Committee Hearing, June 20, 2000

Does there exist an academic formula to plug in -- it may sound simplistic. Because one of the things, I believe, we are being asked to provide taxpayer subsidy. We need to look at this as any other business investment that we would provide subsidy to, and what this return on that investment is going to be to the taxpayers. Whether it is equity ownership or equity opportunities when it comes to the sale, whether it is some way to quantify exactly what the other ancillary spending is going to be. Is there some general formula to plug 126 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 these numbers in so that we know that when the subsidy is 100 million, and then it reaches 175, sorry, bell goes off, 175 don't work. Maybe 125 does, maybe 100 does. Is there some sliding scale formula that will give us better direction? Because basically what we are doing now is, we are listening to what the team's positions are. And they are obviously self-interested, and there is nothing wrong with that. We are listening to what the Administration wants, and that is to probably get this thing done from kind of a reputation standpoint, when the last Administration couldn't get it done. And we are balancing all these other issues, schools, infrastructure needs in the city, all this kind of stuff. Is there some way to plug in what the numbers -- when we finally get the numbers from the Administration -- what these numbers are and some ROI figure that comes in the end and says, do you know what, this is a good deal or it is a bad deal? PROFESSOR ZIMBALIST: I really think 127 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 that you have to look at these things case by case. There are so many variables that we still don't know about in the proposal that you are considering. Not only the costs of the final project, but we don't know what the lease agreement is going to be. We don't know if the city is going to take on any operating, maintenance, or improvement expenses at the ballpark. We don't know what kind of ongoing infrastructural maintenance expenses are going to be. We haven't heard yet estimates for additional sanitation and security expenses around the ballpark, what share of the rent that's generated at the ballpark is going to come back to the city, what kind of property taxes might or might not be paid. There are all sorts of questions we don't know about. So the notion that at this point in the game you could apply a formula, it is nice to think that we might be able to simplify it that much, but we can't.

Our problem is by the time -- what I am fearful of, by the time we 128 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 have some definitive idea of what the numbers actually are, the time frame is going to be so compressed that real due diligence analysis is not going to be possible in any great way. PROFESSOR ROSENTRAUB: You know, I understand the pressures you are under. Again, I have worked for a number of cities, as has Andy, on these kinds of negotiations. Let me come into, what the answer to your question is, with a deal, with numbers, with lease agreements, yes, the answer to your question is, yes, you can actually -- I have done it for Los Angeles, Andy has done it for others, if you have all the variables. The point I would say to you is, I understand the time pressures one is under. And what I am always amazed at is how much money in taxes people will, in effect, expend, 50 million, 60 million, 100 million dollars, and, in some cases, as Andy pointed out, we have King County Washington at well over half a billion dollars, yet they won't take the time and the effort to do exactly what you just said, how do we structure it and how do we know the rate of return. 129 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 What we tried to get across to you today is that there is nothing to fear that these teams will are leaving. One is, they have leases. And even if we assume that the leases can be dedeclared null and void tomorrow morning, there is no better place for these teams to go. So relax. Take the time to get the answers that you need. And as Andy has just pointed out to you, we could structure a lease. You already have one involving the Flyers and the Sixers, which in effect leaves the city at a point that I have concluded is basically you are at a cash deposit situation, if you function in any of the Councilman's intangible benefits. So when you say to me, can you do it, I say, you guys have done it. When I go around the country talking to cities about how to do this, the two examples I use, I use Philadelphia and your deal on the arena and Los Angeles and their deal on the arena and their deal on the NFL, they worked the numbers out. It didn't work.

But the First Union public investment was miniscule compared to 130 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 what is anticipated in this particular -- I am sure Mr. Snyder would love to have had the level of subsidy that these teams are asking for as it relates to the building of Spectrum 2. PROFESSOR ROSENTRAUB: Councilman, take the time to answer the questions to your satisfaction. You did it right before. You can do it right again. (Applause.) PROFESSOR ROSENTRAUB: And as I have said to you, based on the financial information that we have on the operation with the Cleveland Indians, based on the information that Fortune Magazine and other sources put together, we have enough information to ask the questions of the Phillies to say, "On our models, this is what you are worth. If our models are so bad, let's have the books." (Applause.)

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you. Gentlemen, thank you very much. I would ask the interpreter for Mr. Leung to please approach the please approach the 131 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 witness table. Is Mr. Leung still here? I did speak to you privately, but I want to say publicly, and certainly for the record, some people apparently thought that I was cutting Mr. Leung off when he was testifying. That was not my intent, nor did I want to be disrespectful to him. I indicated very early on that we have 132 witnesses on our list. And I thought, to be fair, we would limit people, with the exception of the witnesses that came from out of town and had to take a plane back this evening, that we would actually limit all witnesses to three minutes. So if you will -- INTERPRETER: Can I translate that?

Would you please. And please convey my apologies. If there is any reason for me apologize, I do apologize.

Basically, we are used to being cut off, and -- (Applause.)

Excuse me, dear. I don't mean to interrupt you, but the stenographer would like you to identify yourself, please. 132 RESOLUTION NO. 000325

My name is Leyhar Cheung. I was translating for Cheung Ping Leung. And this is both our words, and our community's words. Is that a lot of times when you don't speak English, like when you are trying to communicate, people don't realize you have a heart, you have a history, you have a soul. Like you have so many stories that tell people that you are a human being. And in this country, when our language rights are violated, our human rights are violated. And we are used to that. (Applause.)

And we just want to thank you for the acknowledgment, and also recognize that a lot of other speakers here today are going to be speaking in Chinese and in English. And despite the time that it might take, it might take a little double time than the regular normal speech, a lot of their words, the essence of those words, have meaning. And they --

We understand that fully. Thank you very much.

Okay. They need to be 133 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 heard. We need to be heard. We are not going to be quiet. And I think for the city's sake, this country is changing, the city is changing, and people have to accept it and accept that we are a part of it. We are just like you. (Applause.) MR. McPHERSON: John Vago.

Good afternoon.

Good afternoon.

My name is John Vago. I am a Mechanical Engineer in the Water Department and a shop steward in AFSCME District Council 47, Local 2187. In considering the issue of financing for new stadiums, I think we need to consider the factors which affect all workers, regardless of their occupation or where they work. My union and the others which represent city workers made sacrifices in past years to help the city's finances. Now we are being called upon to sacrifice so that city funds may assist the construction of new stadiums. The issue should not be whether or 134 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 not sports facilities should be built. What is the issue is whether or not city's funds should be spent to subsidize a private profit-making corporate enterprise, to provide corporate Welfare. (Applause.)

Many our new municipal services are understaffed. What effect will further sacrifice by city workers have on our ability to compete with our employers to adequately staff our operations? Our city and its working class have many unmet pressing needs; public schools, public housing, mass transit, public health facilities, neighborhood recreation and sports facilities, and many others. (Applause.)

Building facilities to meet these needs would not only provide a great many jobs to build them, but also jobs to operate and service them. As the parent of two young people who went through the Philadelphia public schools, I heard more times than I can remember, when we called for improvements in the public schools, "There's no 135 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 money." The problem is not money; this is still the world's richest country. But the priorities for allocating it need to be changed. (Applause.)

From all that I have heard thus far, the financial aspects of the stadium proposal are still quite unclear, its cost and the anticipated payback. That kind of a gamble with city funds, while other needs go unmet, would, in my opinion, be irresponsible. In addition, as the people in Chinatown have indicated, a Center City location would have disastrous effects on our city, destroying jobs and communities and further overloading already overloaded services. In recent years we have seen many major projects which were supposed to bring prosperity to Philadelphia. For Philadelphia's working class, where is that prosperity? It appears to me -- (Applause.)

It appears to me that one of the reasons why those who can are leaving the 136 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 city is the inadequacy of basic public services. What is this doing to the tax base? If the professional sports teams feel that they need new facilities, why shouldn't they practice the self-reliance, the nondependence on government handouts which we have all heard advocated as virtues for us? (Applause.)

All research and evidence tells us that the teams can build the new stadiums with their own revenue and credit, both of which are very substantial. The only reason they are seeking local government money is because they feel they can get it, and it will make them wealthier. Finally, for us to subsidize stadiums could create a dangerous precedent. It could encourage other private corporate interests to demand the same. Thank you. (Applause.)

We can tell you must be an excellent shop steward.

Thank you. 137 RESOLUTION NO. 000325

Thank you. Rosita Johnson. MR. McPHERSON: Mr. Bihong Guan.

My name is Bihong Guan. I am the President of the Greater Philadelphia United Chinese American Chamber of Commerce. The Chinese Chamber of Commerce is strongly opposing the proposal of the stadium in Chinatown. We think Mayor John Street's recommendation is not acceptable, it is totally wrong, must be taken back. First, Mayor Street say there aren't two people who are not happy with that decision. That's not true. About 4,000 Chinese who live and work in Chinatown and 100,000 Chinese living and working in great Philadelphia area are not happy with Mayor Street's decision. We united and assured of a strong opposition to the decision. The May 19 and the June 8 rallies and protests, we have a good manifestation of our strong opposition to the stadium. Secondly, Mayor Street say a new 138 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 ballpark would attract about 45,000 people, again, to 81 games a year. That's three point million people bringing into the streets of Center City, and that would have attract customers to downtown eateries and the business. That's wrong. The games will bring a lot of hazard problems; such as, traffic, parking, trash, drink, drugs, and much more. The stadium will not bring any economic development to Center City and Chinatown. If the stadium built Vine Street, that will destroy our proud heritage, Chinatown. That will also kill our Chinese community. Third, Mayor Street said nobody likes a stadium. No community can agree to it. That's bureaucratic, that is abuse of the power and authority. The football team has virtually settled on South Philadelphia, just east of the First Union Center. But John Street come to pitch Chinatown after he met with some strong oppositions in other communities. That's not fair. In the past 30 years, the state and the city have built Vine Expressway, prison, Gallery 139 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 Convention Center to surround and block the development of Chinatown. Our Chinese community need space to expand business. Now John Street is a adopting a policy to limit and narrow down the Chinese development space. We are definitely say no. 8 In conclusion, stadium on Vine Street is not viable and also is not feasible. We want Mayor Street consider of our request, and change his mind, and give up the recommendation and find somewhere else. We also sincerely request all City Council Members pay attention to our concerns. Stand up and speak for us. Fight against the Vine Street stadium. Save Chinatown, with 130 years of history. As taxpayers, we don't want to pay extra money to build a stadium in Chinatown area. We need a school, library community health centers, et cetera, but not stadium. No stadium in Chinatown. Thank you for your time. MR. McPHERSON: Rosita Johnson. Robert Meek. 140 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 C'Anne Anderson.

My name is C'Anne Anderson. I live on the 1300 block of Nectarine Street, between Nectarine and Buttonwood.

You have to speak directly into the microphone.

This city was once called the essence of the new world. And Athens was the Greek civilization's defining peak. This city, Philadelphia, has resources that draw people from all over the world. We have got art and architecture, we have historic neighborhoods, we have got gorgeous parkways, world-class restaurants, a seaport waterfront, and we got four professional sports teams. Yet, people who love this city leave it. They leave it when their kids get to be school age. That should tell us something. (Applause.)

I can imagine the building boom this city would be in if all those people had stayed here. People live their lives spending their energy making products and services that other 141 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 people pay for. They take that money and more energy, and they put it back where they live and where they work. So are grown great neighborhoods and so are grown great cities, truly great cities. City budgets come from taxing all that activity. And great cities prioritize spending in such a way that they get more people to come and want to live there, and there we get a big tax base and an increased budget. I would like to know why we are starving this city by buying baubles for people who don't even live here. (Applause.)

Philadelphia is at a crossroads. We have an awesome choice to make, a choice about real sustainable quality of life growth. Our children need ballfields, but they need them on playgrounds, in safe neighborhoods. (Applause.)

They do not need unaffordable downtown entertainment options. 142 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 Our children need housing and they need new school buildings; they need books and they need computers. (Applause.)

We have teachers in the Philadelphia system buying pencils and papers for their students just so they can teach their class. That is not world class; that is embarrassing. (Applause.)

This is a city full of committed and creative people who can do the job, and we have a choice here. Either we will fritter away our resources fighting about whose responsibility it is to fix the schools in the neighborhoods and playing political shell games about separate budgets and untappable revenue streams, or we will simply rise to the occasion and solve the problems. If we can find money for a stadium, we can find money for a school system. (Applause.)

We can't do both. This is about priorities. 143 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 Whatever else it is, building a stadium, as you have just heard, is not about economic growth for this city. 30 years of analysis on publicly financed stadiums all over this country have made economic gain a highly discredited rationale for this kind of spending. We do ourselves a disservice to continue the rhetoric, much less spend money on that decision basis. City tax dollars should be spent for city needs. All those people who left Philadelphia, they went to the suburbs, where they spend a higher portion of every single tax dollar on education. They spend almost $2,000 per child more than we do, and their children get an education,. While 58 percent of our school children cannot pass standard proficiency tests. (Applause.)

