Committee Hearing, June 1, 2004

COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE JOINT COMMITTEES OF THE WHOLE, HOUSING, NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT AND THE HOMELESS and FINANCE - - - Room 400, City Hall Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Tuesday, June 1, 2004 10:45 a.m. - - - RES. 040345 - Authorizing Committee of the Whole to conduct hearings on recommendations of Philadelphia 21st Century Review Forum RES. 040618 - Authorizing Director of Commerce to file application and execute a contract to obtain grant from Commonwealth of PA RES. 040619 - Authorizing Director of Housing to file application and execute a contract to obtain grant from Commonwealth of PA BILL 040501 - Authorizing the Mayor to file applications with HUD for a CDBG and to use Section 108 Loan Guarantee Program RES. 040525 - Approving annual Program Statement/Budget, NIT Bond Proceeds, for '05 PRESENT: COUNCIL PRESIDENT ANNA C. VERNA COUNCILWOMAN BLONDELL REYNOLDS BROWN COUNCILMAN W. WILSON GOODE, JR. COUNCILMAN JACK KELLY COUNCILMAN JAMES F. KENNEY COUNCILMAN JUAN F. RAMOS COUNCILMAN FRANK RIZZO COUNCILMAN FRANK DiCICCO COUNCILWOMAN JANNIE L. BLACKWELL COUNCILMAN MICHAEL A. NUTTER COUNCILMAN DARRELL L. CLARKE COUNCILMAN RICHARD T. MARIANO COUNCILWOMAN DONNA REED MILLER COUNCILWOMAN MARIAN B. TASCO COUNCILMAN BRIAN J. O'NEILL V A R A L L O Incorporated Litigation Support Services 1835 Market Street, Suite 600 Philadelphia, PA 19103 (215) 561-2220 2 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525

Good morning, everyone. This is the public hearing of the Joint Committees of the Whole, and Housing and Neighborhood Development and the Homeless, also the Committee of the Whole and Finance. And I would ask Mr. McPherson to please read the titles of the Resolutions and the Ordinance. MR. McPHERSON: Resolution 040345, A Resolution Authorizing the Committee of the Whole to conduct hearings on the recommendations put forth by the members of the Philadelphia 21st Century Review Forum. Resolution 040618, authorizing the Director of Commerce, on behalf of the City of Philadelphia, to file an application and, if the application is accepted, to execute a contract to obtain a grant from the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Department of Community and Economic Development of funding business district revitalization in various Philadelphia neighborhood shopping districts. Resolution 040619, authorizing the Director of Housing, on behalf of the City of 3 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 Philadelphia, to file an application and, if the application is accepted, to execute a contract to obtain a grant from the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Department of Community and Economic Development, for funding revitalization efforts in residential and mixed-use areas in close proximity to a commercial district and to further enhance the downtown area by improving the viability of older neighborhoods. Ordinance 040501, authorizing the Mayor, on behalf the City, to file 14 applications with the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development for Community Development Block Grant and to use the Section 17 108 Loan Guarantee Program; authorizing the Housing Director to file applications with HUD to participate in the HOME Invest Partnership program, the Emergency Shelter Grant program, et cetera. And Resolution 040525, a Resolution 23 approving the annual program statement and budget for the expenditure of the Neighborhood Transformation Initiative bond proceeds for 4 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 Fiscal Year 2005.

Good morning, everyone. We thank you for your patience. As was read, we have hearings today with Committee of the Whole, as well as Committee of the Whole and Finance, and Committee of the Whole and Housing, Neighborhood Development and the Homeless. We have scheduled these hearings and several bills and resolutions. Among them, Resolution 040345, authorizes us to have hearings on recommendations set forth by members of the Philadelphia 21st Century Review Forum. We have asked that we hear from them and take testimony as it relates to the NTI program. Afterwards, we suggest that we take testimony with regard to Resolution Nos. 040618 and 619, which are applications to the Department of Community and Economic Development for the purposes of revitalization. 5 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 Finally, then we are asking for testimony from the Administration on the block grant and Neighborhood Transformation Initiative. Let me also add that tomorrow we have the Housing Trust Fund bill, Bill No. 8 040594. To economize with regard to time, we suggest that we take testimony on this bill 11 today, since so many people are here, and since the NTI program creates the initial funding for it. And once we have finished taking testimony on the block grant and NTI, that we recess until tomorrow morning to report all the bills out together. We are also requesting that the Administration testify, then the public, and following testimony that the Administration return to answer questions. If that's acceptable to everyone, we hope it will help us to get through the hearings in a more timely fashion, so that we can respect everyone's time and everyone's 6 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 point of view. Having said that --

Madam Chair.

Yes, Councilman.

I just want to make sure I understand the last part of what you were saying. Did you say that the Housing Trust Fund bill, we are going to start with testimony today?

Yes. We would like to have all testimony today and report out bills tomorrow. As you know, we have another hearing with Councilman Goode's bill tomorrow that will take up a lot of time.

I understand that. But did I hear you say before that that particular bill was actually advertised for a hearing tomorrow?

You are absolutely correct. You are absolutely 7 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 absolutely correct. You are correct. We will have to do that all tomorrow.

I am not trying to jam up the schedule. I guess I am just wondering if there were members of the public who were anticipating coming to a hearing tomorrow, what will they do?

They still come tomorrow, because we still will have all those hearings tomorrow. But with regard to the Housing Trust Fund, since it is going to be funded in part by NTI, we can hear most of that testimony today, and then just hear a minimal part tomorrow, so that we can allow as much time as we can to Councilman Goode.

Okay. No, I understand that. Lastly, Madam Chair, what's the bill 21 number on the Housing Trust Fund bill?

I am sorry, Councilman?

What's the bill 25 number on the Housing Trust Fund bill? Do we 8 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 have that?

040594. So we will hear that today, testimony with regard to that informally, hear it again tomorrow, and report it out with all of these bills and resolutions tomorrow morning.

Okay. Can we get copies of that?

Absolutely. Please make sure that everyone has copies of the Housing Trust Fund bill, as well as all of those. Thank you, Councilman.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

The Chair now calls Sandra Dungee Glenn, 21st Century Review Forum, and Dr. Rufus Lynch. We thank you for your patience, ask that you introduce yourself and begin your testimony. Thank you very much.

Good morning. Good morning, President Verna, 9 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 Councilwoman Blackwell, and Committee members. My name is Sandra Dungee Glenn, and I was Chair of the Program Evaluation Committee for the 21st Century Review Forum. With me today is Dr. Rufus Sylvester Lynch, President of the Institute for the Advancement of Working Families and Chair of the NTI Subcommittee for the Review Forum. First we would like to thank you for the opportunity to speak to you today. We are here to speak to you about the work that we undertook as part of the Philadelphia 21st Century Review Forum, specifically as it relates to the Neighborhood Transformation Initiative, NTI. The Program Evaluation Committee of the Review Forum was composed of civic, institutional, community, and political leaders from around the region who have demonstrated an unwavering commitment to the quality of life in Philadelphia and its future. Mayor John F. Street charged the Review Forum with the formidable task of 10 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 guiding his Administration through its second term in office by analyzing its past practices, accomplishments, and opportunities for improvement in the quality of life agenda. Five areas were identified for our review. One, education reform; two, the Neighborhood Transformation Initiative; three, Operation Safe Streets; four, social services for children and families; and, five, tax reform. The mission of the Program Evaluation Committee was to recommend actions to promote the fiscally responsible, effective, and integrated delivery of city services that advanced the goals and objectives of the Street Administration's quality of life agenda. On the NTI subcommittee in particular, our work was guided by the principles and commitment expressed by Mayor Street when he took office in 1999 to turn our attention to the neighborhoods without turning our backs on Center City. The Program Evaluation Committee 11 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 established the following objectives to achieve its mission: To examine and evaluate the five initiatives in the Administration's quality of life agenda; to recommend ways in which the city can be more effective and better coordinated in executing its key strategies; and to prioritize critical recommendations in order to focus efforts and resources in a period of fiscal limitations. In carrying out its mission, the NTI subcommittee was informed by the analysis and review of extensive empirical and statistical data, various community meetings and forums, and interviews conducted with key public and private sector stakeholders. As a result of our studies, we found that NTI is a bold plan to address the 50-year decline and abandonment of the city's neighborhoods. Since its inception four years ago, NTI has removed 185,000 abandoned cars from city streets, cleaned 189,394 properties, cleaned 31,000 vacant lots, and demolished 4,106 dangerous vacant buildings. 12 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 Prior to NTI, such large-scale urban blight measures were nonexistent. In the content of the short time in which we worked and the significant progress already made by NTI, we made several key findings which can be summarized in the following manner. One, the city has made considerable progress in achieving some NTI goals, particularly in blight elimination and prevention. Two, there is a perception among stakeholders that there has been less progress in spurring market-rate residential development and stimulating neighborhood commercial development. Three, that there is public frustration among stakeholders with what they perceive as a lack of leadership and accountability for NTI. And, four, there is a critical need for a major public relations campaign to educate the general public, government officials, and private stakeholders concerning 13 RES.

040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 NTI; including its accomplishments to date, goals for the future, and how participation in the process can occur. Additional findings are based on a comparison of the program's accomplishments and its expressed goals and objectives. As with any project of this magnitude, we ultimately found that, in spite of its many accomplishments, the public image of the NTI program could be enhanced. We further found that the continued success of the program depended on maintaining a strong anti-predatory lending effort and identifying new sources of revenue for completion of NTI development goals, including the creation of a Housing Trust Fund. Based on these key findings, we ultimately recommended that the city improve and aggressively market the public image of NTI; enhance city agency coordination to integrate all phases of the demolition and development processes; implement a unified plan for neighborhood transformation; and create a commission to monitor and drive NTI 14 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 progress. Councilwoman Blackwell and members of the joint Committee, I hope that my testimony has been helpful and provided you with insight into the nature, process, and outcome of the work undertaken by myself and other members of the 21st Century Review Forum committees. Thank you for allowing me to testify before you today.

Thank you, Ms. Glenn. Dr. Lynch.

No 16 comment.

Thank you very much. As we said in our opening statement, we really want to get through the testimony and then ask questions as a followup. So we hope that all of our guests can adjust their schedules to doing that. That will make it a lot easier, too, because we will have people that will testify 15 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 with regard to the legislation whose questions can also be responded to at that time. Thank you very much. Mjenzi Traylor, Commerce Department. Thank you very much. Please identify yourself for the record and begin your testimony.

