups, community centers and then host meetings with actual developers, bankers and community members just to explain the Turn the Key program. Then the low touch would be media buys. We're on SEPTA. We use radio like WURD Radio and other radio stations. We do print ads. We do typically find community partners, depending on where we are targeting to do our outreach. And we also partner with a lot of our developers and local nonprofits and housing counseling agencies to put out flyers and make sure that it's getting out through a whole network throughout the city.
We are committing $1 million to operational and programmatic efficiency assessment. Within that, we will be looking at how we can improve programs within our systems -- not programs, the systems within our particular departments to figure out the best way to stand this --
Yeah. And so, we are also working, to Jesse's point, very closely with our IT department led by Melissa Scott Walker. We have some of those capabilities already inhouse to begin to have that application, that One Front Door application already. And so, some of that is already built into the FY26 budget.
And a lot of that has been identified through our executive order process, which that report does specify where there might be a need for some system upgrades or reformation around the process of developing.
Thank you. I just want to say that's great to hear because I know the first thing residents are going to find out how do I apply for all these programs, it's too many, can I just do one spot, so that's really good. And I'm willing to help you all with the marketing. I can give you a list of agencies that are serving our neighborhood that could probably you could send information to for Turn the Key and hopefully they can get the word out too. MR. RODRIGUEZ Thank you. I would ask any Councilmembers, we're trying to build a calendar out of where we should be reaching out. We've been in the 8th District. We're going to be in the 2nd District this weekend. We've been in the 3rd District. So if you have any ideas or places where we can go, where we can actually do the outreach for people that are interested in Turn the Key, we will definitely send our team out there.
Thank you very much, Councilmember Phillips. The Chair now recognizes Councilmember Harrity.
Thank you, Leader. Thank you all for being here all morning. I know it's been a long morning. Just real quick, this should be it. How many full- time jobs do we estimate the H.O.M.E. Initiative will create?
So we're estimating 41,500 full-time jobs. And I'd like to call up Emily Persico, our Deputy Director for Development Services to talk about the quantification effort around that. Emily. And what Emily will get into the detail about is how we came to that number, specifically around looking at our own kind of track record of projects coming out of public sector.
Good afternoon. Emily Persico, Deputy Director of Development Services, Department of Planning and Development. How we quantified is that we looked at a combination of LIHTC projects which track the hourly time spent by construction workers. So we looked at that for both new construction and also for preservation projects. And then we basically extract extrapolated that. And then we also looked at a study done by the National Association of Home Builders, which quantified -- it was basically like an economic impact study of local areas of construction. And we were able to quantify that for single family housing, up to four family housing. And then we basically applied that to the numbers that were predicted that basically the money would be spending out on for home building.
Okay. The 41k in jobs, what does that look like? Are they union jobs? Can you describe some of the positions we're going to have? Are they new jobs? Are they existing jobs that we're just planning on -- do you get what I'm saying?
We looked at it in the sense of job creation, numbers of jobs generated as a result of the goals that we've set out. So they very well could be the union jobs. But I mean, again that number was quantified based off job creation as a result of our target goals for development.
We can get back to you to figure out -- I mean, not to figure out, but to confirm what that breakdown would be with the details that you're asking for.
Yeah, just to be curious, you know, for us guys in the trades this is big for us. I mean, trying to make sure that it's nice that we're building houses, but we also have people working so that we can put them into those houses, but I think it all kind of goes together.
I mean, there's some preliminary thoughts we can already confirm. Like their LIHTC jobs, LIHTC projects that will require prevailing wage. So there will be prevailing wage components to those types of jobs. But we can get that breakdown for you. And this number that we're talking about, we've ran that by the trades community here in Philadelphia.
Yeah, we've done our due diligence. I want to recognize that.
Appreciate that. All right. And then the only other thing real quick is the new housing initiative expands eligibility for 60% to 100% of the Area's Medium Income. How many additional Philadelphians now expected to qualify for these homes? And what will the application process look like, particularly regarding credit score and stuff like that?