We have a choice here. And the quality of the life in this city is what will define our status, world class or third class. 144 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 (Applause.) MR. McPHERSON: Whittier Dow.

Good afternoon, Councilmen Cohen and other Council Members. My name is Whittier Dow, from the Housing Consortium for Disabled Individuals. I am speaking from two perspectives. I am speaking on behalf of my agency first, and as a citizen of the city. On behalf of my agency, and also on behalf of myself, I am opposed to a new stadium in Chinatown. And I am opposed to a stadium in Chinatown because in my job as a Fair Housing Specialist, to put a stadium in Chinatown would have a disparaging impact on the people in Chinatown. And what that means in fair housing, means that the housing options for their community would be lessened. As we have heard throughout the testimony, for the last 30 years whenever Philly has taken a hit, the Chinatown community has been the main ones to take a hit. And I think it is time that it stops. 145 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 (Applause.)

And as we also heard, that the economic development impact of the stadium would be less. And Philadelphia is a city that should respect our communities more, and just not for a short-term economic boom. And the people in Chinatown, and I am saying this as a private citizen, should not be sacrificed. Because if your community is sacrificed now, there will be other communities in the future that will be sacrificed. (Applause.)

I am a lifetime Philadelphian. Love this city. If you look at my shirt today, I have a picture of Muhammed Ali on my shirt. This is how I feel about Philadelphia. We are the greatest city, but we should not sacrifice one of our communities for a supposed short-time image booster. We should realize that our community in Chinatown, we have one of the greatest Chinese communities in the country. I have traveled throughout the country, and I have seen it. 146 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 And if City Council is concerned about what they do about the stadium, other options might be possible, where there is more space at, where traffic conditions are better. Also, a stadium at 12th and Vine would not benefit a lot of people in the disabled community because of transportation concerns, because of the ability to get in and out of that area. I know no one looks at the disabled communities when they are trying to consider building these stadiums and things like that, but you should. You should. Because we are a factor where you build the stadium. (Applause.)

And I came here today opposed to a stadium at 12th and Vine. I think I may be opposed to a stadium even moreso throughout the whole Philadelphia region, if more is not put in by other resources. That's not my decision. But I am here to say to my City Council and to the City Council IN Chinatown, before you make decisions about where a stadium should be, you should talk to all people in that community, 147 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 take their concerns into being, and let them know that you truly care about them, just not in the short, run when every four years comes, but throughout the time in City Council. And I say to my friends in Chinatown, fight on. If they try to put it there, fight on. And I say to City Council, wherever you decide to put a stadium, put a stadium in that will benefit all Philadelphians, and just not benefit certain interests. Thank you very much. (Applause.) MR. McPHERSON: The next witness will be Mary Goldman.

And before Whittier Dow leaves, we have to say you are an inspiration to us all, Whittier. We thank you very much. (Applause.)

Mary Goldman.

Good evening, Councilman Cohen and other Councilpeople. I thank you for this opportunity to testify on behalf of Americans for Democratic Action. 148 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 While Americans for Democratic Action understands the need for improved stadium facilities, we cannot support the commitment of hundreds of millions of Philadelphia tax dollars for this purpose. We oppose any additional local subsidy for stadiums in excess of the 80 million already contracted for repairs and improvements to Veteran's Stadium. We recently held a forum on issues regarding the stadiums, attended by some 80 to 100 people. Almost unanimously they opposed huge outlays of public funding for the stadiums, and the use of Vine Street as a location because of the impact on Chinatown, and the increased cost due to PECO substation. Last week we witnessed the resignation of the Superintendent of Schools over the unwillingness of the state government to adequately help fund our schools, and this at a time when the state has a surplus of close to a billion dollars. Instead, our schools will be forced 149 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 to make cuts in vital educational programs such as summer school, child care, professional development for teachers, and all adult education to the tune of some $30 million. Surely if this Council can even contemplate spending our local taxes on the huge amounts mentioned for stadiums, it could find more than the million, plus the already committed 15 10 million, for the very essence of our future, our 11 children. 12 Huge stadium subsidies only give 13 credence to the accusation by state officials that 14 we do not tax ourselves enough here in Philadelphia 15 for our schools. 16 How skewed could our priorities be, 17 and have become, if we even consider further 18 increasing the corporate welfare for stadiums. 19 We believe that San Francisco's 20 90-percent-team-financed stadium should be the model for Philadelphia, but with our financial obligation limited to the already committed $80 million. We support construction jobs, but do not think the stadiums are the only source of such jobs. How about making our decaying schools safe 150 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 and sound. How do we as a society build sky boxes for the rich, while our kids eat their lunches in decrepid surroundings? (Applause.)

At a time when insufficient resources exist for our school children, it is a perversion of civic priorities to lavish scarce public resources on million dollar enterprises. (Applause).

The most important game in this town is education, not ball games. (Applause.) Thank you very much.

Thank you very much. Reverend Simms. Loraline Jones.

Good evening. My name is Loraline Jones. I am the Athletic Director and the Coach at the University City High School. And I first wanted to say that I am Philadelphia born, I am Philadelphia bred. And when 151 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 I die, I will be Philadelphia dead. I believe in the City of Philadelphia. I believe that we have a ways to go. And I am thankful that we have an opportunity to make a statement. I represent, I feel that I am representing, the school children of Philadelphia. When Mayor Street became the Mayor, the first words that came out of his mouth was that this is the city, this is the year of the child. And I want to go on record to let him know that I am going to hold him to that statement that he made. (Applause.)

I also want to say to District Council 33, as a member of the PFT, I feel you. I am speaking on behalf of the school children of Philadelphia, but I am also speaking in particular for 6,000 kids who attend Overbrook, University City, and William Penn. My question is, why should we pay for stadiums that are only going to be used for six months out of the year, and why are we paying for stadiums for multi-million-dollar athletes, who do 152 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 not live in our community? I also want to read a statement from -- and I had a couple of students with me, but they left to go to Fellowship Farm on a retreat. But the editor of the Black and Gold newspaper wanted to make this statement. And it goes like this, "As I watch television and read newspapers, the issue of building a stadium for the Phillies and Eagles continuously comes up. "When I first heard that the city was going to help with building stadiums, I was outraged because our school system is in desperate need of funding. "Our school system is $300 million in debt, and yet you want to build stadiums costing $700 million. Something isn't right. "How do we have the money for a new stadium and yet we don't have the money for schools?" (Applause.)

"Are the multi-million-dollar professional athletes and the big corporations more important than the children? "These corporations pay these 153 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 professional athletes millions of dollars a year, and now they want to use taxpayers' hard-earned money to build new stadiums. "If they want new stadiums, then they need to build it with their own money." (Applause.)

"It is not a taxpayers' obligation to pay for a new stadium, but it is the team's obligation. "I can see the city building a new state-of-the-art stadium that would benefit the city, but the children must come first. Mayor Street, keep your word. Remember, this is the year of the child, not the year of the stadium." (Applause.)

And this is written by the editor of the Black and Gold newspaper, Melsicurre Griffin Elm. And I would like to continue on with the statement that I wanted to make. That I am aware that City Council has concerns as to how the stadiums would impact the community. 154 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 For the most part, the average Philadelphian would be unable to attend these events because of parking, eating. And if they went to an Eagles game, we are talking about for one day, for one person somewhere in the vicinity of $125. I would like to offer a small solution that may help to make this bill more attractive, because I know the stadiums are going to be built. How they are going to do it, I don't know. In Philadelphia, there are high schools with rich sports traditions that have access to know fields or tracks. These schools are University City, Overbrook, and William Penn. As a stakeholder in Philadelphia, I feel that the athletes of Philadelphia should be able to look forward in playing in these new facilities. I also strongly feel that the professional sports organizations should give back to the community in which they play and earn their big salaries. (Applause.)

I would like to 155 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 propose -- the proposal that I make WOULD be a commitment to the young people of Philadelphia, and it would also level the playing field for all students. Therefore, I would like to make the following proposal: That all high schools in Philadelphia without fields, tracks have a facility provided and funded through this stadium bill; that all existing fields be upgraded and that all tracks become all-weather facilities; that funds be set aside for the maintenance of such fields through the revenue from ticket sales, approximately to 50 14 cents tacked onto each ticket, as they do in the 15 City of San Diego and Sacramento; that all high 16 school championships, football, baseball, be allowed 17 to use these stadiums without costs; and that having 18 special games that the athletes and their families 19 in Philadelphia may attend at half cost or no cost. 20 Because right now most of the 21 students in Philadelphia do not see professional 22 games, indoors or outdoors, because of the cost. 23 I feel that this would be -- there 24 would be opportunities for community involvement and 25 community commitment to the school kids of 156 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 Philadelphia from their multi-million-dollar athletes that work in our city. Thank you. (Applause.) MR. McPHERSON: Reverend Jones.

I have to say, first of all, good evening to everyone.

Good evening.

And I don't have a speech in front of me. I just want to speak from the heart.

I'm sorry. You have to identify yourself for the record first.

Reverend Kathleen Jones. Our constitution gives us freedom of speech and also the right to liberty and pursuit of happiness. And Philadelphia does have Philadelphia pride. We have pride in our Eagles, our Phillies team, Pat's Steakhouse. We have pride in so many things in Philadelphia, even in Chinatown. I've lived here in Philadelphia all 157 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 my life. And I am now 50 years old, maybe a few years over. But as long as I have lived here in Philadelphia, there's been a Chinatown. And, you know, we all have a heritage that we want to preserve, and just like we preserve 4th and Chestnut, where the Betsy Ross House and other things are preserved. And the faces that are here today from Chinatown and the Asian community are real faces, and they have real concerns. They are concerned for their children, they are concerned for their community, concerned for their heritage, concerned for their families. And as a clergy, as a minister of the gospel, you know, just like when David went to slay Goliath, to them their Goliath is the stadium. And, you know, many people are -- I have heard the testimony, and I agree with most of them. And I am really not opposed to a stadium, per se. But those that want a stadium, do you want it in your backyard? Why not take another choice. 158 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 You know, those that want a stadium, why don't they call City Council and say, "Well, build a stadium here in our community." No, they don't want it in their community because they don't want all the things that it may bring. But if that's the solution, why force it on a people and a heritage that don't want it. Like I said, there again, they have faces, just like we have faces, and their concerns and their wants and their desires. And if they don't want a stadium there in Chinatown, then we should consider that concern and say, "Well, we will have to find another site." We have heard about economic development, the things that it will bring, some say the things that it won't bring. But let's consider all these things that have been discussed today. We come before this Council because we believe that you are fair and that you are just. And that's what this judicial system is all about, being fair and just and hearing the concerns of the people. 159 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 And my concern is with the concerns of the Asian community today, and that is not to build a stadium in Chinatown. Let's preserve their heritage. Thank you. (Applause.)

I believe we have the Executive Director of the Asian Americans United. (Applause.)

Please identify yourself for the record and proceed with your testimony.

My name is Ellen Somekawa. I am the Executive Director of Asian Americans United. I would like to suggest that before anybody votes to build a stadium in Chinatown, that you first practice explaining it to your constituents. Practice it out loud. See how it feels. (Applause.)

Say, "I took money away from small children. I took money away from 160 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 the public schools, the libraries, the recreation centers, the parks, the playgrounds, and I gave it the hotel owners. I gave it" -- (Applause.)

"I gave it to real estate speculators. I gave it to the parking lot magnets, and I gave it to multi-millionaire team owners." Say it out loud. Say, "I supported the stadium because the sky boxes for the Phillies and Eagles owners are more important to me than paying a decent wage to our city workers." (Applause.)

Say it out loud. See if it sticks in your throat just a little bit when you say, "I stand for subsidizing the construction of more overpriced parking so that big campaign contributors can earn more money and give more money to our campaigns." Does it stick a little bit in your throat? (Applause.)

While the Paul Levy's and Tom Maloon's, the Zeritski's and the Grasso's 161 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 attempt to make us believe that they are interested in the well-being of this city, most Philadelphians know only too well that they are interested in the narrow interests of a very few rich. (Applause.)

After 130 years of neglect, we now hear politicians expressing their concern for the well-being of the Chinatown community. Not one investment of city services in this neighborhood for 130 years. Not a public school, not a public library, not a public recreation center, not a public park, not a public playground, not a swimming pool. And now, all of the sudden, these expressions of concern, "If only the poor people of Chinatown understood what was good for them, then they would see that spending a half a billion dollars on a baseball stadium, while their children are out playing in the streets is good for them." You know, the people of this city are not stupid. They are going to see the stadium deal for what it is. It is the simple transfer of wealth from the hands of the working people of this city 162 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 into the hands of a very few millionaires. (Applause.) MR. McPHERSON: Reverend Simms. John Chin.

We have two gentlemen on the list for John Chin. One is the Executive Director of the Philadelphia Chinatown Development Corporation. Then we have another John Chin, a Duck Chun Association. (Applause.)

Good evening.