Good morning, Madam Chairman. My name is Mjenzi Traylor, and I am First Deputy Director of the city Commerce Department. And with me this morning is Jillian Pollard, an economic development program monitor from the Commerce Department who has been the point person in processing our application to the state. And I am here before you to present testimony in support of Resolution 040618, which authorizes the City of Philadelphia to apply to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania for funding under the Main Street Program. For years, many of Philadelphia's neighborhoods have suffered the loss of businesses, the loss of population, and the 16 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 degeneration of property. The commercial districts associated with these declining neighborhoods became caught in the vicious cycle of business closings and job losses. The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania passed an economic stimulus package, which includes funding for the revitalization of commercial corridors. The mission of the Main Street Program is to preserve, improve, promote, and expand neighborhood business districts by improving the appearance of the commercial corridors; building consensus and cooperation among the various groups and individuals who have a vested interest and play a role in the commercial district; marketing the unique characteristics of the commercial district's assets to shoppers, residents, and potential investors; and strengthening the existing district economy and building the capacity to embrace new opportunities. To accomplish these activities, the Main Street Program provides up to $25,000 for 17 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 the development of a strategic plan, up to $45,000 per area for a Main Street manager to implement the corridor's improvement plan, up to 40,000 per area for facade improvements grants, and up to $250,000 for economic restructuring. The City of Philadelphia has applied to the Commonwealth for $845,000 in the current fiscal year to support these activities. A copy of the budget summary from the application is attached to this testimony. The idea of Main Street is nothing new to the city. No one can dispute that neighborhoods are declining. These are the same neighborhoods and residential areas that are the targeted users of the neighborhood commercial corridors. As our neighborhoods change, so will the commercial corridors that serve these residents. Part of our interest, and subsequently our economic development policies, should be to facilitate changes in corridors that are consistent with changes in neighborhoods. 18 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 The City of Philadelphia has always undertaken Main Street activity without alluding to its efforts as, quote, Main Street. This funding we are applying for from the state will enhance our resources for revitalization. What this funding also does is increase our ability to deliver resources and services to areas that are currently outside of our ability to serve them because of eligibility requirements associated with our other funding sources. By utilizing the Main Street Program, the City of Philadelphia will now be able to offer assistance to a wider group of neighborhoods, including nonCDBG-eligible areas. The city seeks to expand its own revitalization efforts by forging a financial partnership with the Main Street Program. The intent is to merge the Pennsylvania Main Street Program with activities and resources of other programs 19 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 currently administered by the City of Philadelphia and its agencies. The Department of Commerce is seeking the approval of City Council to apply to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania for funding. Since this is a five-year program, we anticipate that additional funding for Main Street and the companion program Elm Street, which you will hear about later, will be available from the Commonwealth in subsequent years.

I would be pleased to respond to any questions that you may have.

Thank you very much, Mr. Traylor. We, again, hope that you will remain to answer questions later.

Okay.

Thank you very much. Deb McColloch, OHCD. MS. DEBORAH McCOLLOCH: Good morning, Council President Verna, Councilwoman Blackwell, and all members of Council. I am Debra McColloch, Director of 20 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 Housing, and I am here to testify in support of Resolution 040619, which permits the city to apply for funding from the Commonwealth's new Elm Street Program. The Elm Street Program of the Department of Community and Economic Development allows older communities to integrate commercial district activities with housing, planning, and reinvestment. The program is a companion to the Main Street Program, which supports commercial corridor managers in older neighborhood business districts. The Commerce Department is applying for funding under the Main Street Program. In this first year of the Elm Street Program, the state is supporting three kinds of activities. First, it is supporting planning grants of up to $25,000 for residential areas adjacent to commercial corridors. Second, where there are existing community plans and where there is a fully functioning community development corporation, 21 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 the state is providing operational grants of up to $50,000 per area for full- or part-time staff person and associated costs to implement the neighborhood plan. Third, in areas with existing plans and a history of operating similar programs, residential reinvestment grants of up to $250,000 per area are made to support a range of activities, including small loan programs, infrastructure improvements, and facade grants. The city has applied to DCED for $935,000 in the current fiscal year to support all three kinds of activities in various parts of the city. While the state has a matching grant requirement, the city is exempt from the match based upon the level of poverty. I am attaching a copy of the budget summary from the application, which indicates by Council district the activities which are included in the city's application. It is my understanding that the activities to be supported in each Council 22 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 district have been discussed with the relevant district member of Council. Because the state legislature acted very late in the fiscal year to establish and fund the Elm Street Program, DCED required the city to submit a proposal by April 28, 2004, even before obtaining City Council approval. Council's approval of the application by resolution is required before a contract with the state can be executed. The city must execute a contract with DCED before June 30 in order to encumber funds from the current fiscal year. We anticipate that additional funding for the Elm Street Program, as well as for its companion Main Street Program, will be available from the Commonwealth in the next fiscal year. I am happy to answer any questions you may have about the Elm Street Program and the city's application.

Thank you, Ms. McColloch. Mr. Kevin Hanna, Secretary, Office of Housing and Neighborhood Preservation. And 23 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 Pat Smith, Neighborhood Transformation Initiative. Good morning. Thank you for your patience. Please identify yourself for the record and begin your testimony.

Good morning. My name is Patricia Smith, Director of Neighborhood Transformation. And with me today is Kevin Hanna, Secretary of Housing and Neighborhood Preservation. Good morning, Madam President, Madam Chairperson, and members of the Committee on the Whole, Housing, Neighborhood Development, and the Homeless and Finance. I am testifying today in support of Resolution 040525. Under the umbrella of the Neighborhood Transformation Initiative, NTI, the Street Administration is making an unprecedented commitment of resources to Philadelphia neighborhoods. NTI is designed to strengthen, preserve, and rebuild Philadelphia neighborhoods. 24 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 NTI is also about positive change in the lives of people. And today I would like to begin my testimony by telling you a little about the experience of one couple. A. studies at Wharton, also. This high-achieving couple has lived in some of the most beautiful places in the world, Costa Rica, Guatemala, Mexico, Martha's Vineyards, and New York City among them. But for the last year and a half, they have lived in a place faced with great challenges and little beauty, the North Philadelphia community of Strawberry Mansion. And largely they say because of what NTI is doing to revitalize their community, they intend to stay in Strawberry Mansion. There were four dilapidated structures directly across the street, and in every direction trash-covered vacant lots and 25 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 crumbling houses served as havens for illegal activity. Hili tells us, quote, NTI came in and eliminated all of that. I have a beautiful block because NTI took down the abandoned houses about a year ago and cleaned up the lots. What NTI is doing makes all the difference in the world, end quote. Neighborhoods grow strong and healthy when city government takes responsibility and promotes housing and community investments. Under the umbrella of NTI, the Street Administration has taken on this responsibility and launched a comprehensive, cohesive strategy to make Philadelphia neighborhoods great places to live, work, learn, shop, and play. We are doing this by assembling land and promoting development to stimulate market activity, helping more individuals and families to maintain and renovate their homes or become first-time home buyers; making neighborhoods cleaner and safer; forging RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 partnerships; and creating employment and business opportunities. This comprehensive approach enhances neighborhoods for the benefits of all residents, whether they have lived here for generations or just moved into the city. And these efforts are paying off in big ways by creating momentum and a sense of excitement about the future potential of Philadelphia neighborhoods. Wherever you go, you can see evidence of new construction and rehabilitation. Later you will hear from Jeremy Nowak, President and CEO of the Reinvestment Fund, who will tell you about the trends that are coming together to create the lively real estate market that we are experiencing in Philadelphia today. We know that developers are showing renewed interest in the city. More than 150 investors, developers, and others attended the fourth annual development breakfast last month. They spent hours touring potential building sites in North Philadelphia, West 27 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 Philadelphia, and along the North Delaware River front. Housing developers are building large-scale market-rate and mixed-income developments in Grays Ferry, East of Broad, Cecil B. Moore, Jefferson Square, Brewerytown, Packer Park, Southwest Center City, Point Breeze, and Frankford. The RDA has received expressions of interest from developers who want to purchase city-owned land at fair market value. And just a few years ago we couldn't give some of this land away.

At the same time, and in spite of three successive cuts in federal funding, the city is maintaining our commitment to develop affordable housing. More than units of rental 20 homeownership and special-needs housing has 21 been built from January 2000 through April 22 2004. In 2000, 93 units are planned or under 23 construction. 24 In FY 2005, the Administration is 25 proposing to use $4 million of NTI bond 28 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 proceeds to finance low-income housing tax credit projects. 5 million grant of bond proceeds to help capitalize the trust fund. In addition to all this activity, NTI bonds are laying the foundation for even more development in the future. By current estimates, roughly 13 million approved acquisitions will permit us 14 to create more than 1900 units of affordable, 15 market-rate, mixed-income housing, plus 16 thousand square feet of commercial space in 17 community centers. And this is just the 18 beginning. 19 Development projects can take more than five years to come to fruition, so I can say with confidence for the next decade the majority of all development in Philadelphia will likely have been facilitated in part by the use of NTI bond funds for acquisitions. We are proud of the direction we are going. 29 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 The preservation of our existing housing stock is another important tenet of NTI. Significant resources are being committed to rehabilitation activities through a variety of home repair, grants, and loans. Since the unveiling of NTI in 2001, the city has either directly rehabbed or helped homeowners make repairs to more than 8,000 properties. NTI is helping Philadelphia homeowners help themselves by providing them with good financial information and low-interest loan products. Philadelphia has one of the most extensive network of housing counseling agencies in the country. And I wish to take a moment to acknowledge the stellar work of these organizations that we fund by asking them to stand. Many of them are here today in the audience. With the help of Freddie Mac, we set up a public information hotline to reach victims of predatory lending and contracted with the Housing Counseling Association of 30 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 Delaware Valley to train housing counselors on predatory lending practices. As of March 31, 2004, the NTI Don't Borrow Trouble Hotline has served more than 2300 callers, of which more than 800 were referred to housing counseling agencies for help. And in the fall, because there was a generous grant from Citizens Bank, the Administration will be able to promote the hotline in newspapers, on buses, and on the radio. There is -- an example of the billboard is up front. " Perhaps you have seen the Great City, Great Rate billboards donated by Clear Channel, which advertises the city's 3 percent Philadelphia home improvement loan. The city is contributing NTI bonds to still another loan products to give homeowners alternatives to predatory loans. Seven banks -- Beneficial, Citizens, Commercial, Fleet, National Penn, PNC, 31 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 Sovereign, and United -- now offer these loan products. The Home Equity Loan Preservation Program provides financial/legal assistance to victims of predatory loans. These anti-predatory loan products have helped homeowners like Ronald Marshal, Luellen Thomas, Michelle May, William Harris, Levi Moore, and others who are here in the audience today. For too many years students from Strawberry Mansion Middle School and Senior High Schools walked past decaying buildings and debris-filled lots which were located across from their school. Now, thanks to NTI demolition and land stabilization work, they can look out onto tree-filled lots that are being cleaned on a regular basis by community organizations. In Germantown, homeowners like Mrs. Lillian Ford lived in fear because of an abandoned bar near her home.

Today the abandoned building is gone and Mrs. Ford feels hopeful that soon her neighborhood would 32 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 attract new development. Blight diminishes a neighborhood's appearance, poses hazards for children, and is a breeding ground for illegal drugs and weapons. Vacant building and debris-filled lots, abandoned cars, and graffiti impede the development and depress a community's spirit. There is no measure for the psychological and spiritual toll our children suffer while living in blighted environments. Throughout Philadelphia NTI has made major strides in eliminating the blight that undermines a neighborhood's quality of life. To date, city workers have closed down 300 open-air drug markets, taken more than 200,000 abandoned cars off the street, removed graffiti from 308,000 building and fixtures, removed more than 30,000 tons of debris from lots, pruned 15,000 trees, and cut down 7,400 dangerous street trees. During the past year, the city has contracted for the demolition of 2,245 dangerous buildings as part of the NTI target neighborhood program and emergency curbside 33 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 programs. Under NTI, the quality of the city's demolition work has improved dramatically, and improvements to our bidding process have increased accountability. No effort as larger as NTI could succeed without the active participation of neighborhood residents and others who have a stake in our city's health and vitality. Led by the Planning Commission, citizens are engaged in a community planning process in 31 neighborhoods in three commercial corridors around the city. The Housing Authority is using its resources to jump-start neighborhood markets in places like Grays Ferry, Mill Creek, and West Poplar. Working in our most distressed real estate markets, Philadelphia CDCs are building new urban communities from the bottom up. In addition, NTI is partnering with Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Keep Philadelphia Beautiful, Center City Development Corporation, the African-American Chamber of 34 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 Commerce, National Trust for Historic Preservation, and Preservation Alliance. While we have many partners in this work, the Horticultural Society has been with us from the beginning. PHS has brought its community-building and land management expertise to the table and helped the Administration develop the NTI Green City strategy. The NTI Green City strategy calls for a strategic approach to caring for Philadelphia's massive inventory of vacant land, as well as better management of neighborhood parks, public spaces, and community gateways As a part of this strategy, we planted more than 7,000 new trees on streets, in neighborhood parks, on vacant lots; improved more than 1,400 vacant lots by installing topsoil, seeding, and fencing; selected more than ten commercial corridors or neighborhood gateways for improvement; and upgraded some neighborhood parks in the 35 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 ownership of the recreation department. Through PHS the city has contracted with eight community-based organizations to clean vacant lots in four sections of the city. The program impact has been significant. The eight organizations employ 70 neighborhood residents to clean and maintain approximately 2000 lots. Commenting on the success of the vacant lot cleaning program, Wayne Rama of the Universe Communities recently said in an article, NTI is wiping out years of apathy and hopelessness. , New Kensington CDC, Universal Communities, Centro Pedro Claver, and the University City District by asking them to stand. Thank you. )

We would 36 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 like to say thank you, as well. We work with them, look forward to working with them at Malcolm X again this year. And thank them not only for the work they do, but for their positive attitude, their friendliness in the community, and their hard work. Thank you. (Applause.)