I mean, I think we take a page from our own book about how we review applications like that, understanding that there might be some circumstances around the credit worthiness and just things that affect our constituency. We've taken those steps in relaxing certain requirements around other application, programs for applications. So, we recognize this is something that's a variable that we need to bake in. And your other question was?
Well, it was in regard with the credit checks and stuff like that. That's what I'm just -- I'm just worried about people getting approved. I've been through the process and I know how it is and --
To the tune of what we commit to providing in more detail, we can definitely get the numbers on the current waitlist and not just the current waitlist, but folks that have been denied. And that'll help us quantify or continue to quantify how many more people this is going to provide the government.
I mean, we're the government. I believe that we can set the credit score --
-- ourselves and make it so people can actually get into these homes. That's all.
Yeah. We'll get that shortly. That's easy to run just based on census data so we can estimate eligible households.
Yeah, just you know what I'm saying. We're the government. We don't need to make money. We also don't really, you know, the thing is to get people in housing. So the easier we can make that process and that credit score means a lot. Anybody that's going through the process knows. So thank you though.
Thank you. Thank you very much, Councilmember Harrity. The Chair now recognizes Councilmember O'Rourke.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I also had a clarifying question as relates to the Basic Systems Repair Program and Built to Last. It's kind of been addressed several different times. I'm honestly a little bit more confused now on the back end than I was before. So I'll let that one rock and we'll see what we get. But I do have a question that I want to clarify around funding for proactive inspections that I think Mr. Dubow came up to answer at the beginning, especially considering that Ms. Brooks underscored that this plan is proactive, not reactive just before the break. I understand that there is a very small increase in funding for L&I, but that doesn't answer the question when what I really mean by my question of why we aren't investing a significant amount of this H.O.M.E. budget into preventing our homes from falling into conditions that need repair. We could spend less than million annually to hire 110 6 inspection inspectors to see in 7 Harrity's emphasis, good family- 8 sustaining union jobs that would 9 proactively keep homes in good 10 condition. Why aren't we doing this?
The staff positions that the City is taking on are not included in this H.O.M.E. plan budget. They're not being funded out of bond funds at all.
And I know that we also addressed that earlier. But in terms of L&I staffing, as you saw through the H.O.M.E. Executive Order response that we've made public, whether it was L&I Quality of Life -- both sides of the house of L&I. They were at the table doing the assessment, looking at what are the barriers, what are the red tapes, what do we need to be successful. And so, in our budget that we proffered even with our FY26 proposal is reflective of that.
Thank you. Thank you very much, Councilmember O'Rourke. The Chair now recognizes Councilmember Landau.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you all still for being here. Appreciate you. I want to ask about the expansion of the Shallow Rent program. The Shallow Rent program provides an additional subsidy of up to $500 per month to cost-burdened low-income tenants and affordable housing units to cover the shallow gap between the 30% of their monthly income and the cost of housing. The subsidy goes to affordable housing providers to reduce the tenant portion of rent. My understanding is that the Shallow Rent program serves 300 households per month, and 80% of Shallow Rent participant households rent low-income tax credit units, and most units that are rented are affordable at 50% of AMI. So I'm glad to see there's additional funding for the Shallow Rent program through this initiative. And can you share how you arrived at the amount of $8 million in additional funding? How many new households do you anticipate will participate in the program with that additional funding? And can you share how many eligible households that will cover? And essentially what I'm really asking is, what is the overall number of cost-burdened affordable housing renters that exist in Philadelphia? And will the $8 million in new funding fully close the gap?
So I'd like to start off by recognizing that the tenant-based Shallow Rent program that you're asking about proposes to serve 1000 households in this particular bond funding effort. I will defer to Mark Dodds to talk a little bit more about what that number has looked like historically in usage to put it in more context for you.