Good evening everyone. I am John Chin, Duck Chun Association. My name is John Chin. I represent the Duck Chun Association, nonprofit family corporation. I am President. I live in our community over 40 years. Chinatown was established over 130 years ago. We step by step are living and working to build our community and business and neighborhood. We have dream to expand our community, to help more Asian people to come here to invest, to be developed. Chinatown needs space for additional commercial and housing land for our new 163 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 generation. Our children is our future. Unfortunately, our Mayor Street broke this dream. To close up our one and only remaining area to expansion to the north. I am sure more surrounding community is more business, provide more job. For the past 130 years, population is over 2.2 million population, and now about 1.6, compares to New York City, population is increasing. But Philly is decrease. We want city government to help our community for the public service and public school, park, library, and community activity center, not this stadium. We strong to oppose this to build stadium in Chinatown. Thank you very much. (Applause.)

Thank you. MR. McPHERSON: Robert Sugarman.

Good afternoon, Madam President, Mr. Chairman, Members of Council. I appreciate the opportunity to testify on behalf of the Chinatown Coalition in 164 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 regard to this serious imposition on Chinatown which we have identified as something that is not something that should happen to Chinatown, as I am sure you have heard already. My purpose in being here today is to provide Council with some of the reasons why a City Council that's concerned about the rights that all people have, and particularly minorities have, that should not be impacted by this particular project because this particular project will be, as you have heard, a serious insult to Chinatown. I have prepared a document in the nature of an opinion letter for the Chinatown Committee. Which, if it hasn't already been given to you, I believe will be. So that my purpose today in speaking to you, rather than to read that document, is to identify some of the highlights. Chinatown is protected, first of all, by the concept of equal protection of the law under the Constitution of the United States. And it so happens that one of the most well-known and outstanding cases of cities impacting on minorities in a way as to deny them 165 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 equal protection under the law is a case involving a Chinese community. It is 120 years since the City of San Francisco attempted to prevent Chinese people from operating businesses, then it was laundries, by the use of a subterfuge. The subterfuge was to prohibit laundries in wooden buildings. It was well known that the purpose of this ordinance was to allow the city to shut down Chinese laundries, which were all wooden. And that's what happened. And the Supreme Court of the United States, that long ago, stated that the equal protection clause protects not only explicit action which denies the rights of a minority based on ethnicity or national origin, but in fact bars the misuse of apparently equal or nonintentional conduct which is used, in effect, to deny that kind of right to all citizens, including Chinese. It is ironic that we are here 120 years later on the same type of issue. Why would Chinatown be selected as the site, when there's open lots at 16th Street, 17th Street, and Vine Street; when there's open 166 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 space at Spring Garden and the Delaware River; when there's open space at Broad and Spring Garden, which was a site that was recommended by the previous Administration? Why would Chinatown be selected as the location of this stadium? The answer is because there is not the type of respect for the ethnic group that the Chinese represent in our society. (Applause.)

And we are perfectly capable and willing of going to the Supreme Court of the United States, if we have to, to have that Court review the facts in the Year 2000 as it reviewed the facts in the 1880s. Turning to other legal protections. The impact on Chinatown will be, if this project occurs, another sad example of the use of public power by the City of Philadelphia to deny the rights of people to enjoy the protection of the rights of property under the Constitution of the United States. There have been too many occasions when the federal courts have had to tell the City of Philadelphia that it cannot simply take away 167 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 people's property rights, which includes the right of reasonable enjoyment of their property, for reasons that are arbitrary or capricious and not supported by reasonable facts. I refer the Council to the cases of Midnight Sessions which established the principle, Parkway Garage where the city had to pay money, and the case that's less well known but involved Penn's Landing, where the same thing occurred. Here we have a situation where the people of a group that are enjoying property rights which they have paid for, purchased, and own, and they're having those rights essentially destroyed -- the rights to make money, the rights to enjoy a quality of life in a residential area -- by virtue of a city action which is arbitrary. To spend $300 million more, or $450 million more, or whatever it might be, to build a stadium in Chinatown is an arbitrary action which denies those rights to the people of Chinatown. When you compound that rule with the doctrine and the concerns over environmental racism which are occurring, and you factor in the impacts that this project would have on the environment of 168 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 Chinatown, which is a community which has already suffered repeated demands, insults, and damages from public projects, of which the Convention Center is only the most recent and the Vine Street Expressway is only the most obvious, but these things have occurred over and over again. The federal government has required the environmental racism be identified and eliminated. Is it likely that the state government and state laws enforced by the state courts will be any less clear? And, by the way, is there or is there not federal money involved in this project? We have written to Mayor Street twice now to find out what the plans are for this project. One of the questions that we have been asking is, what is the financing? That's the question before you here today, or one of the questions before you here today. What is the financing? Where is the city going to get $450 million? How much are the teams going to pay? Is the city going to use federal block grant money, 169 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 UDAG repayments, or any of the other federal sources that the Council is familiar with? If so, then the city is not only going to comply with whatever the rules are for environmental compliance under the state law, but also with the federal doctrines involving environmental racism. I can go on to identify the issues involved in eminent domain and the prohibition of the use of eminent domain for private purposes, the doctrines involving the prohibition on the use of the governmental financing authority for the benefit of private individuals. These issues and many more are identified in my letter. But I know you have a lot of speakers to hear, Madam President, and I am not going to impose on you any longer. I am going to thank you for your patience. I am going to say to you that the net consequence of -- the aggregate consequence of all of the issues that I have raised is that this project, in my belief, will not be permitted to go forward by the courts. But it shouldn't be to the courts to enforce the law. 170 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 In the first instance, it is for our elected, legislative officials to enforce the law. It shouldn't be necessary to go to court.

We hope we don't have to go to court. We look to our City Council, our elected officials, to vindicate the law, uphold the law, and ensure that legal doctrines are respected. And if this Council does so, then this Council will not approve this project. And we thank you for considering it. Thank you. )

I didn't mean to be impolite. If there are any questions, Madam President.

Councilman Cohen.

I wanted everybody to know that 33 years ago, when Robert Sugarman was a young lawyer and I was running for my first position, not even then a young man, Robert Sugarman took up the cudgels on behalf of groups in Germantown. There was then the Philadelphia Mayor who decided that Germantown should have a major 171 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 highway cut through the heart of it, called the Belfield Bypass. Robert Sugarman, as a young lawyer, took up on behalf of that community, was the attorney on their behalf in the federal courts. The Belfield Bypass was never built. (Applause.) MR. McPHERSON: Nancy Dunno.

Please identify yourself for the record.

My name is Amy Hooper, and I live in a condominium building located in the southeast corner of 13th and Callowhill. It's known as Bow Arts Lofts, for those of you who are unfamiliar with it. There are 64 units in our condominium building and over 100 residents who are in the exact footprint of the stadium site at 12th and Vine. Our building houses a variety of people. We have professional athletes, members of the media living there, physicians, artists, et cetera. We are a really tightly knit, wonderful, vital community that has been in 172 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 existence for about years now. What I want to say to the Council is, to have you carefully consider the idea of such an expensive proposition in a neighborhood that has been growing and changing. I am a native Philadelphian. This city is very dear to my heart. I know that all of the people that live in the building with me feel very, very concerned about this issue. Not only because we will be displaced. Members of our community are disabled, they won't be able to find new housing, they won't be able to get new mortgages. We have watched our neighborhood change over the past 15 years. We are a neighborhood that's up and coming. We are exactly what Philadelphia is about. We are a community that has dug in, that has gone through a tremendous amount of change. Right next door to us is the Wolf Building that houses several technology companies that are up and coming, other artists. We are right down the street from Diane Berka, who is an artist who did the murals in the Marriott. 173 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 There are -- in the whole area surrounding us, there are artists that live there, vital members of the community that have dug in and tried to rebuild an area that is unique to the city. And we understand the value of our land and we understand why you would want to put a stadium there. But we want you to know that it is not a good idea. And we find that it is the height of hypocrisy that you would build such an expensive stadium and let our public school system be in such a state of shambles. I personally find that absolutely amazing. One of the best things that happened since the Mayor has made the suggestion to put a stadium in our neighborhood is that we have bonded even closer with our neighbors in Spring Garden and our neighbors in Chinatown. And I can tell you firsthand that Chinatown is one of the warmest communities. They have done nothing but welcome us and our support. And if for no other reason to save Chinatown, you absolutely cannot put a stadium at 174 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 12th and Vine. It will absolutely strangle them. And they are a wonderful group of people that do not deserve this lack of consideration and lack of respect that the Mayor has shown them. Thank you. (Applause.)

Please identify yourself for the record.

My name is Sharon Nitage. I also live at Bow Arts Lofts. And I am one of those people that have chosen to come here. I come from the suburbs. I moved to Philadelphia. And as a person who is recently married and about to start a family, I want to stay here. I love Philadelphia. And I want to do everything I can. So I buy this property, and I am making the decision to stay, while my friends and my family are all moving to the suburbs because they want to get away from the percent wage tax and, you know -- anyway, I would need to move for lack of space. And I am trying to, with the schools, I am 175 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 trying to figure out a way to stay. So I buy this place, I figure it out. And here you are pushing people who are trying to stay and trying to build up Philadelphia and trying to make the investments in the areas that need developing, and we are being pushed out. I can understand why my friends and family have left. And I can understand why people are leaving. Because they feel like they are being pushed out, they feel like there is no alternative. And this is another example of not giving an alternative, pushing us out. And I am not feeling a whole lot of brotherly love right now. And that's all I have to say. (Applause.)

Good evening, Mr. Palmer. Please identify yourself for the record.

Good evening, Madam President and Mr. Chairman. Also to my dear friend Jannie Blackwell, and the other Councilpeople who have been here. I am here today to, although I don't attend Phillies games or Eagles games, I am here to 176 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 talk in favor of stadium, but I am also here to advocate against it being in Chinatown. I was talking to a news reporter, a friend of mine, earlier. And he said to me, you don't have the numbers. It can't stop. And what he was talking about was the fact there were not many African-Americans in opposition to a stadium in Chinatown. But I am here to tell you that the African-American community is in opposition to a stadium in Chinatown. And I shared with you a letter that I mailed to the Mayor and also every member of City Council, as well as the Governor and every member of the Philadelphia delegation. And I will summarize it. I won't read it all to you. And what it does, it makes an appeal to people of African-American decent in this city. Why should we support people in Chinatown? As many white people begin to join the Chinatown movement, Japanese, Koreans, Philippines, Southeast Asians, there is a national movement that's taking place here in the City of Philadelphia. It is wonderful. There is a 177 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 multi-cultural group that's coming forward. But African Americans must recognize the fact, notwithstanding the fact that we have an African-American who sits on the second floor, that the actions which are taking place today are as racist and are biased and discriminatory as any I have faced in the last 50 years of my life. (Applause.)

On Sunday morning, George Burrell of this Administration sat on television with Mark Howard -- now, remember, we have activist Mayor who sits in the City of Philadelphia. I am here to tell you that John Street is not an activist, never has been an activist. And if he were an activist, he would be sitting in this room leading the charge. (Applause.)

Councilman Cohen is an activist. Angel Ortiz is an activist. Jannie Blackwell is an activist. Historically people called Americans, indigenous people, Native Americans, Mexicans, Hispanics, Chinese, Asians, et cetera, they have been systematically targeted to a 178 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 privileged class of people and been exploited by them for their human and natural resources. Calling it institutional greed in the name of progress, technology, and common good have marginalized the customs, values, social morays, have disrespected their values, cultures to achieve personal wealth and ambition. Over the last 50 years in Philadelphia alone, a city which is known as the city of neighborhoods and communities, we have experienced a dispossession of people of color in this city. In the 1950s, University of Pennsylvania did that to my neighborhood. You remember when I stood before you, and you in fact recognized my old community, West Philadelphia, I did something I never did publicly, I broke down and cried right here. For 30 years of dispossession in my beloved neighborhood, 36th and Market Street, a community which was created in 1806 and was dispossessed by the University of Pennsylvania, which did not come into the community until 1873. And now they brag about a university 179 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 city, something that was nonexistent before the 1960s. The 1970s, they moved northward and expanded. They went east and west. In the 1960s, Jefferson University expanded into Mantua, all in the name of progress for a few. During that same period, Temple University wanted to take over percent of the 11 land mass. And I said at this meeting when I stood 12 here with you that only Frank Rizzo dared to help 13 champion the cause. 14 Isn't that ironic. Frank Rizzo, who 15 all of us as activists fought against between the 16 '50s and '60s and '70s and '80s, up until his 17 death, was the person who championed for the little 18 guy. Not only in Port Richmond and in Bridesburg, 19 and not only in Kensington, and not only in Whitman, 20 but also in North Philadelphia and other areas 21 because he believed that this was a city of 22 neighborhoods. 23 Before the turn of the century, large 24 population of blacks moved into South Philadelphia. 25 But we will find in the 1960s that the renaissance 180 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 would push them out. Poor white people were being pushed out of Fairmount. Poor white people were being pushed out of Second Street, being pushed out of Queens Village. The population of blacks in the 1930s had gone from very, very large, and by the 1960s they were a dominant population in South Philadelphia. The 1970s, Philadelphia College of Pharmacy, located at 41st Street and Woodland Avenue, pushed black people further west out of Woodland Avenue. In the '70s, Chinatown was targeted by the Vine Street Expressway. Chinese and Asian-Americans were forced to condense and restrict their living, working, housing, schooling, restaurants, culture within several narrow blocks. Chinatown fell victim again. They fell victim again to Gallery I and II, Hahnemann Hospital, Convention Center, and now a baseball stadium? In 1970s, La Salle College started to encroach further into the black community in Olney. 181 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 During the same period, St. Joe's College was moving deeper into the black community of Wynnefield. In the 1970s, Graduate Hospital was forced to build this hospital. It had the $80 million Hilburton grant that it wanted to take into West Philadelphia and into University City. Coming out of law school, my first act was to bring a legal action against Graduate Hospital, make them in fact live up to the commitment of helping that community. But they still encroached and began to buy up all the neighborhoods around the surrounding area. When we talk about mechanic impact and economic development, I think there is also another equation left out. It is the emotional impact.