The city is surpassing the participation goals for disadvantaged firms set in the NTI economic opportunity plan for demolition activities. Of all contracts that have been let for the target demolition program as of February, minority-owned businesses account for 49 percent of the subcontracts, and women-owned businesses account for percent, 19 plus minority firms are performing 35 percent 20 of the curbside demolition work. 21 In addition, minority accounts for 22 78 percent and women 2 percent of the more 23 than 87,000 hours worked on NTI targeted 24 demolition programs. Philadelphia residents represent 77 37 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 percent of the work force employed. You have in your gray folders before you a map that shows the distribution of Philadelphia workers by zip code. We are also pleased to announce that a special NTI work force development program that we started this fiscal year, and developed by PREP, has resulted in the employment of 46 individuals and the acceptance of 43 individuals into the building trades. Some of these individuals are also here today, and I wish to ask them to stand to be acknowledged. (Applause.)

The African-American Chamber of Commerce and the Emerging Contractors Program teaches contractors how to demolish dangerous residential buildings by offering them hands-on demolition experience. 1 million. 38 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 One participant, LP Group, competed as a prime contractor and is the apparent low bidder on four bid packages that the city issued recently. Another graduate of the program, Interstate, has qualified to bid under the emergency demolition program. I am also pleased to inform you that the city intends to unveil a pilot program in July that will restrict bidding on demolition contracts under the NTI targeted program that do not exceed $500,000 to small business owners certified by MBEC or SBA. Less burdensome performance bond requirements will apply to this program. And the prime contractor, if qualified to do so, may perform all of the work. All other contract terms and technical specifications, including prevailing wage, will remain the same. During the upcoming weeks the city will host a workshop to explain the small bid package demolition program, and a mock-up project manual for a typical small demolition 39 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 bid will be available for review by all attendees. In addition, we will be working with the Contractors Roundtable over the summer to explore new avenues of access, participation, and inclusion in other city public works contracts for established minority contractors. Mr. Michael Williams, Director of MBEC, is charged with leading this effort. The FY 2005 budget. Based on current interest rates, the Administration anticipates issuing a total of 275 million bonds over a five-year period to support a variety of activities. As you know, we issued the first traunch, 142 million, in May of 2000. And plan to issue the balance, approximately 133 million, by the end of this year, calendar year. For FY 2005, the Administration is seeking City Council authorization to spend approximately 124 million of NTI bonds on a variety of activities to help Philadelphia 40 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 neighborhoods to meet their full potential by demolishing dangerous buildings, $50 million; fostering redevelopment through land assembly, 50 million; investing in housing neighborhood preservation, million; and improving the 7 city's information technology and management 8 information systems, about 4 million. 9 The FY 2005 budget also includes a 10 $15 million increase in funding for land 11 assembly, which will bring the total five-year 12 budget to 89 million. 13 This increase will be achieved by 14 swapping NTI bonds for Pennsylvania Department 15 of Community Economic Development funds for 16 three years, FY '05, '06, and '07. 17 For each of these years, the city 18 would budget a minimum of 5 million in NTI 19 bonds for home repair programs, such as basic 20 system repair program. This swap will enable the city to use taxes and bonds to fund home repair programs, while using state funds to increase our land assembly budget. By using state funds to increase the 41 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 land assembly budget, the city avoids issuing more taxable bonds, which will result in the overall reduction of NTI bond resources for program activities by 29 million. The million increase in funding 7 for acquisition over three years will be used 8 to support a series of RFP's for new 9 homeownership or rental development projects. 10 In addition, NTI will continue to 11 tap an array of federal, state, General Fund, 12 and private resources to help eliminate 13 blight, increase investment and development, 14 and improve neighborhood services. 15 The implementation of NTI has not been easy. Nothing equal to the breadth and the scale of NTI has been undertaken elsewhere in the country.

Where necessary, the Administration has made adjustments in the program goals and strategy to accommodate lessons learned and changed circumstances. Yet, despite the many challenges that are embedded in the implementation of an initiative of this scale, this Administration 42 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 has accomplished a great deal since Council passed the NTI-authorizing legislation in March 2002. The past year has been an exciting and challenging time for those of us who are part of the NTI team. For me, one of the most rewarding experiences is the tremendous amount of collaboration and teamwork that is helping NTI to succeed. I wish to take a moment to acknowledge, by asking them to the stand, the hard work and dedication of my colleagues throughout city government who have spent countless hours in the trenches executing the administrative details of NTI. I give me heartfelt thanks to each and everyone of you. )

I especially want to acknowledge the members of City Council, who have also worked tirelessly to help us design and detail the NTI program to address special problems and needs of their constituents. Your contributions have been 43 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 invaluable and have helped NTI to be a better program. Thank you for the hours you spent meeting with me and members of my staff and the Administration, with developers and others. Madam President, Madam Chairperson, and members of the Committee of Whole and Housing and Neighborhood Development and Homeless, I respectfully request your favorable consideration of Resolution 040525. Thank you. (Applause.)

Thank you very much. As we have said, we thank you for your testimony. We are going to try to get the testimony in, and then ask you to respond later to concerns.

Yes.

Thank you. Jeremy Nowak --

Mr. Hanna on the block grant.

I am 44 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 absolutely sorry. That's only one of the main reasons we are here. Sorry, Mr. Hanna.

I don't take it personally. Good morning, Council President Verna, Mrs. Blackwell, other members of City Council. My name is Kevin Hanna. I serve as Secretary of the Office of Housing and Neighborhood Preservation for the City of Philadelphia. And I am here today to testify on behalf of the Administration on Bill No. 15 040001, which permits the city to apply for the federal Community Development Block Grant, HOME Investment Partnership Funds, the Emergency Shelter Grant, and Housing Opportunities For Persons With AIDS, otherwise known as HOPWA funds, and for state funds from the Department of Community and Economic Development. S. Department of Housing and Urban 45 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 Development and which details our proposal for spending these and others related funds for affordable housing and other activities. The city is required to submit to HUD one consolidated plan which combines the formerly separate CDBG final plan and statement, the HOME program description, Emergency Shelter Grant application, the HOPWA application, and the Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy. With me in the audience are Debra McColloch, Director of Housing of the Office of Housing and Community Development; Tony Macintosh, the Executive Vice-President for the Philadelphia Housing Development Corporation; Herb Wetzel, the Executive Director of the RDA; and other members of my staff. You have heard already from Mjenzi Traylor, First Deputy Director of Commerce, who will be available to answer any specific questions related to the CDBG funds allocated to the Commerce Department which supports their activities and those of the Philadelphia 46 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 Industrial Development Corporation, the Philadelphia Commercial Development Corporation. The consolidated plan also incorporates spending proposed for the third year of the Neighborhood Transformation Initiative. And obviously you have heard from Ms. Smith regarding those priorities for the upcoming fiscal year. The Year 30 consolidated plan for the fiscal year which begins July 1, 2004, details our plan for spending monies from the five primary federal sources. The proposed budget carries forward existing programs and commitments to reinforce certain NTI activities. The first source of federal funds is the Community Development Block Grant, CDBG, which is still the largest single source of funding for affordable housing, aside from the subsidies which the Philadelphia Housing Authority receives directly from HUD. 06 million in new entitlement funding. 47 RES. 377 million. Other CDBG-related resources include program income, such as the sale of land, and prior year's reprogram funds, which are funds which can be liquidated from prior year's budgeted activities. Overall, the total CDBG resources which are available for Fiscal Year 2005 are $76,396,000. 337 million less than was available in Fiscal Year '03. In past years we were able to balance our Operating Budget through the sale of assets by the Redevelopment Authority by not filling certain budgeted position at OHCD and PHDC, by reducing staff at PHDC, by making across-the-board cuts at other city departments, including PIDC and PCDC, all supported by CDBG program and by implementing our cost-cutting measures. However, there was neither a large permanent decrease in spending, nor 48 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 identification of new recurring sources of revenue to support our ever-increasing operating costs. The proposed Year 30 consolidated plan builds upon initiatives and programs from prior years consistent with NTI's housing development strategies. Year 30 is the third year of the implementation of the NTI program. Housing development is integrated into the overall NTI strategy, and housing production activities are organized to reflect the housing development categories associated with NTI.

NTI bond funds will be used not only for demolition and encapsulation, but also will be used to continue support for the settlement assistance program, for the basic systems repair program, for rental housing development, and for the adaptive modifications program. Through a swap with anticipated funding from the Commonwealth Department of Economic and Community Development, $5 million in additional funding will be made available 49 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 starting in Fiscal '05 for acquisition, the first of three expected payments totaling $15 million. Within the CDBG budget, continued funding is proposed for for-sale housing, including both new construction and rehab. Continued funding is proposed for rental ventures, financed in conjunction with the low-income housing tax credits and special-needs housing to assist the homeless and those with other special needs. Settlement assistance grants, using NTI funds, housing counseling, the Philadelphia Green program, Philadelphia Neighborhood Housing Services and neighborhood advisory committees are proposed for continued funding. Tiers and of the Basic Systems Repair Program, which assists low-income homeowners with emergency repairs, are proposed for continuation. Employment and training activities that cannot be funded through the Philadelphia Work Force Development Corporation, including 50 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 the YouthBuild program, are proposed for continued funding. The reduction in available CDBG funding has forced very difficult choices among competing and otherwise worthwhile initiatives and programs. In particular, community economic development activities have been reduced by $650,000. At the same time, we meet and exceed the requirement of City Council Bill 12 No. 000716, which mandates that at least 5 percent of all CDBG funds be spent on economic development activities carried out by community development corporations. The second primary source of funding for Year 30 is the federal HOME Program, H-O-M-E. 994, almost $17 million, in new home entitlement funding in Year 30. That's a decrease of $40,000. While CDBG can be spent for a variety of activities, including economic development, HOME funds are restricted to 51 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 housing activities, including construction and rental assistance. 3 million, that represents two years worth of funding, in HOME fund specifically identified for the American Dream Down Payment Initiative. The city proposes to use these new funds for down payment and settlement grant assistance on behalf of low-income families in home-ownership projects that it supports in areas of rapid appreciation or where the appraised value of the houses being sold makes affordability difficult for low- and moderate-income individuals and families. The third source of federal housing funding, which is included in the Year 30 consolidated plan, is the Housing Opportunities For Persons With AIDS -- that's HOPWA -- which the City of Philadelphia administers for a five-county metropolitan area, including Philadelphia, Bucks, Chester, Delaware, and Montgomery Counties. The federal formula for HOPWA funds 52 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 is based on the historical and contemporary AIDS caseloads in the region. 632 million in HOPWA funds for the five-county region. This amount represents a return to the general level of funding prior to the current fiscal year. In order to address a shortage of rental assistance for persons who can live independently, an increase of $546,000 is proposed for rental assistance. The fourth source of federal funding for housing in Year 30 is Emergency Shelter Grant Program. 332 million in ESG funds for Fiscal Year 2005. These funds, which support emergency shelter activities, will continue to be administered by the Office of Emergency Shelter and Services.