Yeah, thank you for the question. We did conduct a study inhouse in collaboration with PHDC that helped us to arrive at a figure. You're right, this isn't going to erase the total need that exists there for our low-income populations in the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit units. That population allowed us to kind of get a number that we could wrap our heads around, that we could think about increasing. So right now our Shallow Rent program is funded with 2.69 I believe million in Housing Trust Fund money. This proposes to -- it almost doubles what goes towards the program. And it's not going to get us all the way there, you're right. But it is going to make a sizable dent. It is going to build on an existing successful program. And we have an RFP out right now so we are looking for applicants to respond to that. And one of the things I'll note too is that the program has been historically undersubscribed. So what we want to do when we award new applicants through this RFP process is to increase the number of people, because we're not currently serving everyone we could quite frankly, and we've noticed some gaps in the program that will allow us to maximize the funding under the H.O.M.E. bond.
But we've already established we have a tremendous need in the city to help our lowest-income Philadelphians TO attain housing. But this plan expands their Shallow Rent program to units that are affordable above 80% of AMI. So I'm just curious -- I didn't get the actual figures that I wanted here. But in essence, we have a significant -- we have a housing crisis for our lowest-income folks in Philadelphia. We have a great program that will fill the gap so that they can actually get into tax credit- subsidized places. I'm sure we need to do more work on that. We will all roll up our sleeves and do more work on that to make that happen. But I don't think the answer is to expand it up to 80% of AMI for folks who could actually have many more choices of where they can live.
And I think that's one of the assumptions that we are working to prove that's actually not true, because you can't just look at AMI in an isolated vacuum. We may be making the same -- let's say myself and my colleague Greg have the same earnings. But beyond our income, I may have more cost burden because I have more people outside of the traditional dependence relying on me for to meet their basic needs, right. So we are looking, yes, at AMI, that's important, but that's one of several, many different factors. And so, I think it's just what we're doing is saying AMI is an important factor but there are factors beyond that. But to that end, I'll kick it over to Greg.
No, again I think we all agree that the existing Shallow Rent program is a great program. I was honored to be involved in launching it and we're pleased to be putting more resources into it. Again, it will be great with all of these programs to have the funding to 100% address all of the need, you know, across everything from the BSRP to AMP to Shallow Rent. The goal though, which has actually been a goal for a long time, was to expand the program into a portable voucher that tenants could use outside of Low-Income Housing Tax Credit projects. So I do want to set the record straight on what the new program is, is that it's creating a voucher that's outside of LIHTC project. And the idea is, yes, to expand the income eligibility so it can include essential workers like City workers, teachers, nurses and others to be able to afford a quality property. The funding that we put in for the expanded Shallow Rent would provide for about 550 tenant- based vouchers to allow access for either low-income households or middle-income households to access apartments.
I hear you. I need to ask one more kind of companion question to show where I think the need needs to be. I wanted to talk about the PHL Housing Plus program. It's really an innovative project. It's been on NPR. HUD has talked about our program. It's so great. It's a pilot program that I believe is ending soon. Do we plan to continue the program? If not, what's happening to the households and the pilot? Is it just ending? If so, can they receive support going forward so families who have been receiving a cash transfer that helps them pay their rent aren't left with nothing after a program we used to invest in just ends? Again, we've gotten a lot of press about this throughout the country and all of a sudden this is something we know works. We're giving cash to folks to help them pay their rent. It's ending. I believe we don't have an answer for it. There is an entire category of folks who I believe are going to be left out of this plan. I am all for $800 million investment housing. I cannot wait for this. I want to be a part of this transformational change that we're doing in Philadelphia, but I think we're making a mistake at the bottom and we have to put the focus on it now.
We have made the case that we're not leaving out the bottom while also thinking about teachers and firefighters and nurses and municipal workers. We'll continue to demonstrate that and answer the questions that you have, but it's really important that I dispel that notion that by focusing or expanding the focus, that we're forgetting about those who are considered the least of these. That is not the case. That is not the case. Just because someone is low income and we're expanding or increasing the AMI doesn't mean that we're not prioritizing someone that is low income anymore. What we're saying is that we can expand the prioritization and we attempt to do that. And I believe that it is a very sound proposal through this proposal. But I'll kick it over to Greg -- I'm sorry, Dave.