It is the emotional development and our retarding of that development that takes place when we dispossess people. )

Why should Philadelphia's people of color, and black people in particular, be asked to pay for and investment in expanding the corporate wealth of a privileged few? 182 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 You look at the Philadelphia stadium. And when the Phillies play, you seldom see a black person there; black people still smart from the racist behavior of Philadelphia Phillies going back to Jackie Robinson days in the early years of Philadelphia Phillies. Is that taxation without representation? Which elected official will have the political will to say this is wrong; not just for Chinatown, but for all of Philadelphia? Who within the religious community will have the moral courage to speak up and speak out? Which faith will recognize the contradictions within the scriptures of this political and corporate decision? Will it be the Baptist, the Methodist, the Apostolic, the Episcopalian, the Catholic, the Quaker, the Jew, the Moslem, the Buddhist, the Lutheran? Who dares to challenge the establishment? Which politicians will speak out in the City Council, state legislature, state Senate against this injustice? And, finally, in the absence of failure of those voices to speak up, it is 183 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 imperative that people of color, and black people in particular, unite with those others uniting with Chinatown. Rise up and fight with the Asian community and their broad-based coalitions that are against this morally reprehensible decision to once again marginize those perceived as the least amongst us. I continue to say, we must fight this at all costs. And I suspect that Philadelphia will see a kind of movement that took place in the 1950s when the Civil Rights movement was at its peak. Thank you so much. (Applause.) - - - 184 RESOLUTION NO. 000325

Andy Toy, Shirley Young, Tim Lee, and Eileen Hing. (Witnesses come forward.)

I am Eileen Hing, president of the Hing Wah Yuen Homeowners Association. I am speaking on behalf of 51 new homeowners of the Hing Wah Yuen development who invested in the expansion of Chinatown's boundaries, located in the section classified as Chinatown North. We are a part of the cutting edge in expanding Chinatown's boundaries and endure adverse surroundings in doing so. The development is surrounded by an ugly abandoned smoke stack, a loud nightclub bar, a truck staging area for the Convention Center and the Vine Street Expressway. We do not want a stadium two blocks away to add to our adversity. We would much rather see our public funding, our hard-earned tax dollars, be spent on quality-of-life necessities such as education and housing. It is unbelievable that one has to choose between funding a stadium or funding our schools. This is so because the beast, the one who preys on those who are politically weak or 185 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 politically nonexistent continues to thrive. Here, the beast continues to prey on Chinatown and the children of Philadelphia. Most immigrants and minorities have felt its sting and thought, This is so unfair. As we enter the 21st century, it is time to change its momentum and not allow it to perpetuate itself. Using public funding to finance the stadium does not make economic sense. Our children are our future. When we invest in them, we invest in our future. Using public funding to finance a stadium in Chinatown will kill Philly's only physical portal into Asia. Does this make sound business sense? Not in these times of the Internet and our global emerging economies, especially when China alone has over one billion potential customers. It is time for Philadelphia to remove its myopic lens and have the true leaders lead.

Thank you. (Applause.)

Madam President, Members of Council, my name is Tim Lee, and I am also here on behalf of the Hing Wah Yuen Homeowners 186 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 Association. There can be no dispute that the housing stock for Chinese-Americans is sorely lacking, with the current complement. What new housing there has been developed over the past 30 years in Chinatown has been with the kind assistance of local and State agencies, but it has mainly been through the perseverance of Cecilia Moy Yep, who is being awarded tonight and her (unintelligible) PCDC. Don't get me wrong. The units that are being developed are gladly welcomed, but the supply does not even come close to meeting the actual demand. Hing Wah Yuen represents the culmination of years of planning by PCDC and the cooperation of various City and State officials. Fifty-one units of mixed-income housing have opened the gateway to further expansion north of Vine Street, a community occluded from expanding south, east, west has, as a method of last resort, expanded north. We have 51 families with children living there now. If you haven't had an opportunity to look at it yet, I'd be happy to give you a tour. 187 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 I implore you to think about what would happen if a stadium were built at 11th and Vine Streets. Thousands upon thousands of people would traverse the immediate areas surrounding the development and perhaps even inside of the development. Only two blocks away, we have Holy Redeemer grade school. While most game-goers are law-abiding people out to enjoy a game with their family and friends, there are always the hooligans, the drinkers, the troublemakers, who, incidently, will search out watering holes before but mostly after the games. What happens is that the types of businesses that will sprout are bars, nightclubs. You get my point. I remember, as a child attending Holy Redeemer and living in Chinatown, that there were go-go bars and many drinking establishments in the area. I remember one particular place on the northwest corner of Tenth and Race Street. Dancers were on stage when. When we had our annual candy drive, imagine the angst of the bar keeper seeing an 8-year-old walk into the premises. I'm not sure whether he was so much 188 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 concerned that my presence was causing trouble with the cops or that even he understood that that was no place for a child or children in general or for families. I didn't sell any candy there. Most of them are gone now, replaced by flower shops, restaurants, and professional offices. The seedy side of the once red-light district will undoubtedly return. Proponents say that the stadium at any site will necessarily displace or impose upon some segment of the population. If that is the case, why not put it somewhere where it's mostly welcome, serves the public good, and not severely threaten an established and viable neighborhood and community. Hing Wah Yuen is an example of urban renewal at its finest; there can be no question about that. The concept of public good vis-a-vis housing needs and plans to fulfill those needs clearly encompasses more than a scant perusal by the powers that be followed by a conclusion that it makes good business sense to place a stadium downtown. Good business for whom? Think about the idea of people walking 189 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 from their workplace to see a ball game; it's not going to happen. Who dares to traverse the area from 11th and Vine Streets, or any other Center City location, to, let's say, 18th and Market Streets at o'clock night. It would have to be 7 some brave and foolish souls. 8 Sound public policy means utilizing 9 public funds to enumerate and implement a policy 10 plan that enhances and supports the public common wealth.

The concept of placing stadium in a location whose economic feasibility is questionable, which does not have the support of the Phillies, so far as I can tell, and could potentially severely jeopardize the fiscal soundness of City finances makes no sense to me. We have a school system which may not be able to have a sound operating budget in the upcoming year. We have police forces and fire departments that obviously require more manpower to do their jobs effectively. If we all agree that a $680 million price tag is a fair ballpark figure, can we at least agree that if this is an accurate assessment that we can make a rational decision to build it 190 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 elsewhere, at a reduced cost? No one wants a legacy of ballooning public debt, bankrupt schools, and deteriorating neighborhoods -- at least not the majority of citizens of this great city. Thank you for your time.

Thank you, Mr. Lee. (Applause.)

Mr. Toy, good seeing you.

Good evening, Council President Verna and the other Councilpeople that are still here. My name is Andrew Toy and I'm here to testify in opposition to the proposal to finance and build a new baseball stadium at 11th to 13th and Vine Streets. I'm a board member of Philadelphia Chinatown Development Corporation. As a former City Commerce Department official and economist by training, I would like to focus on some of the cost-benefit issues that should be important in your decision-making. Ultimately, even if we can raise all of the millions needed to pay for 191 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 stadium at this site, does our investment here make sense? What kind of return on investment are we expecting if the stadium costs 650 million, 700 million or even $800 million? And what are the opportunity costs of investing our funds here rather than on other critical needs such as schools, economic development, tax reform, housing, or neighborhoods? These are the questions the Administration needs to answer before spending such large sums on this vision. To begin to answer these questions, I would like to focus on important opportunity costs, which have been overlooked in choosing the Vine Street site over other alternatives. The supposed benefits of a downtown stadium on Vine Street must be weighed against what is lost by the City by demolishing four blocks of a developing areas. First, the benefits. The Central Philadelphia Development Corporation commissioned report by Arthur Andersen in 1997 concludes that the City might gain up to $3 million a year -- as we've heard, there are some real questions about that -- in additional taxes at a downtown stadium 192 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 versus South Philadelphia. Many assumptions go into that number. 14. H. 76, which was criticized as too high. But just this percent difference in assumptions knocks the 10 yearly tax revenue amount down by half a million 11 dollars. If the City puts an extra $300 million 12 into 12th and Vine, it would take well over a 13 hundred years or more to recoup the investment, 14 assuming the stadium lasts that long and that 15 there is no time value to money. 16 Even assuming that the study used to 17 support the stadium in Center City is accurate, 18 there are other costs that should be weighed in a good public-policy decision. Beyond the crucial quality of life in the Chinatown community and business impacts are some quantifiable costs regarding the site itself. Our independent analysis totals the lost real estate tax revenues from the stadium footprint to be almost $300,000 today, at today's 193 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 taxes and assessments. If we add in the wage, business, use and occupancy taxes, and water billings, that number could easily double. If we also use a multiplier of economic activity, as the Andersen report does, we quickly reach well over $1 million per year of direct and indirect tax revenues attributable to this site today. But this number is actually an understatement of opportunities lost because this area is on the rise. In the western area of the site, others will relate to you that buildings like the Edwards Shoe building and the Laramie building are in process of being filled with e-commerce and artists' loft space, adding to the already-vibrant Beaux Arts condominium. On the east and north, the Asian residences and businesses are taking hold, as the Philadelphia Chinatown Development Corporation has recently completed its first housing project and office north of Vine and plans another development to break ground this fall. So even the total assessed market value of properties within the site is currently -- so even though the total assessed market value of the 194 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 properties within the site is currently a little over $11 million, this number will be rising significantly with these new developments.

One example is a property with a Board of Revision tax value of just over half a million dollars, whose value today by many is believed to be seven times that number. Given the development pressures already evident, the taxes generated just from within the site could easily double or triple in the next ten years. The irony is that after investing hundreds of millions of dollars in a stadium in the name of economic development, the net increase in revenues to the City per year could end up being nothing, or even a net loss if this area continues growing the way Old City did, as an example, 15 years ago. I know because I lived there then. Obviously, Old City didn't need a stadium to succeed. A look at the time it has taken to develop and is still taking to develop Penn's Landing tells us that 15 years is not a long time. A stadium at 12th and Vine will not only have direct tax consequences to the City; the other costs will be the loss of e-commerce jobs to 195 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 the suburbs and the continued stunting of Chinatown, one of the City's few growing neighborhoods. If it hadn't been for the Vine Street Expressway and other government projects, Chinatown could easily be double in size today. A look at New York's Chinatown shows how growth can happen. In fact, New York City would have lost population in the last decade if not for strong immigrant patterns. By Chinatown finally developing across Vine Street, there is great potential for City population and tax growth in the next decade. On the other hand, if a stadium is built there, there will be a gaping hole 280-plus days a year and a sea of parking lots surrounding the site instead of 365 days of economic and community development moving forward today. One other development opportunity which may be negatively impacted by the rush to put the stadium at this terrible site is the ability the ability of the City to obtain the Reading viaduct under the best of possible terms from the Reading Company. Obviously, it is more difficult to negotiate under time constraints. This decision 196 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 could cost the City millions here as well. The removal of this eyesore will open up the redevelopment of this whole sector of the City, just as the removal of the old viaduct did along West Market Street. Has Mayor and his team investigated or revealed these and other opportunity costs to the public? Or is a stadium at 12th and Vine to be built at any cost, no matter how high? Or worse, will this become another hole in the ground, a moment to a monumental mistake? Finally, if the opportunity costs are so high at this site, is the same true at other Center City sites or other sites in general? No. 16 The City currently receives no tax revenues from either Spring Garden and Delaware or Amtrak's 30th Street Yard. Both also have the advantage of already having many visitors accustomed to traveling by and through them. While I'm not advocating any other site specifically, this analysis shows that it makes poor economic and community development sense for the City to put the stadium at 12th and Vine Streets. As acquisition and construction costs 197 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 and time estimates continue to rise, the picture becomes even clearer. Even setting aside many legitimate community issues, the 12th and Vine Street site is a terrible investment choice for the City's new stadium. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Toy. (Applause.) (Witness comes forward.)

Good evening.