In the past, another major source of funding for housing has been the Section 108 loan program. Under the Section 108 loan program, the city is allowed to borrow funds against 53 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 future CDBG entitlement grants. In the past, the city used the Section 108 loan program to provide debt financing for economic development ventures and to support specific housing development ventures. While economic development Section 8 108 loans are self-sustaining through the repayment of debt, subsidies for housing funded with Section 108 loans must be repaid through CDBG entitlement funding. The city has nearly reached its Section 108 loan program borrowing capacity. And, therefore, in Year 30 no new Section 108 loan authority will be sought for housing activities, and budget authority for a relatively modest loan of up to $15 million is requested for economic development activities administered by PIDC, should that become necessary. Last year I committed that improvements would be made in the relocation process that is sometimes required for acquisition and site assembly for development. I am able to report to you that the 54 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 RDA has hired two bilingual -- that is English and Spanish speaking -- individuals who will serve as relocation specialists, and also now provides both notice letters and relocation brochures in English and in Spanish. Before hearings are held in the City Council on a condemnation bill, a meeting is held with persons who may be relocated to explain the process, the benefits, and purpose of the relocation activity which may affect them. These actions have improved drastically a process which can be very difficult for the persons affected. In addition, the Redevelopment Authority has arranged for legal services to be provided at no cost to low-income persons who face relocation. As part of the additional notice to condemnees, the RDA informs persons of the availability of these services in writing both, again, in English and in Spanish. The Senior Law Center, Philadelphia Legal Assistance, and Community Legal Services 55 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 have agreed to provide these legal services related to fair compensation, title issues, appraisal, and relocation benefits. This effort represents a further effort by the city to deal fairly with everyone affected by condemnation, even above the improvements contemplated last year. We have endeavored in the past to keep down general administration as well as program-delivery costs. These efforts will be hampered in Fiscal Year '05 by increasing healthcare and pension costs. These escalating costs will be addressed in Year 30 plan through layoffs, not filling current budgeted, but unfilled positions, and other cost-cutting measures. These efforts will result in a savings of $3,250,000 for the upcoming fiscal year. We expect that these cuts will have a minimum impact upon services provided. However, with the every-increasing request for acquisition, relocation, and land assemblage placed upon the RDA, we cannot guarantee that 56 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 services will not be impacted. In order to meet our deadlines, however, I would respectfully request that the committee vote Bill 040501 out with a favorable recommendation and with a request to suspend the Rules to allow first reading at the next Council meeting. Thank you for this opportunity to present this testimony. At the end of the public testimony, Ms. Smith and other members of our staff will certainly be available to answer your questions. Thank you.

Thank you very much. (Applause.)

Jeremy Nowak, The Reinvestment Fund.

Good morning, Council President Verna, Councilwoman Blackwell, and members of City Council. I don't know if you want me to send these out, but I have got pictures and maps to go along with my presentation. 57 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 My name is Jeremy Nowak. I am the President of The Reinvestment Fund. As some of you know, we are a lender and investor in countless housing and economic development projects throughout the city and region. TRF manages more than $200 million in assets and we have played, we think, an important role in stimulating housing markets, financing affordable homeownership and rental units, providing debt and equity for small businesses, as well as financing child care centers and charter schools. We are also a significant provider of data and planning for both cities and states. Our recently released Choices Pennsylvania was the first housing analysis of its kind ever done for the State of Pennsylvania. We have conducted and continue to conduct important analyses of subprime lending and foreclosure rates in Philadelphia and statewide. And we provide Mayor Street and Pat Smith housing market data for use in their original organization of the NTI program. 58 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 I am here today to provide some initial updates of the market analysis that we conducted for the Mayor in late 2000 and early 2001. I have done so through maps that provide both an overview of the city, as well as highlight four different sections of the city that, in our view, are emerging markets. Some of the data is taken from the recent presentation that we created for the city as part of their developers breakfast and tour that was held two weeks ago. In 2001 we designed a market-type policy with six market types, ranging from the best areas in the city that we called Regional Choice neighborhoods, to ones that were the most challenged that we called Reclamation Areas. The market types were constructed through a statistical cluster analysis that used nine different data sets. We recently updated, only through the addition of 2002 and 2003 actual sales data, in order to find out what the changes and improvements might be. We did this on not a census tract 59 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 level, but a lower level than the census tract level, the block groups. Philadelphia has 1816 block groups. Of the 1816 census-defined block groups in the city, our initial report categorized 7 percent of those groups into what we call the 8 upper three market types, 82 percent into the 9 bottom three market types, with about 5 10 percent as nonresidential. 11 By the update that we recently did, 12 now 25 percent of the block groups can be 13 categorized in the upper three market types, 70 percent in the lower three, and 5 percent remain nonresidential. While the majority of the block groups showed no change or have insufficient sales data to justify reclassification, there are clearly some positive trends that are worth noting. First -- let me just sort of lay out, I think, sort of six important points here. First, it is clear that the Center City real estate boom has spread both north 60 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 and south. South Philadelphia, east of Broad Street, has experienced remarkable value shifts, and now areas west of Broad are trending upward. North Philadelphia, particularly areas north of Girard Avenue, both on the east and west side of Broad Street, have shown improvements. Second, it is clear that the city has rediscovered parks and rivers. Some of the most interesting value shifts hug parks in West Philadelphia -- think of the West Park area -- the Northeast, Pennypack; the northwest, of course; and South Philadelphia where market-rate housing is being built in proximity to Roosevelt Park. New condos and townhouses are changing values along both the Delaware and Schuylkill.

Third, it clearly mattered, when you look at the maps, that we rebuilt or are in the process of rebuilding our large public housing projects. This has been, I think, quietly, in 61 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 some situations not so quietly, this has been a major revolution in Philadelphia's neighborhoods. Many of these projects are located in areas of the city that are proximate to stronger markets, and the impact is now clearly apparent. So go to the area around Martin Luther King, area around any of the other projects, go up to Schuylkill Falls, now we see the same thing. Fourth, the middle and upper parts of the Northeast have stabilized and strengthened. And I'm not sure I would have predicted that three years ago. New housing units and retail are being built and planned as townhouse values escalate all the way out to the county line. Fifth, a decade of reinvestment associated with the University of Pennsylvania is influencing values west of University City. And it would now appear that the expansion of Temple's campus and student housing supply is slowly also taking some value effect. 62 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 Sixth, as the market strengthens, isolated community development projects that were built over the last two decades are now taking on new meaning. Islands of development created by nonprofit and for-profit developers now look less isolated and more meaningful. There are, of course, still troubling indicators. We have escalating foreclosure rates in particular neighborhoods; in parts of the Lower Northeast, parts of the Northwest, Southwest Philadelphia. Quality, affordable rentals in particular are still at a premium. Public systems can always be improved. And, of course, a few years does not make a trend. But clearly something is happening, and we have to take advantage of it. If we zero in on the four areas in the accompanying map presentations, we can see that there are ample opportunities in selected areas of the city for large-scale change. In each of the four sections I have provided, comparative market indicator trends, 63 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 and then on following maps, I have shown the market influences and some of the public incentives that are available to drive development. In all four of these areas there is ample opportunity to build both market-rate housing and to preserve and build affordable units. The two are not mutually exclusive. To continue the process of market revitalization in Philadelphia, we have to allocate scarce CDBG and NTI funds in smart ways. Let me suggest several guidelines. First, we have to maximize the production of affordable units that are produced with limited subsidy. The era of really deep subsidy may be over. Secondly, we have to create clean sites in areas of the city where there are clear market demand. Third, we have to identify in a more rigorous way than we have ever done previously a retail development strategy to accommodate new housing development. Fourth, we have to concentrate 64 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 market-building efforts in areas approximate to major public housing renovations. Fifth, we have to preserve intact blocks that show signs of erosion, particularly because of escalating foreclosure levels. Sixth, we have to foster preservation programs in blocks adjacent to new market rate development in order to send a clear signal that we are serious about preserving a diversity of incomes and housing tenures Finally, we have to encourage other major institutions, besides Penn and Temple, to step up to the plate in the revitalization process. I want to thank you for your time, and I will be happy to answer any questions you may have at a later time. Thank you very much. )

Thank you very much. Brett Mandel, please come forward. 65 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 Next will be Jane Pepper, Pennsylvania Horticultural Society; then Susan Klein, PCA. Thank you. Please identify yourself for the record and begin your testimony.

I have copies for distribution.

Yes.

Madam Chairwoman and members of City Council, thank you for providing this forum to discuss the recommendations put forth by the members of the 21st Century Review Forum. I am Brett Mandel, Executive Director of Philadelphia Forward. I come before you today to commend the 21st Century Review Forum for its work in reviewing the recommendations of the Tax Reform Commission. As you know, the citizens of Philadelphia agreed to the Tax Reform Commission by a vote of nearly 180,000 residents, 80 percent of the electorate. The Tax Review Commission worked for ten months and spent a half million dollars in 66 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 public funding to create a blueprint for change to improve the city's tax structure. The recommendations of the Tax Reform Commission would dramatically reduce the wage tax; reform, reduce, and eventually eliminate the business privilege tax; and make real estate taxes fair and understandable. I appreciate the time and effort this City Council has put into reviewing these recommendations and understanding the thinking behind them. I am pleased to note that the Mayor's hand-picked transition team, the 21st Century Review Forum, reviewed the work of the Tax Reform Commission and gave the recommendations a tremendous endorsement, agreeing with all but one of the Tax Reform Commission's 28 formal recommendations. The Review Forum declared, "The city should move quickly to adopt the major recommendations of the Tax Reform Commission, even if expenditures have to be reduced to cover the initial tax revenue shortfall. The Mayor's very important, quality-of-life 67 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 strategies will not have the desired impacts or be sustainable in the long run in the absence of fundamental tax reform." I will repeat that last part because we are talking about initiatives today. I think that's a very important line. "The Mayor's very important quality-of-life strategies will not have the desired impacts or be sustainable in the long run in the absence of fundamental tax reform." Furthermore, the 21st Century Review Forum also discussed the question of whether we should pursue implementation of the Tax Reform Commission's recommendations in light of the city's fiscal condition. The 21st Century Review Forum stated unambiguously, "Some will question whether the city, with its projected FY '05 deficit, can afford significant tax reform at this time, but that is the wrong question. Rather, we should ask how we can afford not to reform taxes now." I could not have said it better myself. We cannot accept the excuse that we 68 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 can't afford to enact this tax reform package. Truly, we can't afford not to do it. If Philadelphia is to move forward as a city, it must break with policies that hold it back. Today taxes hold Philadelphia back; tomorrow, tax reform can move Philadelphia forward.

Thank you very much. Jane Pepper, Pennsylvania Horticultural Society. Good morning.

Good morning. I have copies for distribution.

Thank you. Sergeant-at-Arms.