Please forgive me because I just walked back in from a board meeting. So if you could tell me exactly your question, so I can --
The question was about the PHL Housing Plus program. I believe it's ending -
-- and what's the plan? It's a pilot program that has gotten great success around the country in great press. Philadelphia is on the map for it. It's ending. What's the plan? And what are we going to do with these families who have been receiving cash to help them stay in their houses?
Well, that's a good question. I've been working with some of the philanthropic folks that have funded that program to try to extend that deadline beyond June. We're certainly not just going to leave the families with no support. We're actually working with a couple of the partners, PHA included, because those individuals actually are on the waiting list for Section 8. That's how we identify people for that program. So those folks hopefully -- in some cases throughout that study I want to say about 20% of the folks received vouchers during the study so they were dropped out of the program during that period. And so, we're working with our housing providers to see whether or not we can find a way in which we can get them steady, stable housing.
Okay. We'll follow up on that one. Thank you very much.
Thank you. Thank you very much, Councilmember Landau. The Chair now recognizes Councilmember Young.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Just a couple quick questions. There's a lot of information to hear about, education and things like that to keep property owners informed. But is there any programs to help out the home seller, right? Because earlier in the conversation there was talk about how folks get their predatory calls and we want to allow folks the opportunity to get all the equity that's in their property. Does the H.O.M.E. Initiative include any programs to help property owners in these gentrifying neighborhoods to maintain their or educate them on the equity in their properties?
So the one program that does speak to that is the Home Appraisal Bias looking into that, and we have that housed in DPD right now -
So I think that's appraisals with appraisals and bias in that particular industry. I'm talking about is there a specific program to help the actual homeowner understand their own equity in their own property?
I'd like to call up Kathleen Grady who can talk to how that program that we do house around Home Appraisal Bias does speak to other elements outside. Actually --
-- I'm going to actually call up our new Director of Home Appraisal Bias Andy Toy. (Witness approached Witness table.)
So essentially, what in this H.O.M.E. Initiative is geared toward property owners to educate them on their equity in their properties in some of these gentrifying neighborhoods or not gentrifying neighborhoods, just the neighborhoods throughout the city?
Okay. I understand that. One, we talked about this earlier. Housing counseling is very important so working with agencies that we already have the relationships with, that's where they will get that education around equity and how to utilize that if they're looking to sell a home. So that's the first part of that question. And we know that there are organizations that we've worked with. Councilmember mentioned Esperanza earlier. Clarifi's another organization that we've had a longstanding relationship with through Financial Empowerment and CEO that does that work as well. But that Home Appraisal Bias is also really important. And if we can just really quickly, because I know Councilmember Majority Leader asked us to be succinct, so I'll Andy Toy to come up to talk briefly about that.
Sure. And just to follow up on that, there is funding in the H.O.M.E. program in the budget for outreach and education. So part of that will be towards the homeowners. Part of that's towards the other industries that are involved, the appraisers and the bankers and even the City employees that are involved in the process. And we just had a meeting this morning -- Day by 7 the way for me. We just had a 8 meeting this morning about how we 9 do that, how we can better do that 10 outreach and the materials that we 11 have to put out there. So we're at 12 the beginning of it -- we're in the 13 middle of it I should say, but we 14 are working towards that goal. 15
Thank 16 you. And one final question about 17 the pre-authorized disposition. How does one get on that list and Will that list be rolling?
It will definitely be a rolling list. And we'd like to talk much more closely with Council about how additions are made to that list on a very consistent basis. And we'll talk about the time frame around making additions and deletions from that list as well.
Thank you, Member Young. The Chair recognizes Councilmember Gauthier.
Thank you. I wanted to ask that you get us clear budget numbers for housing counseling services for FY26 compared to FY25. We've heard multiple references today about their importance to the success of this initiative, but it's really hard to tell based on the spreadsheets that we have how much money is specifically slated for housing counseling agencies in FY26.