Good evening. My name is Lou Incognito, and I'm a second vice president of the East Mt. Airy Neighbors. I was born in Philadelphia, raised and lived all my entire life in Philadelphia. And I love Philadelphia. My testimony is as follows: While building new sports facilities would provide trade union jobs for construction workers, objections are not raised to begrudge a single worker of the right to a decent livelihood, nor are there protests of cultural and sports activities. 198 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 The two major points of contention are funding and location. Public funds are proposed under the specious argument that the City will eventually gain, and the construction sites are selected without regard to the affected communities. The tens of millions of dollars of proposed stadium subsidies should be spent for housing, for public transit, for health care, and for our severely underfunded public school system. Many, many more trade union jobs would be created in building schools and repairing roads than in stadium construction. Public works will help rebuild our city. Boondoggles will not. Democratic-minded folks will not allow public funds to be spent at the expense of teachers and City workers' contracts. Not only funding, but also choice of site is at issue. Neighbors in other proposed locations have successfully fought off the designs of profiteers. Now our Chinatown friends have become unwilling targets. We stand with the shop keepers and residents who demand to be consulted before construction is attempted. When another 199 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 site is chosen, let us make sure that no part of the City is insulted. As has been repeated many times -- (Applause.)

As has been repeated many times throughout the City, the current funding and site proposals are against our best interests. An East Mt. Airy Neighbors petition demands that no public funds be used until class size in every Philadelphia public school is reduced to 15. (Applause.)

Chinatown pleads that no stadium be built in its community. If the sports teams' owners need new stadiums, let them build the facilities themselves. (Applause.)

Mayor Street should take time to recall those who worked tirelessly to ensure that Philadelphia would not fall into Republican hands. Thank you. (Applause.) 200 RESOLUTION NO. 000325

I understand there are some high school students here and we're trying to get them out of here so they can go study. I hope I can say the names right. Phally Chroy, Fung Wa Chung, Anh Ha, Wilfred Yip, Huot He, and Tan Nguyen. (Applause.) (Witnesses come forward.)

Good evening. My name is Phally Chroy. I live in South Philadelphia. I'm a resident of Philadelphia. I pay taxes, a lot of taxes. (Laughter.)

I'm a student in the School District of Philadelphia -- well, I graduated this year. And what kind of struck me funny about financing the stadium is that the City had the ambition to raise $650 million but they don't have the ambition to raise $650 million for the schools. (Applause.)

One thing that also struck me kind of funny was that I work in Chinatown, and the streets of Arch, they ain't getting any 201 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 wider. I mean, if you're out there at p.m. on the weekdays, the cars don't even move. See, I walk faster than some of the cars that go through traffic. Building a new stadium, you can see what's going to happen. Cars are either going to be stacked on top of each other just to move across these streets, or they're going to have to widen up the streets. And I don't think the City, now knowing that it's going to cost over $650 million is going to invest in, you know, changing the streets of Chinatown. Chinatown itself is shrinking and shrinking and shrinking every time because the area of Chinatown is prime development. And, I mean, you think about, like, prime development, there's other parts of the City who need improvement -- there should be prime improvement in Kensington and Northeast and South Philly, where I live in. You know, there's so much, like, focus in this, you know, stadium, everything else is forgotten. Like -- like -- stadiums bring money; education doesn't, I think, the way it's going. I 202 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 spent four years in high school. Seeing that I've been reading the same books for four years -- it's kind of funny, you know, how many times are you going to read Inherit the Wind and stuff, you know? (Laughter.)

Also, it's like -- hearing the other people speak for so long and being so patient, it made me kind of realize that speaking here today that I can change, like, the minds of City Council. It's kind of like an empowerment towards me. So I'm -- it's like, um -- if I could change, like, you know, like, the minds of, you know, City Council, it would be a great thing. So we don't have much time, so I'm going to pass it over.

Do you want to state your name first for the record.

My name is Anh Ha. I'm 17 years old and a resident in Northeast Philadelphia. I am here today to express my strong opposition of the stadium being built in Chinatown. Chinatown has been in existence for the 203 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 past 130 years, and now they say that they want to place a stadium in Chinatown. How big do you really think Chinatown is? People oppose the stadium because this is going to mean the end for Chinatown. Chinatown is not a big place. It's where children live, people build their lives, people open their stores there. Talking about an economic boost, for the past 130 years, people have established their lives there and opened their stores. Why shouldn't they have a say in where a stadium should be built. Taking taxpayers money out of their paycheck to build a stadium when our school system, the largest in the State of Pennsylvania, is $300 million in debt. Many, many times, I have been told we are the leaders of tomorrow. Well, the leaders of tomorrow don't even have books to bring home. (Applause.)

I don't just speak because I oppose the stadium, because I'm of Chinese descent and don't want this community destroyed. I speak on behalf of the hundreds and thousands of people who send their children to Philadelphia public 204 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 schools rather than leave Philadelphia and commuters that have to travel through the crowded streets of Center City. I really don't think it's right for their tax dollars to be spent. And for those who don't know, the $650 million project is going to destroy an establishment that has been here for the past 130 years, bringing culture and substance to this city and deprive the children money needed to recover from the large debt in the School District. And I don't think it's right for the money to be spent this way. For you, the elected officials of Philadelphia, your job is to hear the voice of the people. And we say no stadium in Chinatown -- money for education. (Applause.)

Hello. My name is Will Yip, and I oppose the stadium being built in Chinatown. I attend Central High School. I live in the Northeast, and yet, Chinatown has always been like my second home. I can see with my own eyes the ever-growing population of Chinatown. 205 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 And now for sports to park itself into an area only so large. Our voices have not been heard in prior development, such as the establishment of the Convention Center. And there are far too many other developments that are irrelevant to Chinatown. Chinatown serves as a tourist attraction for people to learn about Chinese culture, and it also serves the purpose of uniting people of the Chinese culture together. As you understand, many people from Chinatown came to the United States from their native land. When they arrived to the U.S., they were at a disadvantage of not understanding or speaking the English language. So Chinatown was a place for these people to access their needs conveniently. The induction of the stadium would definitely hurt the capacity of Chinatown. Despite the overcrowded conditions in Chinatown, the Chinese continue to be deprived and discriminated against. We're not going to stand for that. For years, the government has never given Chinatown a sufficient amount of money 206 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 needed to construct housing and various public facilities. Now that Chinatown is beginning to expand, the government wants to plot a stadium on it. The Phillies don't want it in Chinatown, the community doesn't want it in Chinatown, so why does the stubborn mayor refuse to consider different locations for a stadium. (Applause.)

The schools are in debt and the Mayor seems to be showing more concern for a stadium than school funding. There are still numerous financial issues that the public schools are still challenged with, not to mention the safety of our children. A school known as Holy Redeemer will reside less than 500 feet from the stadium. I mean, during the course of the ball games in session, children will be in a corrupted atmosphere of constant disturbance and danger. When traffic builds up, it is hard to preserve any precautions. When heaps of traffic develops, we cannot risk the safety of our children as they walk home from school. Instead of building a stadium in 207 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 Chinatown, I say -- no, we say, have Mayor John Street ensure the City of Philadelphia unconditional assurance of public safety and education by establishing the stadium somewhere else and save the money to compensate and resolve all of our staggering problems. Thank you. (Applause.)

Thank you for that. I think maybe we heard not from the leaders of tomorrow, but from the leaders of today. (Applause.)

Hal Sawyer and Rita Addessa. (Witnesses come forward.)

That is absolutely an impossible presentation to follow as eloquently. I applaud you. (Applause.)

I did bring testimony if I may share it with you.

First identify yourself for the record and proceed. 208 RESOLUTION NO. 000325

I will be very brief. I know it's been a long day for City Council. I am Rita Addessa. I am the Executive Director of Philadelphia Lesbian and Gay Task Force. I am a parent -- (Applause.)

Thank you. I'm a parent, I'm a grandparent, I'm a Philadelphia native, and I am here to testify on behalf of myself and the community against this new stadium. (Applause.)

The essence of my commentary is very simple. From our view, the Administration's proposal represents nothing more than another tax giveaway to the corporate elite. (Applause.)

And it's a giveaway that will further impoverish our city. I encourage each member of City Council -- and I notice that most members are not here at this moment, but I do encourage them and have provided copies of an excellent article on how this form of corporate welfare works from a magazine called Dollars and Cents, and the name of 209 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 that article, for the record, is "Public Teams and Private Profits," the March and April 2000 issue. The Administration is engaged in a reverse Robin Hood paradigm. It is particularly unconscionable when one considers the desperate plight of our children and of the public education system in Philadelphia. It is particularly unconscionable when one considers the myriad unmet needs of our community related to long-term employment at living wages, to quality and affordable child, elder, and health care, as well as decent housing and transportation. I strongly encourage the City Council to take a strong stand against the new proposed stadium, and in contrast, argue for the reallocation, as everyone before me has probably spoken, of this billion dollars so readily available to corporate profiteers to be applied to the long-term needs of our communities and, most particularly, for a superior, as we need it, public education system. I ask you, in closing, to consider a few central questions. These are apriori questions that this administration and mainstream 210 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 media, who, I think, have largely left, have failed to address. And the apriori questions are: why a new stadium at all? who benefits? who decides? If private corporations and players want a new stadium, why should limited public tax dollars be used to subsidize private profit for a handful of elites off the backs of our children? The invasion of Chinatown is -- though, at a different level, not particularly different -- from white Western Europeans invasion of this country. That within the concept is absolutely, absolutely unconscionable. (Applause.)

Thank you, thank you. And please note that the we oppose the invasion of any indigenous community, and we certainly, as well, oppose the use of public dollars for private profit and gain. Thank you. (Applause.)

Thank you very much. My name is Hal Sawyer. I'm here representing several community groups in Germantown: The Concerned Neighbors of Greater Germantown, the West Side 211 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 Neighborhood Council, and several other concerned neighbors in Germantown. We're here to show solidarity with the people of Chinatown who are being subjected to an exploitive -- (Applause.)

-- and abusive commercial development. Germantown has suffered similar exploitive and abusive developments in its past, and they are very damaging to both the commercial and the residential fabric of the neighborhood. It is anti-residential development that's going on here. In years from now down the road, one thing will count in Philadelphia's economic wholeness and development, and that is how it retains its residents, how it retains its population. If you look at cities around the United States, they fall into two categories: ones which have retained their population and their residential base since 1950 -- they are viable economic cities; and ones that have allowed their economic base to deteriorate, which follows when their residential base drops -- cities like 212 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 Philadelphia, cities like Baltimore that built their famous downtown stadiums have lost population faster even than Philadelphia. This is anti-residential development. It impinges on one of the healthiest, most viable communities in the City, which is Chinatown. Business is booming there. It does not need any help from stadiums, even if you believe that stadiums generate spin-off business, which they do not. (Applause.)

Look at the at Veterans Stadium, which will still not be paid off for years. They're going to tear it down and the City will still be paying off its investment, it's not paid off. It is a capital investment of City funds that has failed to realize its potential. It's not paid off yet, and they're scrapping it. Look around Veterans Stadium. It's been there for 30 years. If there is spin-off business from a stadium for restaurants, for nightclubs, for bars, where are they down there? They've had 30 years to build them. (Applause.) 213 RESOLUTION NO. 000325

Because the business does not exist -- that is why it's not there. (Applause.)

The only business that can succeed around a major sports facility is parking -- the one thing that we don't have, okay? So, it's very simple. If you want to promote economic development in Center City, north of Vine Street, the City can acquire the properties and turn them over to the Chinatown Development Corporation. They will do a better job, okay? (Applause.)

They'll make money, and money will be realized in taxes and benefits to the City, okay? At the same time, I don't think I even have to address the issue of taxpayer money being spent on these stadiums, okay? I think that we have heard that eloquently spoken over and over again, and I think that it's obvious to everyone in this room that when rain is coming in through the roofs of recreation centers, if you care about sports, if you care about baseball, football, why 214 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 don't we have leagues for those things in this city for our kids to enjoy it? (Applause.)

If they're so important -- if these activities are such important cultural components of our civic life, why are we not providing them to our children, let alone basic education? And that's essentially all I have to say. If you want to make sure that this city remains viable, do things for the residents, keep the residential base up, okay? (Applause.)

Do not displace them by hemming them in, do not continue a policy that the City has had for a decade now, that they will not spend a dime anywhere except for Center City. The outlying neighborhoods, where people actually live, do not get any kind of scale development that they can use. Everything is a big deal, a big photo opportunity, and it's downtown. And I'm sure that a lot of people in the Administration would be glad if everything south of South Street and north of Market -- or Fairmount, north of 215 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 Fairmount would go away so that they could just keep spending money in the Center City area. But it's not going to work in this case because this is one case where if it works, don't fix it. Chinatown works, okay? It doesn't need any help. (Applause.)