Good morning, Madam President, Madam Chair, and members of Council. Thank you for the opportunity to present this testimony. I am Jane Pepper, the President of the Pennsylvania Horticultural Society and the Philadelphia Green Program. Through Community Development Block Grant dollars, the Pennsylvania Horticultural 69 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 Society's Philadelphia Green Program has been able to carry forward its mission of improving the quality of life and building community through horticulture. Our work touches nearly every corner of the city. We support grass-roots efforts of hundreds of neighborhood volunteers and create maximum impact by establishing strong partnerships with city agencies, neighborhood institutions, not-for-profit organizations, and the business community. We very much appreciate the support provided to Philadelphia Green by OHCD over many years. We have put these resources to good use. More importantly, we have been able to leverage city dollars into significant support from foundations, businesses, and other entities in the private sector. In June 2003, as part of Mayor Street's Neighborhood Transformation Initiative, PHS was awarded a $4 million contract to oversee greening projects in the city, with the aim of making a substantial impact in improving community open spaces. 70 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 Taking advantage of this landmark commitment, PHS proposed specific projects for Fiscal Year 2004 that have greatly improved the appearance of many of our neighborhoods. This unprecedented level of investment has resulted in dramatic improvements in the quality of life in our communities and has clearly conveyed the importance of quality open space as part of a neighborhood's revitalization strategy. The immediate visual improvements bring hope to residents of formerly blighted areas and help to build support for investment in the city's green spaces. Our work over the next five years will continue to be based on the green city strategy, a concept developed by Philadelphia Green that emphasizes large-scale investment in vacant land management, quality landscapes, streetscapes, neighborhood parks, and other open spaces as a means to rebuild the city. Starting from the premise that ugly is bad for business, the goal of this effort is to significantly enhance the quality of the 71 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 city's green infrastructure to make the city attractive so it can more easily retain and attract new residents, new businesses, and new investment. This strategy adopted by NTI in 2001 reflects key priorities for neighborhood revitalization. A three-pronged approach that includes concentrated greening, clean and green in targeted areas, community-based vacant land maintenance, and citywide greening projects. These efforts are integrated with PHS's ongoing work, leveraging further support and long-standing partnerships such as those with the Pew Charitable Trust and the William Penn Foundation. As part of the $4 million investment in greening and open space revitalization, PHS has partnered with hundreds of neighborhood residents, community groups, and city organizations, and we are proud of the following accomplishments. Working with the Mayor's Office, City Council members, and key neighborhood 72 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 stakeholders, PHS identified strategic corridors, as well as sites adjacent to schools, churches, commercial and housing developments, and gateways for land stabilization. Land stabilization has been completed in many neighborhoods throughout Philadelphia and has included clearing land of debris, replacing topsoil, planting grass seed and trees, and constructing post-and-rail fencing.

Coupled with the city's efforts to demolish abandoned buildings in the neighborhoods, stabilizing vacant land in these communities has significantly improved their appearance, discouraged further deterioration, and built momentum for other enhancements. As part of the NTI contract, PHS' goal was to clean and green 1,000 parcels, a million square feet, of vacant land. 3 million square feet of land has been successfully brought under a 73 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 management program. As an approach to vacant land maintenance, PHS developed a pilot program that looked to build the capacity of community organizations to maintain recently cleared land. In August 2003, PHS selected eight community-based organizations that were responsible for performing basic housekeeping of cleared land in their communities. This approach gives local organizations a direct role in improving the appearance of their own environment, investing the community in the long-term success of the project. Approximately 70 city residents have been hired by eight organizations. , Tioga United, University City District, Mantua Improvement Association, Universal Companies, and Village of the Arts. As part of the NTI contract, PHS' goal was to provide basic housekeeping for 74 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 1,760 parcels of vacant land utilizing community organizations. To date, we are pleased to report that more than 1,900 parcels have been successfully brought under a management program. As part of a citywide greening approach, PHS was able to expand urban greening efforts that are key programmatic initiatives to Philadelphia Green. Outside of the vacant land management efforts, a variety of greening projects have been developed and implemented. These projects include work on revitalizing neighborhood parks, creating community gardens, greening neighborhood corridors, and conducting community-driven greening projects on residential blocks. A series of educational programs for residents has supported these efforts. Specifically, PHS is currently completing work on six greening projects at neighborhood corridors, six signature greening projects, 51 park improvement projects, 20 75 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 community gardens, and garden block clusters, consisting of more than 500 colorful wine barrel planters. Again, the Pennsylvania Horticultural Society is grateful for the long-term support provided by OHCD, as well as the opportunity to serve. We look forward to support in the coming year to continue our work in the neighborhoods using greening as a community development tool. We also look forward to expanding our impact and building on the landmark investment made by NTI in open space revitalization. The green seeding strategy holds tremendous promise for Philadelphia's continuing revitalization. While its long-term success will be measured by the number of residents who choose to stay in their neighborhoods, rather than move out of the city, the strategy's immediate impact is evident; not only in the much approved appearance of many neighborhoods, but also in 76 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 the hearts and minds of residents who are begin to view these communities in a whole new light. Neighborhood activist Juanita Story-Jones has been pleased with the results to date. "Greening is something we have needed for years," she said. "It makes this place feel more like a community. " Thank you. )

Susan Klein, PCA. Next is Terry Mushovic, Neighborhood Garden's Association. Is Terry Mushovic here?

I have written testimony.

Please identify yourself, begin your testimony. After Neighborhood Gardens Association will be Jihad Ali, Contractors Roundtable, and Donald Kelly, GPUAC. We are trying to keep in timely 77 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 fashion. If you folks move fast, we can save time. Thank you.

Thank you for the opportunity to testify. I will just highlight my testimony today. I am the Director of Housing for the Philadelphia Corporation for Aging. Philadelphia has the highest concentration of elders among the largest 11 cities. Approximately 30 percent of older 12 Philadelphians live within 150 percent of the 13 official poverty limit. 14 Some of the ways that we address 15 these needs is with funding from the Office of 16 Housing Community Development through direct 17 housing services, including SHARP, the Senior 18 Housing Assistance Repair Program, and the 19 Adaptive Modification Program, AMP, which 20 serves the needs of people with disabilities of all ages. This year we were able to serve 750 consumers in the SHARP program. We have 1100 high-priority elder households waiting for these services. 78 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 PCA requests City Council to support current SHARP funding for $325,000, but more construction funds without significant lead-based paint regulations are needed for this program. The Adaptive Modification Program started in 1989, provides modifications to people with disabilities of all ages. And with thanks to the advocacy of the Philadelphia Affordable Housing Coalition, and the disabilities community, this program was funded at $5 million in Year 29 and is the plan for the same amount. I have quoted some people who have received those modifications because I really want the Council to get a sense of the kinds of impact that these modifications can make for people. We currently have 760 people waiting for services. So even at current funding levels, it is a two-year waiting list. PCA would like to thank OHCD for their support of the Adaptive Modification Program and ask City Council to support this 79 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 level of funding. PCA would like to mention a number of different things. We certainly support the development of the Housing Trust, Bill 040594, as introduced by Councilwoman Blackwell and Reynolds-Brown, Councilwomen. The Housing Trust needs to be funded at a level that $20 million can be annually used. (Applause.)

PCA supports maintaining the Basic Systems Repair Program at Year 29 funding. Most seniors own their own homes, and BSRP is a lifeline for-low income homeowners in Philadelphia. The third thing is that PCA strongly supports the passage of the visibility ordinance, and would like to thank Councilwoman Blackwell and her office for their support of the concept. (Applause.)

Typical row homes were 80 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 designed centuries ago, when the average life span was in the 40's. And we are really wasting our effort if we keep on building outmoded designs. I understand that the only objection that some people have is whether there would be an increased cost. And I have included in my testimony information from an organization called Concrete Change in Atlanta that supports how inexpensive visitable housing can be. PCA urges OHCD to develop as many units of senior housing as possible. On a national level, it is predicted that for each unit of housing, there are nine people waiting for senior housing. We would also like to thank OHCD for supporting the expansion of housing counseling from one to three senior centers. Senior centers are the place that seniors feel comfortable to walk in and to talk about issues, including predatory lending, and expanding the housing counseling will be very important. 81 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 I would also like to ask City Council to increase the capacity of the Historic and Planning Commissions so that they can respond to our requests. We currently have about 62 AMP cases and 66 SHARP cases waiting to see whether they are treat sensitive. And we have about 9 cases that are waiting to see whether we can 10 go forward with the planned renovations. 11 And, lastly, I would like to mention 12 that the state has two demonstration projects 13 underway. One to assist people to get on to 14 care services quicker and one to get people 15 out of nursing homes. 16 The barrier is often housing. So 17 the only way that we can be successful in 18 getting people out of nursing homes is to make 19 sure that the people with the housing units 20 and the people that can provide services sit 21 down together. And we could certainly use 22 your help in making sure that the Philadelphia 23 Housing Authority join us in this effort. Thank you for the opportunity to testify. 82 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 (Applause.)

Thank you very much. Neighborhood Garden's Association. Are you here? Jihad Ali, Contractors Roundtable. Are you here? Donald Kelly, GPUAC. Thank you. Michael Spain, Design Collaborative.

I am Donald Kelly, Director of Community and Economic Development for the Greater Philadelphia Urban Affairs Coalition. Thank you for the opportunity to testify today. There are three issues I would like to address. One is two programs supported by the NTI. One is the Anti-predatory Lending Program, the second is the Employer Assisted Housing Program, and then the new initiative proposed by PHCDC, the Housing Trust Fund. In the spring of 2002, GPUAC's community and economic development committee began a series of meetings with the objective of creating an alternative for Philadelphia 83 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 homeowners who need loans to repair or improve their homes, but whose credit was not good enough to qualify for conventional bank loans. Faced with essential repairs, such as replacing a worn-out roof or a dangerous electrical system, and unable to get loans from responsible lending institutions, such homeowners become easy prey for sweet-talking predatory contractors and lenders. The CED committee includes bankers, community activists, community housing counselors, and community development intermediaries. This knowledgeable group is joined by OHCD and NTI experts, and together devised a program that would open the door to bank home improvement loans to B grade borrowers who would not normally be considered qualified. This model would be accomplished through a partnership of banks, housing counseling agencies, and the city. And the idea was that clients would receive counseling and home inspections to identify essential 84 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 work items, then the banks would make the loans. But the banks would only be willing to do that if there were some recourse. And we devised a percent recourse strategy. 7 In the fall of 2002, OHCD issued an 8 RFP for the proposals under the NTI that would 9 create alternatives to predatory lending. And 10 GPUAC applied and was awarded $500,000. 11 Of this, $450,000 was immediately 12 earmarked for the loan lost reserve fund, with 13 the potential of leveraging approximately 175 14 loans, averaging 15,000 each. That's 15 administered by the RDA. 16 In all, we have 40 partners in this 17 program now, including 25 city-funded housing 18 counseling agencies that were trained in the 19 loan programs now known as PHIL-plus and 20 Mini-PHIL, eight participating banks, three home inspection firms, two city agencies, a marketing firm, and GPUAC. The Mayor announced the program at a press conference on June 30, 2003. We are pleased to report now that, after ten months, 85 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 the program has provided 100 counseled clients to participating banks, loans have been 4 closed, and many more are in the pipeline. 5 For the second year of the program, 6 we are projecting an average of ten referrals 7 to banks per month, with 50 percent of them 8 being successfully closed. 9 At this pace, the 175 loan capacity 10 of the reserve fund should be sufficient until 11 mid 2006. However, administrative and 12 marketing funds in the amount of approximately 13 66,000 per year will continue to be needed. 14 The NTI was responsive to a serious 15 threat to the public's interest by supporting 16 the launch of the Anti-Predatory Lending 17 Program. That threat continues, and the need 18 for alternatives to predatory loans continues 19 with it. 20 NTI's Anti-Predatory Lending Program 21 was a starting point to make some inroads into 22 this problem. And with continued support from 23 the city, will make further headway in the 24 coming years. 25 The second program is the employer's 86 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 assisted housing, which is a newer concept in Philadelphia for most of Philadelphia. This was launched this past year, the goals of which are two-fold. One is to make employment in Philadelphia more attractive to workers by helping employers offer housing-related benefits to their employees.