I want to get all my questions on. Next, can you tell us how much of NPI's allocation for Turn the Key has not been spent yet? I asked because from what I can see it looks like Turn the Key is the only housing production program that the H.O.M.E. plan proposes to increase. But if we still have NPI money left over for Turn the Key that hasn't been used yet I wonder if the allocation for Turn the Key, as much as I love it, needs to be 100 million across four years in order to maintain its success. Also, if we are going to expand Turn the Key funding, is this an opportunity to make our terms a little less rigid so that we can perhaps partner with nonprofits such as Habitat for Humanity or explore other creative housing typologies that we haven't been able to get to so far such as owner-occupied duplexes?
So good afternoon. I can take the first one on housing counseling. It's been discussed multiple times throughout the day. It's very clear how important this is for the residents of our city. I believe we operate somewhere around 12 housing counseling agencies to all 13 parts of the city predominantly 14 located in low- and moderate-income 15 areas, but there's definitely a 16 good distribution. 17 Currently we've -- it's 18 about 10 million that is funded 19 through housing counseling through 20 various initiatives that support 21 various programs. But all total, 22 we're in for about 10 million in 23 FY25. In FY26 we intend to add 24 somewhere around 2.8 million. A lot of this will go to help alleviate the money that's going away, the CDBG CV money that we had during the pandemic that was supporting counseling operations and other related operations to prop up eviction diversion and related programs. So in FY26 I think we're closer to million. 10
11 So we're increasing the budget for 12 housing counseling by about 3 13 million?
Thank you. And then can you speak to the Turn the Key amount? This is a wonderful program but I think it amounts to about 10% of the total H.O.M.E. budget. Can you talk about how much we have left for Turn the Key? And if it needs to take up such a substantial amount of the H.O.M.E. budget being that we're in here going back and forth about other programs that also need funding? MR. RODRIGUEZ Angel Rodriguez, PHDC. Can you clarify the last part of your question, why does it have to be -- I didn't --
It's I think the only housing production program slated to increase through H.O.M.E. I think we have it in the budget for 100 million across four years. But I also believe that we have money through NPI that we haven't spent yet. So when we consider the money that we still have, does it have to take up as substantial an amount of the budget, particularly when we're talking about all sorts of programs where there's a high level of demand, where we're drastically expanding AMI and where we don't have enough resources? MR. RODRIGUEZ Okay. So currently Turn the Key has an allocation of $42 million for the mortgages. We've expended 14.1 million. I will tell you that the 42 million will not cover the approved 102 properties that were approved. So to give you an idea, just to reach the 802 properties that have been approved through the process, we have 400 under construction, but we have another 400 that have to start, get through entitlements, we would need an additional million just to get 17 to the 802 number that we have 18 right now. So if we were going to hit the original goal of 1000, we would need an additional $33 million. Now, I know that we only have a small balance on NPI, and there are very I think valid competing interests and I think that's why we were talking about that, and also there's an issue with NPI that you have to be aware that you have to build that pipeline and maintain the pipeline of development, because between the approval phase and then getting your permitting phase, getting to settlement, factually we started in '22, we got contracts done and shovels in the ground in '23 and then we started seeing a lot more production and sales in '24, so we need to maintain that lead time. So I think that's why we have that kind of allocation and that transition.
Thank you. And just in closing, I want to reiterate Councilmember Landau's point. I think it's a grave mistake to let PHL Housing Plus fall off of a cliff while at the same time expanding Shallow Rent to 80% of AMI. And I'd also ask that you provide Council with the rationale for why we would take that program to 80%. You talked about the idea that 80% AMI that folks at this level are cost- burdened. But I'd really like to see that and understand what we're basing this proposal on. Thank you, Council President.
As it really pertains to Turn the Key being called out as the only program that is dedicated to production, I don't believe that's the case. We have two more programs that we're looking to, one, continue around affordable housing production making sure that there's some gap financing available for those types of projects, but then also something that we're looking to invest and expand in around affordable housing preservation, which is the Neighborhood Preservation. So these are two things that we also have and --
I said increase. Just to clarify, I said it's the only housing production program that we seem to be increasing in terms of the budget numbers.
We are increasing the Affordable Housing Preservation Program and dedicating funds to that as well.
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilmember Landau.