It's an obnoxious piggybacking of a failed economic concept onto a viable neighborhood. The stadium will not make money for anyone except its owners and the concessionaires in it. You know, when people come to a baseball from, let's say, South Jersey, do they go out for dinner? They're not going out to dinner in South Philadelphia now. What makes you think they're going to like Chinese food better than Italian food. (Laughter.) (Applause.)

What they want is -- they want a hot dog and a beer for $4 each in the stadium, and then they go home. Because after a three-and-a-half-hour baseball game, you don't want to do anything else but go home, okay? So 216 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 that's what you do. So the purpose of concessions in the stadium is directly opposed to the idea of spin-off business in the neighborhood, business that the neighborhood doesn't need. I come to eat in Chinatown once a week and I can't find a parking spot. Do you think I'm going to come down here for a Chinese dinner while there's a baseball game going on? Not a chance, sorry. Lee How Fook, you are the best Chinese restaurant, but I'm just going to have to go out to the suburbs and eat second-rate Chinese food from now on. That's all I have to say. Thank you very much.

Thank you. (Applause.)

Yat Sun Wen (ph.), Yat Sun Wen? (No response.)

Is Yat Sun Wen here? (No response.)

Grant Gulibon and Beth McConnell? 217 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 (Witnesses come forward.)

State your name for the record so that you will be recorded.

My name is Frances Gabo (ph.). I'm a member of the communist party and represent their position, and I've turned in a statement here. I do want to deal with a number of questions off the cuff in addition to that statement. I'm not going to read the whole statement.

We'll put it in the record.

Thank you. (Copy of Ms. Gabo's statement not submitted to stenographer for attachment hereto.)

First, I want to greet all of the Councilpeople here who have taken the time and the effort to hear from the people of this city. It is shameful that more have not been here. (Applause.)

Let me say in defense of the other Councilmembers, when the 218 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 session started earlier this afternoon, most of them were here, but schedules are very heavy, particularly at this time of the year when we're in our last week before the summer recess. Some of them are in their offices listening when they're not here, others are at other meetings, but they will get full copies of all of the testimony.

Well, I do hope that Mayor Street gets it. (Applause.)

He has stated, and incorrectly so --

I can't speak for Mayor Street.

He has stated that he has to have respect from the people of this city as the mayor of this city, and we certainly owe him that respect. However he has to learn that respect is earned, and it is earned by virtue of the fact that he respects the people as well and hears what we have to say. (Applause.)

And that has not always been 219 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 true. I feel very strongly that a city government owes its people, first and foremost, the service -- their services for being elected means that we have confidence that they will serve us well, and when they don't serve us well, we should really stand up and respond, and that is beyond respect. This city has suffered terrible losses. I was born and raised here. It has suffered terrible losses -- losses in housing, losses in people, losses in health and security, losses in jobs. We were a major industrial city, and that is gone; and with it, the people have gone. In order to just survive, the City -- yes, it needs its culture, it needs its sports fields, but it needs, more than all else, the care for its constituents, the care for the neighborhoods, the care and the concern for the neighborhoods. When we will have enough to be able to take care of the health needs of our cities, imagine we have all of these health centers 220 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 without a single mammogram machine sitting in any one of them. That is an outrage in this day and age when we talk about health care for the whole population, when our children, as has been stated here so well by so many people, do not have the school books, when I know that nurses have to go out and by Band-Aids when a child gets hurt in school because there are no Band-Aids there. (Applause.)

When teachers -- and I would love to ask, I really feel very badly about building trades workers because I come from a building trades family. My husband was a building trades worker, my father-in-law was a building trades worker, and I know the pain of seasonal jobs when we are unemployed. But I would like to ask every one of them, how many apprentices could they teach at one time -- 30 or more? -- under the jurisdiction of one carpenter? They couldn't do it. Why should we expect a school teacher to teach 30 or more children in a classroom when they are unable to do so? And then we will blame those teachers. (Applause.) 221 RESOLUTION NO. 000325

I'm telling you, until we fund the neighborhoods with enough services and facilities, we cannot throw boondoggles into the profit-making people. Thank you. I'm through. (Applause.)

Good evening.

Kindly identify yourself for the record.

Sure. My name is Grant Gulibon, I'm a senior policy analyst with the Commonwealth Foundation, which is a statewide public-policy research organization based in Harrisburg. Over the past several years, we've written and commented extensively on the subject of taxpayer financing sports stadiums within Pennsylvania. The push for putting taxpayer dollars on the table to finance stadiums is a gamble, with those in power using other people's money to bet that new sports facilities will spark substantial economic development in Philadelphia and in other cities. And they say that the payoff will be shown in growth in population and jobs. 222 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 The problem is that this never pays out. And, as with most gamblers, the people in power are looking for quick fix for the problems facing our cities. It's far easier to throw cash at high-profile sports teams than it is to create quality public schools, safe streets, low taxes, and efficient public services. Yet till these problems are addressed, Philadelphia's economic challenges will continue, with or without new stadiums. That is the evidence that we at the Commonwealth Foundation have found in examining the examples of other cities that have subsidized stadiums with tax dollars. Our conclusions mirror those of other scholars across the United States, such as Dr. Zimbalist and Dr. Rosentraub, who have found that publicly financed stadiums have little, if any, economic impact on the communities that build them. Cities such as Baltimore, where two new publicly financed stadiums have opened in the past decade, continue to struggle economically. Baltimore has lost 250,000 residents since 1960, 223 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 putting its population at its lowest level since 1915, and it continues to lose about 1,000 residents per month. And, also, in an April 1998 report by Greater Philadelphia First and the Pennsylvania Economy League, it was found that Baltimore ranked 44th among the nation's top 50 metro areas in employment growth, one spot below Philadelphia. The evidence also demonstrates that the real winners in the taxpayer-subsidies-for- stadiums game are team owners who, through sweetheart lease deals, are guaranteed to receive almost all of the income the new stadium generates, while making little investment of their own funds. Demands for such deals are leveraged against the threat of moving the team, and policy-makers face the prospect of caving in or being tagged as the ones who lost the team for a city. We do believe that professional sports teams, as private businesses, may still decide that it's in their best interest to build new facilities in order to compete more robustly with other teams. But if that is the case, we believe 224 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 that they should pay the cost of financing their own stadiums, not hard-working taxpayers. (Applause.)

Several major-league baseball and football teams have privately financed stadiums in recent years, including the San Francisco Giants, who, this spring, moved into the new $262 million Pacific Bell Park after San Francisco areas voters repeatedly rejected the Giants' demands for a new taxpayer-funded stadium. The Giants not only listened to those voters but went out and found innovative ways to raise enough private money to build the first privately-funded major league baseball-only stadium in more than three decades. However, Pennsylvania voters have not been, to date, fortune enough to have their elected officials heed their wishes regarding taxpayer-funding of stadiums. Taxpayers have not been bullied by the threats of local teams pulling up stakes and moving out of town. Poll after poll shows that Pennsylvanians oppose taxpayer funding of stadiums. And when given the chance to vote, an overwhelming number of southwestern 225 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 Pennsylvanians rejected an initiative to fund stadiums and other projects with tax dollars in the fall of 1997. The rejection of this initiative was loud and decisive, with citizens in counties 7 voting the initiative down by a margin of 2 to 1. 8 And even in Allegheny County, where the new 9 stadiums would have been constructed, the 10 referendum failed by a margin of 58 to 42 11 percent. Citizens are smart. They know that the private sector can build successful stadiums without relying on public dollars, but the voters' verdict in southwestern Pennsylvania was not honored. Local politicians responded by developing an alternative, "The Plan B," that relies heavily on local and State tax dollars. And early last year, despite statewide opinion polls again showing heavy opposition to State tax dollars for stadiums, Pennsylvania legislators approved funding for two stadiums in Pittsburgh in and two in Philadelphia, as well as an expansion of Pittsburgh's convention center. Since that time, problems have 226 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 developed with the Pittsburgh stadium projects. The most serious of those is the federal investigation into alleged improprieties in the awarding of stadium construction contracts; namely, the alleged existence of pass-through schemes under which minority and women-owned businesses would be paid not to work on a project but would be listed as contractors or subcontractors in order to meet Affirmative Action requirements. In addition, the two stadiums and expanded convention center are expected to eventually cost more than one billion dollars, about $350 million more than projected during the regional renaissance initiative campaign of 1997. The Pirates' new stadium, in particular, will stand where, just two years ago, there stood homes and businesses, a residential neighborhood. Some of these homes, which dated back to the early 19th century, were pushed aside in the name of so-called progress. Building new stadiums will not solve Philadelphia's most pressing social and economic problems. Census Bureau figures show that 227 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 Philadelphia lost percent of its population during the 1990s; other data show that the majority of those leaving are between the ages of and 39, the prime demographic group that plans 6 to start families, create business, and are most 7 attractive to potential employers. And when those 8 who have left were asked why they did, the answers 9 were: poor public schools, a fear of crime, high 10 taxes, and a lack of quality public services -- 11 not because the Phillies and the Eagles don't have new stadiums. If the teams and the community ultimately decide that new stadiums are in their best interests, then all parties should work together to find innovative ways to raise private funds for construction. Thank you very much. (Applause.)

Hi, good evening.

Identify yourself for the record.

My name is Beth McConnell, and I'm an advocate with PennPIRG, the Pennsylvania Public Interest Research Group. 228 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 PennPIRG is a nonprofit, nonpartisan, public-interest advocacy organization representing close to 12,000 citizen members across the State. PIRG, as part of a national organization, has become well known for our efforts to cut wasteful and destructive government spending from the federal budget, and I thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak about this issue here in Philadelphia. It's been called "A Field of Schemes" and "A Major League Steal." Opposition to it has caused conservative think tanks and progressive advocacy organizations to join together, and the subject has inspired vigorous debate in cities from Boston and Nashville, Seattle to Tampa, Baltimore to San Francisco. Yet despite the overwhelming evidence against the economic benefits of public financing for sports stadiums, as well as overwhelming public opinion against public financing, decision- makers in our city are having a tough time saying no to wealthy special interests. It is time for our city officials to listen to the facts and the will of Philadelphians and stop corporate welfare 229 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 for sports teams in our city. Recent estimates put the cost of a new baseball stadium in excess of $627 million. Public financing of this enormously expensive venture is corporate welfare at its worst. Wealthy team owners will reap the benefits while the public will be left holding the bag. At a time when our city is struggling to provide basic critical services to its citizens, this corporate welfare is unacceptable and must be stopped. (Applause.)

Claims made by proponents for public financing that the public will reap economic benefits as a result of increased revenue brought by a new stadium are tenuous at best. Numerous independent economic studies demonstrate that sports stadiums almost universally fail to generate statistically significant economic benefits or increased employment for the metropolitan areas they are located in. One study done by Robert Bade (ph.) of Lake Forrest College studied 30 cities over 30 years and found that 27 experienced no significant 230 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 economic impact from new stadiums, while cities 3 actually experienced a negative economic impact. Oriole Park in Maryland is a prime example. A recent study shows that the net game to Baltimore's economy in terms of new jobs and incremental tax revenue from the new stadium is only $3 million per year. A measly return on a $200 million investment, this can hardly be considered a gain. PennPIRG believes that public dollars should not be used to finance private gain. Due to the fact that these numerous studies have shown the public financing awards no benefits to the public, we urge City Council and other decision- makers on this issue to oppose public financing of any sports stadiums in Pennsylvania. (Applause.)

Thank you for the opportunity.

You're welcome.

Robert Sklaroff, Robert Sklaroff? (No response.) 231 RESOLUTION NO. 000325

Irene Wright? John Struble? (Witness comes forward.) (Applause.)

Thank you. My name is John Struble. I own property at 1215 Wood Street. I think the Mayor has his priorities backwards. If a new stadium is built, it should be built at the proper cost, at a proper location, and to the benefit of the taxpayers and the fans -- not the Center City interests or the team owners. People leave this city because of the poor quality of our schools, not because of the age of our stadiums. Extra police and better high school graduates would contribute more to the economic development than stadiums would. The Mayor says the area where the stadium is going to go is blighted. This is not true. I work there every day. Let me tell you about this area. At the corner of 13th and Wood is the Hyde Building, 8 stories, 80,000 square foot, almost fully occupied; the Edwards Shoe 232 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 building, stories, 80,000 square feet, being converted into residential lofts; the arts space, 10 stories, 130,000 square foot, textile manufacturers, wood workers, and artists; the Wolf Building, right behind the corner, right behind me, 7 stories, 120,000 square foot -- in three years, this has been developed into a 90 percent occupied building. So when the Mayor says this area is blighted, he is wrong. But why does he say it's blighted? He says it's blighted because that's the first step in condemnation under eminent domain. This is going to become a job for lawyers. I want the City Council -- I ask the City Council to vote this down right away. This is not a job for lawyers; it is a job for you to do. And thank you very much. (Applause.)

Debbie Wei? (Witness comes forward.)

Oh boy, you guys got stamina, man. (Witness speaks in foreign tongue.) 233 RESOLUTION NO. 000325

I am Chinese and I will not be silenced. (Applause.)