Secondly, to provide resources to employees to enable them to purchase or improve their homes in Philadelphia. The program is now called Philadelphia HomeBuyNow. Philadelphia HomeBuyNow consists of a menu of housing-related benefits that have been assembled by GPUAC and are now being offered to Philadelphia employers for their employees. These benefits include competitive mortgages through PHFA and six banks; down payment and closing cost grants, in which the city matches the employer contribution up to $3,000; employer guarantees of employee's mortgages; home inspections; home maintenance training; and linkage to city housing 87 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 counseling services and home improvement loan programs. This housing benefit menu is now being marketed to a large and small employers, for-profit and nonprofit entities, as well as to government institutions, such as the Philadelphia School District, where it is being considered as a potential tool to attract and retain teachers. Employers that offer one or more of these benefits will be at a competitive advantage in attracting desirable employees, increasing employees' loyalty, and thereby reducing turnover costs. Housing benefits can also be structured in a way that strengthens the demand and upkeep of housing in a neighborhood surrounding the employer's facility, such as has been demonstrated by the University of Pennsylvania. Despite their obvious advantages, housing benefits are still relatively rare, with only 7 percent of the nation's employers offering them. 88 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 The principal reasons for this are that housing benefits have had to be custom crafted by employers looking to participate, and there are a few entities available to employers to guide them in the crafting or implementing of these programs. Thanks to the Neighborhood Transformation Initiative's HomeBuyNow Program, that need is being met. Perhaps more importantly, HomeBuyNow and employer assisted housing represent an innovation in the city's community development strategy in four ways. It is a demand-side strategy, seeking to encourage demand for existing housing, rather than increasing supply at a time when the city is losing residents. Moreover, this approach can particularly help younger people who are in their home-buying years in the city. As a demand-side program that reduces the costs of homeownership, it puts the city in a position to better compete for residents. 89 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 From the community development perspective, employer-assisted housing provides the city with a new and important way to leverage its funding, as the program requires participation of employers and employer organizations. To date, many employers have not been part of the city's community development conversation because they have not had the tools to connect improved communities to their own prosperity. Philadelphia HomeBuyNow makes that connection. Although employer-assisted housing is a business improvement strategy, organized labor can also participate. Federal law recognizes housing benefits as a bargainable benefit. And in addition to participating in HomeBuyNow, unions can now seek to create Housing Trust Fund programs managed by labor and management Boards. Funds from Fiscal Year '03 supported Philadelphia HomeBuyNow during its construction phase. And funds from '04 are 90 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 available to support Philadelphia HomeBuyNow during its marketing and initial implementation stage through its to 30 5 employers are expected to participate. 6 However, at this point there is no 7 funding included in Fiscal Year '05 budget for 8 either replenishing the city fund for matching 9 benefit grants or for the administrative costs 10 during the third year of the program.

11 In creating this employer-assisted 12 housing program, the NTI has recognized the 13 strategic value of a program that is both an 14 economic development strategy and a housing 15 strategy, and that effectively uses limited 16 public resources to leverage private-sector 17 investment. 18 However it is important to recognize 19 that employer-assisted housing places a new 20 responsibility upon the city. A core element in the employer-assisted housing conversation is that employers should adjust their benefit programs in return for gaining city assistance in offering this benefit. Employers are not going to want to 91 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 reconfigure their benefit programs to participate in a fleeting city effort. In beginning this program, it is vital that the city stick with this approach, assuming it proves successful. It is not enough for the see to be a partner with the business community in this program, it must be a reliable partner. We hope that the success we are showing this year with both the anti-predatory lending and employer-assisted housing programs will continue the city. And the NTI initiatives have had positive effects in our neighborhoods. Numerous for-profit and nonprofit partners are committed to making these programs work in the long term, and this will continue to be the case as long as we can count on the consistent long-term commitment by our public sector partner, the City of Philadelphia. Finally, allow me to reiterate GPUAC's endorsement of the idea proposed by PACDC for the formation of a Housing Trust 92 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 Fund with dedicated sources of funding. This is a powerful concept, with the potential to both increase the supply of decent and affordable housing and provide stability to the nonprofit housing industry in Philadelphia. This industry has not only brought housing renewal and new tax ratables to our depressed neighborhoods, it has also brought hope to our depressed citizens through its ability to transform abandoned land to productive use. This industry has helped to keep the city alive and is worthy of the city's steady and predictable support through the Housing Trust Fund, Bill 040594, with amendments. Thank you for the opportunity to testify. )

Thank you very much. We can always present your testimony in total for the record. We would ask everyone, if you can, to keep your remarks to three minutes. Is that all right? Thank 93 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 you. Thank you, Mr. Spain. Not meant specifically for you, sir. Thank you.

Good afternoon, Madam Chair, members of Council. My name is Michael Spain, I am an architect and a Board member of the Community Design Collaborative of AIA Philadelphia. Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments on the Year 30 consolidated plan. The Collaborative believes that design matters for every community in every part of our city. The Collaborative is a volunteer-based design center that connects community-based organizations with pro bono preliminary design services. We provide nonprofits with access to predevelopment design services, match design professionals with volunteer opportunities, and promote best practices in community development. Since 1994 our volunteer teams have advised hundreds of nonprofits on the design process. In 2003 alone, the Collaborative 94 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 initiated 38 new projects and coordinated pro bono services for 47 non-profits, delivering nearly $400,000 in pro bono preliminary design services. Design professionals can contribute to neighborhood revitalization by donating time to nonprofits through the Collaborative. Our design teams work with community groups to strengthen our neighborhoods, build a supply of affordable housing, and improve the quality of life in our city by design. Let me provide you with one example of how we have helped the Community Development Corporation test new housing options. In 2001, the Allegheny West Foundation in North Philadelphia came to the Collaborative for assistance in developing design solutions for combining vacant parcels on Garnet and Somerset Streets, sadly known as the forgotten blocks. With Collaborative report in hand, Allegheny West was able to present their approach to funders such as the Redevelopment 95 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 Authority, Pennsylvania Housing Finance Agency, OHCD, leveraging a total of 1.2 million to develop vacant lots for 5 home-ownership housing. 6 This project is a best-practice 7 model for reusing housing stock and vacant 8 lots for lower density units. 9 Good design is good policy. Many 10 important private, nonprofit, and public 11 initiatives help our neighborhoods by building 12 hundreds of homes and repairing thousands more 13 each year. All build on the investment made 14 by the Neighborhood Transformation Initiative. The Collaborative supports the Year 30 OHCD consolidated plan. The support of preliminary planning and architectural services for community development corporations and neighborhood-based organizations have qualitative and quantifiable returns on investment. OHCD has been a strong partner, providing guidance, referrals, and funding for our activities since 1994. Overall, the Collaborative leveraged, again, more than 96 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 $400,000 in donated services from our design volunteers and vendors in 2003. This is a 4 to 1 return on the city's investment. Every dollar of CDBG support leverages $4 of pro bono free development services. The Collaborative's early technical services also leverage considerable professional services for Philadelphia's architecture, engineering, construction industry, support community participation, while providing quality technical assistance, making good use of the funding provided. We support the creation of a Housing Trust Fund. More than 275 cities around the country have Housing Trust Funds. (Applause.)

This is a best practice worth replicating in Philadelphia. Philadelphia needs to invest in housing production. The trust fund should be funded from ongoing, dedicated sources. However, to get it started, we support the allocation of NTI 97 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 funds. This will provide support for rehabilitation or construction of affordable rental homeownership and special-needs housing. The Philadelphia Trust Fund should become a permanent source of funding for neighborhood revitalization. We support the historic property repair program. The Collaborative supports the work between the Preservation Alliance and the city to design a program to help maintain the character of historic areas and properties in Philadelphia without placing excessive financial burdens on low-income homeowners. The design and implementation of this program will provide grants to low-income homeowners to complete needed exterior repairs. We support the homeownership Rehabilitation Program. The Collaborative has provided support to many community development corporations using Historic Rehabilitation Program. Supplementing CDBG funds with NTI funds will enable HRP to expand its success, 98 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 additionally targeting households above 80 percent of the area median. In closing, promoting design is a tool for community participation, also helps the city create spaces that are responsive to neighborhood context, reflective of Philadelphia's culture, and more affordable to adapt. These programs and initiatives advance Collaborative goals. The Community Design Collaborative believes that design matters for every community in every part of our city. Thank you for your attention and continued support. (Applause.)

Thank you, Mr. Spain. Rachel Cohen, People's Emergency Center. Jim Miller, Friends Rehab. Are you here, Mr. Miller? Thank you very much. Please identify yourself. Mr. Miller, you may come up and join 99 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 us at the table. Please identify yourself and begin your testimony.

Good morning. My name is Rachel Cohen. I am here representing the People's Emergency Center and the People's Emergency Center Community Development Corporation. I thank you for this opportunity to come and speak this morning. I am here on behalf of Gloria Guard, the president of our two affiliated organizations. On behalf of PEC and PECDC, I would like to make the following recommendations to City Council for Year 30. First, we would like to commend the city for continuing to include the homeless and special-needs set-aside and maintaining the special-needs development financing. The $3 million set-aside of CDBG funding for development financing for homeless and special-needs housing is critically important for serving homeless individuals and families, people with AIDS, and people with 100 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 physical disabilities. The set-aside has made a significant difference by creating new housing for homeless people, enhancing development capacity among special-needs providers, and considerably increasing the federal dollars coming into Philadelphia for special-needs projects. These resources allocated to development financing for homeless and special-needs housing in Year 30 will enable the city to fund desperately needed permanent supportive housing units without draining resources from the other essential components of the homeless continuum of care. This is consistent with the five year action plan developed by the steering committee with broad local representation and incorporation for supportive housing. We would like to thank the city again for its ongoing commitment to funding acquisition, and especially for the set-aside of $15 million for land acquisition. If the city is going to meet its 101 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 goals of revitalizing neighborhoods, increasing housing production, and improving quality of life, we need this continued funding for land acquisition. As the properties are demolished, the land is left vacant, creating additional sources of blight. As a CDC that has been working to strengthen the West Powelton community for years, we directly understand 11 the importance of redevelopment. 12 With the support of all the past acquisition funding, we have converted over 78 vacant and blighted properties into 100 units of affordable, transitional, and permanent housing, four social service facilities, a community program, and green space. We would like to urge the city to maintain current funding levels for the community economic development activities. The city should continue to meet its obligation to use 5 percent of its CDBG funds for CDC economic development projects by maintaining current commerce department support of CDCs, at least at the existing 102 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 level, including support for special service districts and neighborhood commercial corridors. We applaud the city for investing $50,000 of homeless technical assistance planning dollars in the Greater Philadelphia Urban Affairs Coalition's blueprint to end homelessness. We would also like to thank the city for maintaining the funding for affordable homeownership housing, and we urge you to increase your affordable rental housing funding. We support the city's $750,000 commitment to implementing the employer-assisted housing program designed to increase the number of families purchasing homes in Philadelphia. Through this program, designed by GPUAC in conjunction with PHFA, PEC will be launching its own employer-assisted housing program The plan offers a great incentive for PEC employees to buy a home in our West 103 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 Philadelphia neighborhood, further supporting our community revitalization efforts.