Thank you. That's my last round. I wanted to first shout out Philly First Home. I like that. Thank you for investing more money in that. It doesn't cost us much to give folks a nice down payment amount for the first home, so want to put that out there. But I want to shift over to something that I think you said you didn't want to talk about in the beginning, but I got to put it out there. We rely heavily on federal funding for all of our housing programs, vouchers, housing tax credits, all kinds of financings. What are we going to do if those are cut? And how are we going to be able to pivot -- how are you expecting now to pivot and shift with all of this money that we'll have in the H.O.M.E. Initiative to cover those cuts?
I think we had a point of clarification regarding the FY25-26 numbers. Greg, can you speak to that? And then we'll answer your question, Rob.
Yes. So what I'm seeing is that there's 32 million for Turn the Key and at Fiscal Year '25 and also proposed 32 in '26, so it looks like it's going to be stable funding, just point of clarification.
It's going to be stable funding between 2025 and Fiscal '26, Turn the Key.
I'm talking about the H.O.M.E. budget. Are we not allocating 100 million for Turn the Key over the four-year period?
Yeah. But if you look at the Fiscal '26 -- there's a column just for Fiscal '26. It keeps stable funding between Fiscal '25 and '26.
Yes. I'm talking about over the life of the program.
Hello again. So your question was about the impact of federal cuts. It's a concern obviously that we share and live with every day as grants are announced that they're stopped, and then they're back and then websites go down. But we think that that uncertainty makes this program even more important, that investing in housing in this essential, as you talked about, human right, it becomes even more important when there's uncertainty about what the Feds do. And I think the question about how do we replace federal funding, obviously we don't have the ability to replace everything we get from the federal government. In '24 we got 2.2 billion. We don't have that capability. We do have to look really kind of on a case-by-case basis as things come in and figure out what to do while making sure that we have prepared ourselves, which is having that federal reserve, built up a Budget Stabilization Reserve Fund. It's kind of getting ourselves in position trying to handle it with the knowledge that we can't replace all of it.
But to be clear, would you tap the reserve to fill the gap by a federal funding cost before you shifted the money that we have for the H.O.M.E. Initiative through the bonds?
I'm curious if there's a Plan B right now. We're about to take out 800 -- we're going to get $800 million through bonds. That's great. We're going to have these great programs. But what happens if all of our federal funding for our housing is cut? Are we going to pivot with our 800 million and try to fill some of those gaps or is the plan to hit the reserve and just keep going forward exactly with what the plan is --
Let me just say one thing first. So if we have issued our bonds, there will be restrictions on what we can do. So we would not be able to pivot and say we're using this 400 million, we're taking it away from what we borrowed for and what we told you here and putting it in different places.
Yeah. So just obviously this is a challenge that cities all over the country are facing. And in my current work I'm working in a number of cities that are facing the same issue of uncertainty with their federal entitlement funds. And I'll also say there are a number of cities that are issuing bonds right now in order to make sure that they have funding available specifically for housing. So Philadelphia is a leader nationally in terms of being in that pool of cities that are being very proactive and making sure they have funding. I know the Administration's had some conversations with local philanthropy. And one of the things that's been discussed, not committed to but discussed, is potentially providing a backstop for lost federal funds, especially for some of the most essential activities that would have immediate harm if those federal entitlement funds were cut.
That's great. Thank you so much. It's really helpful.
Thank you, Council President. Actually this last answer kind of alluded to the question I had, which was about leveraging philanthropic community, private capital and our union partners. Do we have a very clear plan for that? And not just to backstop the federal potential loss, but to see what part of this plan can we depend on those dollars for and what that might look like and how concrete are those?
Yes. So we're currently in negotiations so it's not final yet. But, yes, we are in negotiations working through the proposal with both the unions and then working with our philanthropic community, who both national and local, who have already affirmed the need for this and the importance of it. One thing I failed to mention earlier is happening just a few miles from here at the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia is the Economic Mobility Conference. And there was data released by Dr Raj Chetty with Harvard University to substantiate the need for the crisis now and the need for the investment to counter or address the crisis now. So absolutely, though we are thinking through that.