My statement says "good afternoon," but I think I have to change it to "good evening." My name is Debbie Way. I am with Asian-Americans United and the Philadelphia Chinatown Coalition to oppose the stadium. I would like to speak to you today about the cost of this project, but I don't mean the economic cost, I mean the social cost; and I don't just mean the social cost to Chinatown as a community, but to the City, as it makes critical choices on how to rebuild and revitalize Philadelphia, and in those choices, creates a blueprint for the future and an example for our children. The social costs of these stadium projects cannot be measured in dollars and cents. They are measured in spirit and hope and a vision for sustainable cities well into the 21st century. And what does this mean for Philadelphia? As Jimmy Boggs said nearly 15 years ago 234 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 as he reflected on the same question for the City of Detroit, to begin, we have to stop seeing the city as just a place to which you come to get a job or to make a living and start seeing it as the place where the humanity of people enriched because they have the opportunity to live with people of many different ethnic and social backgrounds. (Applause.)

The foundation of our city has to be the people living in communities. We have to see ourselves as responsible for our city and for each other, and especially for making sure that our children are raised to place more value on social ties than on material wealth, on the development of our neighborhoods and not on the lining of pockets of the rich. (Applause.)

We have to get rid of the myth that there is something sacred about developing industries based on visitors and transients who have no commitment to our city or our neighborhoods or our children. (Applause.) 235 RESOLUTION NO. 000325

Such development renders our neighborhoods invisible. Our communities only become valuable as commodities, interesting stops along a tourist's way to entertain and amuse them. City administrations across the United States support and are supported by outside developers who promise that luxurious sports complexes will replace the jobs once provided by industry. But for each so-called success story touted in the press, grassroots citizens have struggled because their major concerns -- living and raising their children in healthy, environmentally just, and sustainable communities -- are ignored. Ask the neighborhood people of Baltimore or Cleveland if life has improved. Are the schools better? is housing better? are streets cleaner? are jobs more plentiful? are communities safer? are neighborhoods flourishing because of baseball stadiums? (Applause.)

Neil DuMause, in his book, Field of Schemes, said: "Unrestrained 236 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 growth is the ideology of the cancer cell." If we continue on this track, we will find that Philadelphia will come to resemble Atlantic City, a city whose fancy facades mask decaying neighborhoods, a city which teaches its children that the fast and easy is more important than the deep and meaningful. This is a cultural and spiritual struggle as much as it is an economic and political one. Grace Lee Boggs asks, do we want our children to grow up to be passive consumers and spectators living only for their own pleasure and self gratification, only for the excitement of the moment, or do we want them to become productive, self-reliant, and self-determining citizens? These profoundly moral and spiritual questions are at the heart of this struggle. In the wake of real and lingering concerns with Philadelphia's economic future, development continues to be defined by the needs of business and industry, and not by the socio-cultural needs of the communities who live here and have put roots here. Development has boiled down to a big publicly funded project of 237 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 hundreds of millions of dollars to benefit tourists and commuters. This is like keeping count of the bodies which enter and leave the City, without caring about whether or not there is cultural and social breadth in the bodies which make up the city itself. True development in this city must not only look at the body of the city, the shiny new glass and the glitz of Center City's downtown corridor, of which Chinatown is the last standing, attached neighborhood of color. True development must attend to the breadth of our city, to the life of our many neighborhoods and communities, lest the collective breadth of this city be irretrievably lost. And what does breadth look like? I saw community breadth here tonight, breadth for us, for Asian-Americans who have stood here in a place that is very hostile to us. It was evident today in our children and our youth who came out here since 9 o'clock this morning, petitioning, begging, pleading, hoping that they will be heard, who stayed until they had a chance to have their voices heard. Breadth to us is in our businesses 238 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 and in particular the Ocean Harbor and Hong Kong Golden Phoenix restaurants who donated over 200 dinners tonight because the people here are defending our community. (Applause.)

The spirit in this room 8 cannot be measured in dollars and cents. This is way beyond economic development. I realize now that when speaking of the choices behind this issue of stadium financing, I'm directly addressing three levels of marginalization: First and most obvious is the question of class, where power and privilege assumes precedence over the lives of working and poor people, the common people, the little man, the people that the government is charged to protect and serve. The second is race, where development consistently means a form of cultural and ethnic cleansing from the downtown core. And, thirdly, there is the marginalization of gender, where there exists an unquestioned assumption that men's gains take precedence over women's, children's, and families' 239 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 lives. (Applause.)

I raise the question of gender equity involved in the jobs being created by these proposals and the prime beneficiaries of such proposals. This question must be put on the table when considering such public expenditure of dollars. I wasn't going to say this -- I took it out and everybody said that I should probably say it anyway. But I realize that it takes balls to play these games. (Laughter.)

In closing, though often difficult to do, I ask that you look beyond the shop window facade, look into your vision for a city where decisions are made based on how they promote relationships and interactions and where sustainable development models are used as the template for economic growth. (Standing ovation.)

Ida-Meri DeBlanc? (No response.)

Hele Gym? 240 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 (Witness comes forward.)

My name is Hele Gym. I come here today as a Korean-American and as an Asian-American resident of this city. I do not physically live in Chinatown but I do consider it my home, and I will fight to protect it until this righteous cause is won. Chinatown is not only a neighborhood for 4,000 residents, it is also a psychological home for over 250,000 Asian-Americans in the Delaware Valley region, and it is one of the many Chinatowns nationally that are under watch by National Asian-American groups, because this Chinatown, like many others, is under assault by downtown revitalization projects that have threatened to destroy them. Os while City Council considers the economic costs of this stadium, perhaps it needs to consider a cost which hits closer to home: the political repercussions of attacking this, the oldest, most established Asian community in this city and the political and reprehensible implications of such racial politics. Chinatown is a symbol, a beacon of how 241 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 Asian-American ancestors, no matter what their ethnicity, had to scrape, struggle and fight to build a future for Asian-Americans in this country. When they were shut out of jobs, when they were told they could not live in other neighborhoods, when they were told over and over again that they did not belong, they never gave up. They built a community for themselves, their children, for us and our children, a home that stood against time for 130 years and here, as it is now, will stand for centuries more. Chinatown is our ground. It is sacred in a way only that people who are consistently marginalized from society can understand. That is why we as Asian-Americans, Chinese, Korean, Vietnamese, Cambodian, Indian, we will not deny our responsibility to unite and defend this home and the memory of a common history. This stadium and this city's dismissal of our voices is a symbol of how Asian-Americans have been treated as invisible throughout history. Chinatown will not stand for it, Asian-Americans will not stand for it. We will fight back and we will always stands by 242 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 Chinatown. (Applause.)

Mary Yee. (Witness comes forward.)

President Verna and members of Council, my name is Mary Yee. I am a member of Asian-Americans United and also a co-chair of the Technical Review Committee of the Stadium Out of Chinatown Coalition. I have been an active member of the Chinatown community for 30 years, and my affiliations have included: Philadelphia Chinatown Development Corporation, Yellow Seeds, and Asian-Americans Americans United. I have been involved firsthand in the struggles the community has faced to survive and thrive, despite government-sponsored Center City projects. Through the use of public dollars again, the current stadium proposal threatens to destroy Chinatown. Given the current estimates of 650 million for the Phillies stadium at the 11th Vine Street site, this amounts to $335 million more than the original city estimate for a facility. What does this extra money really buy 243 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 you? Well, if the stadium is built on the Chinatown site, this extra $335 million brings you the gradual death of a dynamic, self-starting, growing community of over 4,000 hard-working residents and over 200 businesses. It will pay for the deterioration in the quality of life and the erosion of the cultural and spiritual center for over a quarter million Asian residents in the Delaware Valley. It will pay for the destruction of an historic community of color in Center City. The crowds, trash, and traffic $335 million buys will eviscerate Chinatown, draining its life as a healthy Center City neighborhood where people earn a livelihood, rear their families, worship, and participate in their cultural organizations. Instead, Chinatown will gradually turn into a tourist shell of restaurants and stores with a couple of pockets of subsidized housing, like the ghost town that is DC's Chinatown since the MCI Stadium got built. So these extra millions buy a giant 40,000-seat tombstone for Chinatown, a monument, which would appropriately be silent for about 285 days a year. If the Mayor and Bruce Crawley and 244 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 their supporters are so able to raise this kind of money, why don't they put their efforts towards finding an extra $335 million to pay for what the people of Philadelphia really need. I'm a parent of two children who attend public schools. I work for the School District of Philadelphia, and I know firsthand the educational crisis we face. Are we making entertainment for suburbanites, who constitute 88 percent of the fans, according to the Phillies' own numbers, and for the corporations who will rent the luxury boxes a higher priority than the 200,000 or more school children who desperately need a quality education? I would challenge someone from the Mayor's Office to go to schools in clusters like Martin Luther King, Strawberry Mansion, Olney, or Audenried and tell students that the City can't find money to pay for them to have a decent after-school or summer program or to get them enough computers and books, but it can build a new stadium, which they're -- (Applause.)

Maybe this as good a civics 245 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 lesson as one an find to teach kids how adults deal with issues of public accountability, financial stewardship, and social responsibility; that is, how you should not do as we do, but as we say. Well, what good stuff can you actually get for $335 million? Well, for starters, it would pay for the Mayor, Bruce Crawley, and 10 other supporters of the 11th and Vine Street site 11 to spend a week in outer space on the Russian 12 spaceship MIR -- 13 (Laughter.) 14

-- at a cost of about 15 $20 million round trip. Of if Council would prefer, they could also have that extraterrestrial experience. (Laughter.)

More to the point, however, is that $335 million will buy the citizens of Philadelphia the following: The construction and land for 16 new community schools, like the state-of-the-art the one being planned jointly by the University of Pennsylvania Grad School of Education and the 246 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 School District. Each of these schools could serve over 620 children from pre-K to grade for 4 close to 10,000 students. 5 It could also pay for the salaries of 6 over 1,000 additional public school teachers for 5 7 years. 8 (Applause.)

Given the 175 elementary schools in our district, this translates to 5 additional teachers in each elementary school for 5 years. This could help lower class size or be used to provide added support for literacy and math instruction. $335 million also pays for the purchase of over 275,000 computers for schools. Each kid could get a computer, and you would still have enough left over to give over 250 computers to each of our 260 schools. (Applause.)

This amount of money also pays for the cost of 20 programs like the Scholarship Builders, sponsored by Merrill Lynch and the Urban League. Each of these programs provides for full mentoring and full college 247 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 tuition for about 220 children from 1st grade through college. This would mean that over 4,400 Philadelphia school children could have a promise of a bright future. In fact, $335 million would pay for class of in each elementary school in 7 the City, or an average of 17 1st grades per 8 Councilmatic district, to participate in the 9 Scholarship Builders Program. 10 This money would also pay for the cost 11 of preschools for 3- and 4-year-olds in the 12 District for almost 4 years. This would be a boon 13 for working mothers and parents who are trying to 14 reenter the workforce. It also would provide much 15 needed support to prepare children socially and 16 emotionally and academically for elementary 17 school. 18 $335 million also pays the cost of 19 subsidies for full-time day care for more than 20 7500 young children citywide for 5 years -- again, 21 a huge benefit for working families. 22 Our discussion here has focused a lot 23 on the dollars. There is no doubt that this is 24 absolutely necessary as we decide how are public 25 monies are going to be used and to what extent 248 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 that use will benefit the overwhelming majority of citizens who center their lives in Philadelphia. However, I also want to raise the issue of costs that are difficult or impossible to quantify. What about the social and emotional costs? Surely, if the stadium goes here, families and businesses will move to avoid the problems that masses of people and cars bring to an older inner-city working-class neighborhood. How do you count the anger and anxiety caused when your whole pattern of daily life must be disrupted to satisfy the pockets of others, or the sadness when relationships are broken between families and businesses and community institutions, or the loss of the place where your collective identity is centered? How can you put a price to the unique, synergistic qualities of a unique neighborhood, that essence and soul of Chinatown that you can't possibly recreate elsewhere? How can we attribute dollars amounts to the loss of a sense of community, loss of a sense of security in your own neighborhood, or the loss of faith in a purportedly democratic system which 249 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 is supposed to protect rights of minorities? How do you count these in the proforma, in the bottom line for the proposed stadium on the Chinatown site? Is the additional economic return of maybe $3 million, which is Jonathon Saidel's figures, worth all of this? Who and what are being sacrificed? And who is to gain? I leave these questions as challenges for the Mayor and members of City Council. We are here to speak truth to power. We are counting on you to hear our voices. Thank you. (Applause.)

Guand Bi Hung, Brenda Doyle, Gary Lee? (Witnesses come forward.)

Brendan Doyle is not here? Brendan Doyle? (Witness comes forward.)

Good evening.