And, finally, we would like to thank the city for addressing the issue of neighborhood preservation with the establishment of the Targeted Basic Systems Repair Program in Year 29, and we encourage the city to continue funding this crucial program as outlined in the RFP. This important preservation program builds on existing investments, prevents vacancies, and creates wealth for community residents. In the past, PEC has helped 16 homeowners with repairs, and by the end of the 17 summer we will have helped 46 additional 18 homeowners repair their homes, for a total of 19 66, which wouldn't be possible without this 20 funding from the city. Thank you again for the opportunity to provide comments. )

Thank you. Mr. Miller. 104 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525

Good morning, Councilwoman Blackwell. My name is Jim Miller, I am the Executive Director for the Friends Rehabilitation Program Incorporation. And I am here today to express my organization's support for the Housing Trust Fund ordinance, Bill No. 040594. The Friends Rehabilitation Program is one of the oldest nonprofit housing corporations in the nation. And we have been in partnership with the City of Philadelphia for 40 years to develop safe, decent and affordable housing of low-income persons. During that time, we have developed more than 1,000 units of affordable housing. We currently manage more than 700 units of housing, 57 units for persons with HIV and AIDS. We also administer 125 units for the transitional housing program. Passage of the Housing Trust Fund is essential for a group like FRP to continue to be a partner with the City of Philadelphia. The lack of a reliable source of funding is truly a problem for a group like 105 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 FRP. A $20 million Housing Trust Fund will provide just what is needed so we can spur long-term, sustainable economic and community growth. A $20 million Housing Trust Fund would build 400 new homes per year, repair 1,200 homes per year, and prevent homelessness, while leveraging more than $50 million per year in outside funding. A $20 million Housing Trust Fund would also mean $115 million economic impact on the City of Philadelphia. Passage and full funding of the Trust Fund will not only help to spur housing and community development, it would also have to close the gap of an estimated 60,000 new units of housing that's needed in the City of Philadelphia today. In addition to supporting full funding for the Housing Trust Fund program, Friends also supports an additional $15 million in new acquisition funding. We believe these funds should come directly from 106 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 the NTI. In addition, the city should implement the proposed recycling agreement to ensure that a portion of that funding being spent on acquisition will be available to support future acquisition needs, as well. Again, I would like to thank Chairwoman Blackwell for the opportunity to speak here today and, again, express our organization's full support for full funding of the Housing Trust Fund, Bill No. 040594. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Miller. (Applause.)

Jihad Ali, Contractors Roundtable.

Good morning, Councilwoman Blackwell, and thank you for giving me the opportunity to come back and testify. My name is Jihad Ali, and I am happy to say that I am the Chairman of the Contractors Roundtable, which is Contractors 107 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 Roundtable Council, which is an organization that's advocated for inclusion of African-Americans and Latinos in the construction industry for the past several years. One of the reasons we are here today, Councilwoman Blackwell, is to give a followup about the -- we were here in March, and we were directed to work with technical staff to have the technical staff look at our proposal that we had submitted to the City of Philadelphia. Our proposal was to increase minority capacity and participation in construction contracting in the City of Philadelphia. As we all know with the recent newspapers reports, that 98 percent of all contracts in the city goes to white-male and white-women-owned firms. We first attended in March. And we worked with the Council, we submitted our proposal to have existing contractors participate in the NTI demolition program. 108 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 We subsequently met with Ms. Smith and several city representatives to discuss our proposal and getting our members involved in the NTI process. And we have, for the past several months, attempted to get some type of commitment from Ms. Smith to support our proposal and our participation in the NTI process for existing contractors. Ms. Smith has developed a -- since that time, Ms. Smith had developed a great idea for our involvement into the process; however, we are yet to meet some time in the future to develop this great idea, to get a mechanism to implement it. Ms. Smith has also suggested that we can participate in some existing programs under the NTI. Why we are here again today is for some type of commitment from the NTI and from the city for some definite dollar amount for participation of existing contractors in the last year of the NTI demolition process. Our proposal was unique, in that we 109 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 had a Memorandum of Understanding for our contractors to support and respond to. We had a mentor/protege program. We had the full support of Local 332, Sam Staton. We had the support of the directors of -- executive director of DAP, Tony Lewis. We had the support of the General Building Contractors Association. And we also had partnering and joint-venturing opportunities. We have employment goals. We had a program that was entitled Tools For Guns, where we would have hired youth to get the 14 youth to put down guns and try to get a 15 foothold in the construction industry. 16 And one thing I wanted to do is, I 17 wanted to thank all the technical staff that 18 had helped us throughout the past three months 19 to try to get this program. We really would 20 like to extend our sincere appreciation to all the staff people of the City Council of Philadelphia. I am here today with my attorney, Isaac Green. And Isaac Green has been one of the main people that has been responsible for 110 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 us to try to get some commitment from the city, instead of just a lot of promises. Because ultimately why we are here today, is to try to help families. Because even though we talk about construction, and there has been testimony today about the different programs, whether it is the housing program, whether it is NTI, demolition, or the new development, it all comes down to construction. And ultimately that impacts the black family, black and Latino families. Because if black men and Latino men and women cannot work, then they can't support their families. And too often we don't really look at the causes why families have problems, but the number one reason is the lack of economic opportunities for those families to participate in.

So ultimately, Councilwoman Blackwell, we are here to support families, because it is all about families. It is about husbands and wives and sons and daughters. 111 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 And we are talking about generation after generation we are stuck with the same problem because nobody has taken a fight to make sure that we are participating with the rest of society as it goes forward. So every day when we look in the newspapers, and we see young black men that are dying because of their involvement in the drug trade, we really have to stop and see, ask ourselves, what other opportunities are we giving them to participate in the economic opportunities of this city. So ultimately, once again, we are here to fight for families. I would like our attorney, Isaac Green, to tell you about some of the things that we had -- problems we had with the NTI program.

Thank you, Mr. Ali. Please proceed, Mr. Green.

Good morning, Councilwoman Blackwell. I would, first of all, like to thank you, your staff, and the other members of City 112 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 Council who provided staff persons to provide us with certain assistance in putting together this proposal and making sure that Council was made aware of our concerns and the efforts that we are trying to complete. I would also like to thank the Administration for some of the efforts that it has extended in terms of opening its doors to hear our membership and the concerns that we have. As you well know, there has been a utilization study which has been publicized which has raised some serious questions about the inclusion of African-American and Hispanic businesses in the contracting process of the City of Philadelphia. And we are all embarrassed by those statistics that have been revealed. And we, the Contractors Roundtable Council, are committed to reversing those statistics in a meaningful and creative way with the assistance and support of City Council, as well as the Administration. There was one meeting that we have 113 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 had in particular with respect to the proposal that we submitted to Council and to the city Administration. That meeting was with Ms. Pat Smith and several staff members and other representatives in connection with that proposal. That meeting was the first in what is expected to be a series of dialogues in moving toward a meaningful resolution of the issues related to the substantial inclusion of African-American and Hispanic businesses as mandated by Section 1(b) of the amendment to Bill No. 020036. As you know, this section requires the service agreement, which is labeled Program Framework, to include an economic opportunity plan, which is found on the legislation. That plan specifically states that for the overall NTI program, each consultant and contractor's good faith and nondiscriminatory efforts shall be presumed if during each phase of the project the following 114 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 levels of participation are achieved: 35 percent of participation for minority business, percent participation for 5 women-owned businesses, and 2 percent 6 participation for disabled-owned businesses. 7 Now, this totals 49 percent of all 8 minority, female, and disabled-owned 9 businesses. 10 In reality, the city's utilization 11 study and the insightful report of the 21st 12 Century Committee generally have shown that the presumption of the consultant and contractor's good faith and nondiscriminatory efforts have been rebutted. And we want to help the city to address this issue now. Neither we nor the city can afford to wait any longer. The time to act is now. I would also like to add that the directors of the NTI program, Ms. Patricia Smith, did respond to our correspondence in which we were suggesting that we meet and work together pursuant to Council's stated position in that regard. 115 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 We received a response dated May 31, 2004, from Ms. Smith, in which she stated that the city intends to unveil a pilot program in July of this year that will restrict bidding on demolition contracts under the NTI targeted program that do not exceed $500,000, small business owners certified by MBEC or SBA. She also states in the letter that there will be less burdensome performance bond requirements and the prime contractors, meaning -- she has clarified this for me -- the minority prime contractors, if qualified to do so, may perform all of the work. There was some confusion as to whether or not the term "prime contractors" meant minority- or majority-owned contractors, and she has now resolved that confusion. Because had it been literally meant to include only minority or majority prime contractors, I would have to caution that such a statement would have made it easier for the majority-owned contractors to continue to dominate the field.

And, in so doing, this pilot program 116 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 feature could have invited the risk of a perpetuation of the past exclusionary contracting practices. But it seems now that, in light of that clarification, that this risk may not be out there. There are -- in her letter, there are no specific funding commitments stated which are commensurate or compatible with the 35 percent contract dollar participation stated earlier that comes from the ordinance 13 and the service agreement. And there are no 14 time lines for this framework to occur. Moreover, this pilot program does not specifically address the funding for the proposal, which has been submitted by the Contractors Roundtable Council. In further discussions with Ms. Smith just within the last few minutes, we have received, I have received, certain information which indicates that this will be worked out in the months to come. I think that all in all -- and I want to be brief in the interest of time -- I 117 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 think that all in all we have had some dialogue. There is clearly a need for additional dialogue. And we need to keep Council abreast of the developments as we go forward. We are not only looking at NTI, but looking beyond NTI, post demolition. Because it is those contracting opportunities for the building and trades industry, and in particular our members, which will have a profound impact on achieving one of the objectives that my colleague, Mr. Ali, has articulated; that is, addressing the whole question of family values, in terms of economic family values. It is those opportunities and it is those contractual opportunities, as well as those employment opportunities, which can positively impact on the neighborhoods that have been positively affected by the NTI initiative overall, and also the development of an affordable housing stock here in the City of Philadelphia. I think that goes forward. If we 118 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 are able to work closely with Council, as well as the Administration, I think that we can come up with some creative ways in which to address most of the issues that are raised in the proposal, as well as most of the concerns that have since been dealt with through my discussions with Ms. Smith. I thank you for your time. I thank you for your interest. And we hope to move forward in a positive vein in the very near future. Thank you very much.

Thank you very much. And certainly we will ask, when the Administration responds, that they respond more specifically to times and to goals and specific timelines so that we know what their goals are and when. We don't want this to drag on and on. And we know with regard to federal ordinance -- I mean, the Mayor's executive order, 295, and Section 3 from the federal government, we are hoping that they also help us with regard to making sure that we have 119 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 more minority participation. Thank you. Judith Robinson. Leona Keitt, is she here as well? What about Mageedah Rasheed? All right. We will mark them absent, Leona Keitt and Mageedah Rasheed. Is Allison Hughes, Homeownership Council, here? Allison Hughes? Okay. All right. Thank you for your patience. Please identify yourself and begin your testimony.