Do we have a dollar figure that we're looking for a match or to come from each sector? Do we have some numbers that would give us -- this is a huge investment so --
Yeah, we have some preliminary numbers. So, yes, our goal is through the philanthropic community and the trades to bring in an additional 100 million, upwards of 150, if not more.
And there are banks that have set up separate funds to look at these issues where to look at the private sector. So we talked philanthropy and unions. I'm looking at the private sector and we can't let them get away without participation. And I just wondered how detailed the effort has been there, particularly because they have been set-asides made for investment in urban centers?
Yeah, we've been having discussions specifically with banks as recently as yesterday. So it's their ongoing discussions.
We would love to see -- I heard 100 million from unions but that's like a little drop in the bucket at the moment. So I would love to see what that number in total would look like and when you are able to share that, we would love to have the Council President get that information. Because that gives us a lot more confidence in how we're going forward because it's having other partners who will have skin in the game. I mean, this is how we just need to proceed.
Yep. And one of our guiding principles here was to be leveraging other people's money and to use what we're putting in to build other investments. So we completely agree with you.
And to Rob's point, right, that support for that 800 million will go a long way, right. It will signal both to local and national funders that the City, City Council, the Administration that we're serious about addressing this crisis.
Thank you. Last question and we'll be wrapping up for today. Jesse, on the 30th of October -- that was actually my birthday last year. We had a Housing, Development, Homelessness Committee hearing. And during that time, you mentioned that the assessment that we're going to be doing for the Land Bank will be done by the end of the year. And so, I just want to make sure we're on track because that was the statement then, October 30th it will be done by the end of December 2024 and we're in now pretty much going into the summer of 2025. And has the RFP gone out?
The RFP is active. It is active. And it's set to close on May 1st, and we're hoping to sign off with a third party vendor by July of this year. And I completely own up to that on day of my job in this particular position committing to something like that but also understanding that there were larger --
Day of the job. And understanding that there is a lot more that goes into that process-wise, which is what we've had to navigate through to get to this particular point. But also understanding, as our Chief of Staff indicated earlier, that we wanted to make sure that that process was congruent with the Administration's initiatives when it comes to rolling this particular plan out. So it's been timed accordingly as a result, but do recognize what was stated on record on October 30th on my fourth day of the job.
And, Council President, I think what you're asking for, if I'm correct, is an early birthday gift to which we say, okay, we got you.
No, it's cool. I'm just making sure we're rolling in the right direction. I'm supportive of the initiative. We're just doing our due diligence. And so, we're going to do a callback, right --
-- we'll make sure we get the Administration the actual date and time of the callback so we can continue doing a deeper dive, right. And with that being said, I do thank you for taking time out of your schedule and being here. I do thank the Mayor, right. We talked about this early on about the process and even additional hearings because she wanted to do a deeper dive herself. I do want to say that publicly as well so we're in alignment together in terms of approaching it that way. And so, because this is such a significant initiative and a huge borrowing, we want to continue to allow my members to have the opportunity to do a deeper dive. And so, we will let the Administration know when that actual date is. And thank you all for being here with us today.
With that being said, the Chair recognizes Majority Leader Gilmore Richardson for a motion that the public hearing and meeting on the bills and resolutions before the Committee today stand in recess until Tuesday, April 29, 2025 at 10:00 a.m.
So moved, Mr. Chairman. (Duly seconded.)
It has been moved and properly seconded -- Jim Harrity likes to say second before I even get a chance to move forward. This public hearing and meeting on the bills and resolutions before the Committee today stand in recess until Tuesday, April 29th at 10:00 a.m. All those in favor of the motion will signify by saying aye. (Aye.)
The ayes have it and this motion carries. The next hearing will be on April the 29th at 10:00 a.m in City Hall, Room 400. Thank you, everybody. (Committee of the Whole concluded at 4:05 p.m.) C E R T I F I C A T I O N I, hereby certify that the proceedings and evidence noted are contained fully and accurately in the stenographic notes taken by me in the foregoing matter, and that this is a correct transcript of the same. __________________________________ TANEHA CARROLL