Good evening, Council President Verna and other members who are present 250 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 here at this late hour. My name is Gary Lee. I respectfully request that City Council oppose the building of a baseball stadium at 12th and Vine Street. Building a stadium there would be bad for Philadelphia are, bad for the Phillies, and bad for Chinatown residents and businesses and other residents and businesses in the area. The City Administration is asking City Council to focus on the wrong question. The City Administration is asking the question, is building a stadium at 12th and Vine Street possible in terms of cost, parking, traffic flow and access? The right question which City Council should be focussing on is, what is the best site for a baseball stadium in terms of cost, parking, traffic flow, and access? Considering the enormous effect the location of a baseball stadium will have on the community in which it's located and the enormous amount of public funds which will be spent, a responsible government must consider which site is the best, not merely a sight that is possible. The City Administration failed to use a 251 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 process designed to select the best site for a stadium. This is abundantly evident by the fact that the City Administration selected 12th and Vine Street as the site, without even knowing the cost, the parking problems, the problems with traffic flow, and the problems with access. Indeed, it appears, from recent newspaper articles, that the City Administration has not yet completed an analysis of these issues. It seems that the prime reason the City Administration has selected the 12th and Vine Street site is that the City Administration believes that if the stadium is located downtown, fans spending before, during and after the game will be greater than if the stadium would be located in the sports complex because the sports complex is relatively isolated from restaurants and other forms of entertainment. However, Professor Andrew Zimbalist has submitted testimony today that directly contradicts this basic proposition and demonstrates that public economic benefits are not sufficient to justify the public subsidies in building a baseball stadium downtown. 252 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 Therefore, I will not remark on this issue except to say that once again, the City Administration fails to ask the right question. The right analysis would compare all of the factors, costs, parking, traffic flow, and access at 12th and Vine Street with other sites which are close to restaurants and entertainment, such as the 30th Street Station or the Delaware and Spring Garden Street site. Building a stadium at 12th and Vine Street will also be bad for the Phillies. The Phillies have stated that they don't want the stadium to be built at 12th and Vine Street. It will be more costly for them, and the delay of building the stadium there will significantly diminish the revenues that they will receive if the stadium were built at another location. Building a stadium at 12th and Vine Street will also be bad for Chinatown residents and businesses and the other residents and businesses in the area. City Council has already heard from John Struble that building a stadium 12th and Vine Street will be bad for the other residents and businesses in that area, so I will 253 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 not discuss this anymore. But I will discuss some of economic effects on Chinatown. In considering the effects on Chinatown, one must know about Chinatown. Chinatown is not just a collection of restaurants. It's a home for more than 4,000 people, it's a center for more than 250,000 Asian-Americans in the Delaware Valley who worship, shop, play, attend school, receive day care, and participate in Asian cultural activities.

Chinatown has three churches, two Buddhist temples, an elementary and middle school, three preschools, a senior citizen residence and center, medical facilities for western-style medicine, and medical facilities for eastern-style medicine. Building a stadium at 12th and Vine Street will have a devastating impact on the quality of life of the people who come to Chinatown and the people who live in Chinatown. However, because this hearing is limited to the finance aspects of building a stadium, I will not discuss the quality-of-life issues, although they are very significant. If City Council does not decide to 254 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 reject the proposal to build a stadium at 12th and Vine, because of the enormous financial costs, I urge City Council to hold hearings regarding the other issues involved in building a stadium at 12th and Vine Street, including the effect on the quality of life, the parking problems, the traffic flow problems, the access problems, environmental problems from asbestos and PCBs, and the problems which would be felt by air quality. Contrary to the belief of the City Administration, building a stadium at 12th and Vine Street will not have a positive economic effect on Chinatown; it will have the opposite effect. )

Instead, factors like the loss of parking spaces, the increased cost of parking, and the loss of time from traffic congestion will cause a significant loss of business and economic hardship. Like most other businesses, Chinatown's business success requires available and affordable parking. The existing parking in Chinatown is not adequate. If a stadium is built at 12th and Vine 255 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 Street, the baseball fans will use the parking spaces which Chinatown customers currently use. The proposal for a stadium at 12th and Vine plans to include only 4,500 parking spaces. These parking spaces will be available to the people who buy or rent the sky boxes. The stadium will have a capacity of 45,000 people. The proposed plan is for the rest of the fans to park south of Vine Street, which makes Chinatown the closest site for parking. Fans will use up the parking spaces which are now used by residents and customers of Chinatown. Although it is possible that some of the fans will patronize some of the Chinatown restaurants, the net effect will be the loss of customers and the closing of some businesses. (Applause.)

Fans will be competing with Chinatown customers at what is usually the busiest time for restaurants -- dinner time. Moreover, when the baseball games are held on Fridays, Saturdays, or Sundays, which are usually the busiest days for Chinatown restaurants, the loss will be even more devastating. 256 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 Chinatown restaurants need a successful dinner and weekend trade to survive, much like retailers need a successful Christmas season to survive. Furthermore, almost half of the businesses in Chinatown are not even restaurants. There are businesses such as beauty salons, travel agencies, Asian grocery stores, Asian video rentals, pharmacies, insurance agencies, physicians, accountants, and lawyers, whose customers are predominantly Asian, from all over the Delaware Valley. Their busiest time is the weekends. It is highly unlikely that any of the fans will patronize these businesses. Unlike the restaurants, these businesses will only lose customers. They will not have any fans as customers. Baseball games, especially on the weekends, will cause a significant loss of customers to these businesses. In addition to the loss of customers from the lack of parking spaces, Chinatown business will also lose customers from the cost of parking. The cost of parking on the day games are scheduled will significantly increase. For 257 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 customers, one of the main attractions of Chinatown is the reasonable prices for food. If parking is significantly increased, the cost of patronizing Chinatown businesses will no longer be reasonable, and customers will go elsewhere. Even if a potential customer can find a parking space and is willing to pay a higher price for parking, Chinatown businesses will still lose potential customers from the traffic congestion on game days. Fans will use the streets of Chinatown for parking or to go to the stadium and drop off their passengers. The result will be a traffic congestion nightmare. Although other restaurants in Center City may expect to increase business from building a stadium at 12th and Vine Street, because fans will be competing with the potential restaurants, customers for parking south of Vine Street, Center City restaurants may lose their regular customers, and business may decrease, not increase. That they are not considering these impacts is to their peril. In conclusion, City Council should reject the proposal to build a stadium at 12th and 258 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 Vine Street. The selection of 12th and Vine Street was a rush to judgment that failed to consider all relevant issues. It also failed to compare all of the issues of the Vine Street site with all of the issues of the other sites. This important decision should not be made by asking the wrong questions, by ignoring the right questions, or by making a rush to judgment. Responsible government must ask the right questions. Responsible government must take the time to carefully consider all of the issues. The Phillies oppose the stadium site at 12th and Vine, the effect on the quality of life on the businesses and residents of Chinatown and the businesses and residents of the other areas of the site will be devastating and the effect on the company of Chinatown and the other areas around the site will be devastating. Please stop this now. (Applause.)

The next three witnesses are Jeff Lewis, John Nhan, and George Moy. (Witnesses come forward.) 259 RESOLUTION NO. 000325

Good evening.

My name is George Moy. I live in the Far Northeast. However, my wife thinks I live in Chinatown, given the amount of time I volunteer my time in Chinatown. I tried my best to come up with a short statement, struggled with it, and came up with a two-thirds of a page long statement. However, while I was sitting here listening to all the other statements, I came up with just as much comments as I prepared. To begin with, I want to just mention that Professor Williams mentioned the number of communities that were helped by Mayor Rizzo, and I wanted to add to that list that he was the first to help Chinatown in its struggle against the Vine Street Expressway. He provided the funding for a study of the problems that Chinatown was facing and provided the first grant to build -- for us to be able to sponsor th4e first 15 houses for relocating the people that were being displaced by the Vine Street Expressway and other developments. 260 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 In fact, at that time, Chinatown lost about one-quarter of its land, and we were forced to live in a compacted four-square-block area. Our only hope then was to expand north after we worked on the core of Chinatown, and that's now being cut off. These are some of my random thoughts that I just came up with. Chinatown is a cultural center and a tourist attraction. Destroying Chinatown is too high a price to pay. Is this cost being considered? How does one measure such costs? Our community is not adamantly against a new stadium, but it should not cost an additional $300 million to build, especially when the public schools have to shut down meaningful programs or the City employees are probably going to be asked to eat crow in the coming contract negotiations. The $300 million additional cost would go a long way to solving many of these problems. (Applause.)

The City coffers have limited funds. Senator Albright alluded to the adding of 261 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 additional lanes on Vine Street. Does this mean that Vine Street will be widened? Are we back to square one when Chinatown fought the full-scale expressway 35 years ago? Is this another added cost that is not being considered? In the past, promises were made to our community, and broken in short order. The Hawthorne Hotel promised to hire people from the neighborhood, and I don't know of any of our people who were hired. A promise made, a promise broken. Chinatown made sacrifices for the Convention Center. Our only position then was that those affected be relocated to replace the facilities as near equal as they were -- as they presently owned or lived in before being displaced -- the building to be built before they were displaced. Also, that the local shows, such as the flower show, be kept out of the new center, and that no food be prepared or served in the center. That was another promise that did not last long. Before Chinatown knew it, the Civic Center was closed and the flower shows were 262 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 conducted at the new center. Parking and stopping in Chinatown was prohibited at this time, and the Chinatown businesses suffered. Is this what they mean when they claim that -- is this what they mean when the claim is made that Chinatown will benefit? Another promise, another broken promise. I commend the Councilpersons present at these proceedings who feel that it is important enough to hear what is being said. I only hope those not present will take their responsibilities seriously and review all that is being said today before making your decision. At the present -- have you seen the present raucous behavior of the Lakers fans as they run amok? It was on the 12 o'clock news. They destroyed an auto distributor nearby, the showroom and eight cars in it were destroyed. A police car was overturned and a TV van was also destroyed. If the police can't protect their own property, what will happen to Chinatown should the Phillies win? (Applause.)

If a stadium is built at 11th 263 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 and Vine Street, we pray that the Phillies will never win a pennant. (Applause.)

The proponents of a stadium at 11th and Vine Street were publicized in this morning's paper, and they aptly named themselves "BAT," B-A-T. Of course, a bat is often used to beat into submission anyone who gets in the holder's way. Also, a bat (unintelligible) descends on its victim and sucks their life blood. (Applause.)

Why are they not here today to testify? Is it because the stadium at 11th and Vine is a done deal? Is this democracy in action? Now, for my prepared statement. Our Chinatown is the kind of neighborhood that should be replicated and not imposed upon. Much more tax revenues go into the City coffers than what is spent by the government in services. It is a neighborhood where businesses and residents coexist, where crime, juvenile delinquency, and graffiti are practically nonexistent. These are factors that do not come by just by chance but by 264 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 a concerted effort of concerned citizens, the organizations that serve people, particularly the three churches, and the people themselves. To say that the stadium is not in Chinatown is to ignore the negative effects and the impact that the stadium will have on the quality of life. Noise and air pollution, traffic and parking problem does not stop at the boundaries of the site. Otherwise, why do other neighborhoods oppose a stadium building built in their backyard? They would at least have hundreds of feet between their neighborhood and the stadium; whereas some of the residents in our community would be living less than 50 feet away, only across the street. Will they be protected by a 40-foot high noise wall? Will they be able to park their vehicles? How will they even be able to get home when they encounter gridlock? Chinatown is a place where newcomers can find work, even though they may have difficulty with the English language. Although parents may be working long hours, by having their families in the vicinity, they are able to maintain a cohesive family structure. This is in 265 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 contrast to the commuting public, where some children have minimal contact with their parents. Living in Chinatown is a must, for it would be dangerous for working parent to take SEPTA to get home after leaving work after or a.m. in the morning.

Mr. Moy, I -- I have to ask you to summarize. Everybody here who will be patient enough to stay will be heard. If you're not on the list, you will still be able to be heard if you wish to testify. Somebody's got to be the last, so please don't feel bad if it happens to be you. I'm saying that to maybe a hundred people that are in this room. But everybody is going to be heard, we think it's very important. But we're going to be asking everybody to please stay if possible into a two-minute time capsule and at the very most three minutes because, otherwise, we may be here till or in the morning. But if you're game, we're going to be game, because we think everybody's voice is important. (Applause.) 266 RESOLUTION NO. 000325

Placing the stadium at 11th and Vine Street will surely stunt the growth of our community. The conflicting demands of property will tear the very fabric of the community. Undesirable elements will once again afflict our neighborhood. They are the bars, prostitution, drug pushers, and others. Property values will skyrocket and will be unaffordable, especially for those who need housing the most. At the very list, an impartial impact study is needed for anyone to be able to make an informed decision regarding the location of the stadium. Please do not make a mockery of democracy by deciding before the all the facts are known. Thank you.

Thank you very much. (Applause.)

Mai Huynh, Lisa Cancelleri, and Dan McShane. (Applause.) (Witnesses come forward.)

Please identify 267 RESOLUTION NO. 000325 yourself for the record.

Good evening. Good evening, Councilmembers. My name is Mai Huynh, and I am a taxpayer and a registered voter. I wish President Verna was here because I live in Philadelphia and I work -- I'm sorry?

She's listening in the president's office.