Yes. My name is Judith Robinson, and I am hear today as a homeowner that resides in a property in North Philadelphia. Thank you for the opportunity to be here. And because it appears that we are connecting several different bills here, I am going to try to correct them in that regard. We are talking about the NTI program and statement. We are also commenting on OHCD's 30-year budget. And, in addition, the Joint Committee of the Whole and Housing and Neighborhood Development is also -- there is a 120 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 resolution regarding the Housing Trust Fund. Okay? So I am clear with that. So in that regard, I am going to make comments and try to be as succinct as possible. But I am also going to reference the HUD report regarding concerns as relates to how NTI is being implemented. And I am also going to refer to the Century Forum 10 information findings. 11 In that regard, I want to touch on 12 NTI initially. And say that I want to talk 13 about not so much the houses, but I want to 14 talk about how it is affecting the community, 15 what's going on in the hood now that a 16 substantial portion of demolition has taken 17 place. How it is affecting our seniors, 18 what's going on with our neighborhood, how is 19 it changing our neighborhood. 20 And also to say, with all of this 21 banging and booming going on, it is just unconscionable that we cannot find a way to have equitable inclusion from African-Americans. It is just truly out of order that 121 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 we are moving so far along in this process and we haven't figured that out. It should have been figured out before it started, but that's a whole other story. So I want to talk about some of the positive things that I see in this year's NTI budget. Because there are some good things. And I am going to put this in the category of better late than never. The Adaptive Modification Program, I am glad to see that it is there and it seems to be expanding. The retaining wall program. The Historic Property Repair Program. I live in North Philadelphia, which has the first historic district on Diamond Street, West Diamond Street. And I am glad to know that that's a program to help my neighbors maintain the repairs of their historic properties. Also, the Housing Trust Fund, I think that's a good thing. I referenced that from the Century 21 Forum recommendations. That's a good thing. However, I don't want us to lose 122 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 sight of the fact that every time a PHA development is created, that there is a reduction in affordable housing. Let us not forget that. So, you know, we need to be clear on a substantial amount of reduction of affordable housing in that regard. Also, another area that I think we are not really focusing on is our intact blocks that have really nice affordable housing on some of those blocks, and they could be maintained to stabilize. I do see an area in here about vacant property stabilization. I think that's an area we definitely need to move towards. I am greatly concerned that we continue to have our blocks, like the 1400 block of North Corlies Street, properties demolished out of those strong intact blocks. There are strong and intact blocks in every neighborhood, and I think they should be maintained. Because money will run out soon for demolition, so we should be focusing on areas where there will be redevelopment in 123 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 the future, not on our strong blocks that will not have a maintenance plan in the future. In that regard, I am really concerned that there is a fund for redevelopment in the future. But I am concerned after the $4 million is exhausted, that there will not be maintenance of these lots, which a substantial number of them are in my neighborhood.

So that's a concern that I have because I remember the tot lots and all of these developments, or I should say all of those areas, that were left from 30 years ago, when there was demolition in the past. So I am going to just, in the essence of time, just mention some of the negatives of OHCD's budget that concerns me. Because there will be a reduction in funding, we must use best practices and pick the best developments that are going to be of value to our future. We should not do 3S-type projects and other back-street projects that do not have any positive effect on our community. 124 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 So I think that all the projects should be streamlined and a cost/benefit analysis should be done in that regard. I want to get to the HUD report and the findings. I remember a very, very, according to Mr. Hanna, severely flawed process of last June the 3rd. And there were some recommendations made from HUD as a result of that very flawed process. And I would like to know how many of these -- how many corrections have been made relating to HUD findings. So in the future, or when the Administration comes back up here, I would really appreciate if they would touch on how many of these areas have been corrected. One area I am very much concerned about is that people are getting fair market value for their homes. I am a real estate broker, and I know for a fact that there is no house that is being lived in in the City of Philadelphia that should be being appraised at $3,500. I 125 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 have seen that. It is out of order. It is terribly wrong, and it should be corrected ASAP. There is no way that a house should be purchased from the government -- from a citizen by the government at such a low price. And when an appraisal comes back across one's desk and across the Board's meetings, that should be not accepted. There are various areas. And, in the essence of time, I am not going to go through all of them. But one area that there was a major concern about was notification as it relates to notice of intent. It states here in the HUD concerns that the notice of intent did not contain statements explaining that the owners would be given fair market value. I am concerned, also, that with the relocation process, that people are not being given every opportunity to move to the next step to protect themselves as relates to fair market value. I am going to move on next to some 126 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 of the findings of the Century -- 21st Century, I should say, Review Form. This was commissioned by the Mayor. So, you know, these are friendly folks, I am sure, giving recommendations. And one of the recommendations that they made is that this process of NTI be more transparent. Well, we have been hearing that for several years now, and it has been three years of this process. And I would like for it to actually be, instead of just being a suggestion. When you are transparent, the community could have an opportunity to buy into a process that they are a part of the planning. Even though I have attended many NTI meetings as it relates to planning, a substantial of them felt as though we were just being told what we would accept. Also, I am very much concerned that we are doing a lot of talk about housing. Where are the people going to eat? Where are 127 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 the supermarkets? There is no money budgeted, according to the findings of the 21st Century Review Forum, that there is no money budgeted under the NTI bonding for residential or retail development. We need to quickly change that. One of the other areas of concern is that, I feel that one Council person, with all due respect, has too much power to determine what happens in a district without, without proper consulting of the community folk, people that live in the houses. It is unfortunate.

Now, this is related to OHCD. That here you are with people in the homeownership zone still unaware, after years of this moving forward in process, they aren't aware that they were even in a homeownership zone, and what the implications would be as it relates to that. And now they are being asked to move and relocate out of their homes, and they did not have proper planning or inclusion in that process. So there is a major disconnect here as it relates to that. 128 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 Also, as it relates to affordable housing, there are city-owned and PHA-owned properties that have been managed over a period of time that could very well be affordable housing. They are being demolished. So, you know, I hear us trying to build this trust, and that's a good thing on one hand. But, on the other hand, we are sort of not being very smart about how we are preserving what we already have. I have never heard of a poor person asking for a brand-new home; they just want a decent home. Also I have some concerns about land assembly. And that's something I am sure that we can discuss in the future. Also, there has not been a major effort to deal with foreclosure. And I still contend that there is no subprime product that will address the issue of people having less than perfect credit. I appreciate the time. And I would also just say that, as we talk about trust 129 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 funds, as I close up, there also was a request in this Century Review Forum for something 4 called a committee, or futures committee, that 5 would address issues of all aspects of this 6 development. 7 So, I mean, I understand people want 8 to deal with the issues that have to be 9 funded, et cetera. But some of these efforts, 10 because they are voluntary, could be dealt 11 with before we start divvying up the cash. 12 Thank you very much for your time. 13

Thank you 14 very much. 15 (Applause.) 16

Ms. Hughes, 17 Homeownership Council of the Delaware Valley. 18

Good afternoon, 19 Madam Chair and members of City Council. 20 The Homeownership Counseling 21 Association is a membership-based organization of 31 community non-profit housing agencies and 6 associate organizations, which are corporations HCA basically acts as a support 130 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 network for housing practitioners. We focus on four key tasks; they are training, mentoring, technical assistance, and policy advocacy. Our members, as you know, provide a broad range of services, including prepurchase counseling; anti-predatory lending counseling; credit and budget counseling; post-occupancy counseling; home improvement and rehabilitation counseling; default, delinquency, and foreclosure intervention counseling. Our members believe that housing counseling will continue to play an essential role in helping individuals and families successfully not only achieve homeownership, but also sustain homeownership. And I am going to briefly go through some other points. We urge the city to consider the following: First, we applaud the city's continued investment of significant resources to provide residents with free comprehensive housing counseling services. However, the demand for housing services have continued to 131 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 grow over the past years. In addition to addressing credit and budget issues for just first-time home buyers, our counselors now find themselves interacting with loan servicers on behalf of defaulted borrowers, and now engaged in very complex negotiation for victims of predatory lending or for families on the verge of foreclosure. We ask the city to continue to play a strong role in encouraging the industry stakeholders to help us keep families in their homes. Secondly, we ask you to increase the closing cost grant from $800 to -- I am sorry, from $800 to $1500 per person using the American Dream Funds. Last year Council reinstituted the $800 Settlement Assistance Grant Program. Since that time, participation in this program has almost doubled. Nearly 600 new homeowners were able to receive a grant. We are also excited about the creation of the American Dreams Down Payment and Closing Cost Grant. However, we have deep 132 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 concerns that the city's abilities to implement the program may be curtailed by the home inspection issue. However, I am confident that the staff of OHCD and NTI will be able to come up with a workable solution for this problem. Lastly, we really commend the city for all of its efforts on anti-predatory lending. Our efforts address both preventive and remediation for residents of our neighborhoods. Since 2001, HCA has collaborated with the Reinvestment Fund, Community Legal Services, and Beneficial Savings Bank to create the Home Equity Loan Preservation Program, which we call HELPP. HELPP was the region's first predatory lending remediation program to offer victims of predatory lending relief. This was a ground-breaking effort which directly aided victims of predatory lending by providing them with a means to retire the predatory loan and obtain a more manageable mortgage, thereby allowing the homeowner to regain financial 133 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 stability and keep their home. The HELPP program consists of six components: One, referral and intake; two, legal assistance; three, borrower assessment and initial counseling; four, refinancing of the predatory loan; and then five and six, ongoing counseling as well as community outreach. In 2003, we received a generous grant in the amount of $250,000 from the city's Neighborhood Transformation Initiative that allowed us to continue this effort. To date, loans have been 15 approved, of which 8 have settled.

In fact, 16 our refinance of predatory loans generally 17 lowers the homeowner's interest rate by an 18 average of 4 points and reduces the amount of their limited income that they need to use to service their mortgage payments. For example, I have a case of Mr. And Mrs. M. 04 in 2013. Needless to say, the family was not 134 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 aware of the balloon lump-sum payment that would be due. 53. 125 percent interest. It is a 30-year fixed rate loan. 60, including their taxes and their insurance. 93. )

We have a current balance of $64,00 in our loan pool. This is a valuable program; however, we may not be able to continue this program without an allocation of additional funds to replenish the loan pool, as well as help with administrative costs. In the interest of time, I will also say that we too endorse the creation of the Housing Trust Fund as proposed by PACDC for the reasons that numerous organizations have previously stated. 135 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 (Applause.)

Thank you again for this opportunity to testify on behalf of the Homeownership Counseling Association.

Thank you very much. Thank you both. Debra Wilson Williams, are you here? And Lillian Ford. We do have a section for all of the Affordable Housing Coalition. AUDIENCE MEMBER: You had called Leona Keitt previously, and she wasn't in the room. She is here now.

Who are you?

Debra Wilson Williams.

You are Debra Wilson Williams. Thank you. Is Lillian Ford here? I will get back to Ms. Keitt here. Is Lillian Ford here? Okay. Is Lena Whitehead here? What about Anthony Brooks Upchurch? 136 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 What about Michael Lightner? What about Bill Peebles? And John Lane? John Lane I saw. John Lane, you can come up, as well. Thank you very much. Identify yourself for the record and begin your testimony.

Good morning. My name is Debra Wilson Williams, and I am testifying on behalf of the 4900 block of Girard Avenue. It sits in Cathedral Park Association, who is in the 105 census track, part of the West Philadelphia Empowerment Zone. Since 1998, the Cathedral Park Association has supported a housing development project that would address the 4900 block of Girard Avenue. This is an important block. It sits in Cathedral Park, which begins at 48th on Girard, and it goes west to 52nd Street, and it goes down north to Lancaster Avenue, and back to 48th and Girard. 137 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 It is one of the gateways. It sits across from Our Mother of Sorrows Church, a beautiful site. Habitat for Humanity has been working on the 4900 block of Stiles Street, just north of Girard, for almost years. 8 The community has worked really hard trying to 9 fix the community itself. 10 And we are pleased that the 11 empowerment zone and OHCD have partnered 12 together to commit funds for redevelopment of this block. We anticipated that new 15 homeownership units would be developed. However, the development of this project also requires Neighborhood Transformation Initiative funds for acquisition. Our estimate is that at least $750,000 is required for acquisition. This project has been caught up in an unfortunate circumstance. In which, when it was first conceived, it was in the 4th Councilmanic District. In the beginning of this calendar year, it became part of the 3rd Councilmanic 138 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 District. This has created confusion as to which Council person would provide the acquisition funds. I am here today to request urgently that both Council persons Blackwell and Nutter jointly support this project and identify funds for acquisition. The 4900 block of Girard Avenue is an important gateway to that section of West Philadelphia. And thank you for allowing me to testify.

Thank you very much. We note that we have spoken already with the Empowerment Zone, Councilman Nutter, and we are working jointly on behalf of your neighborhood.

Good afternoon, Councilwoman and Council committee. My name is John Lane, I am with the Greater Philadelphia Urban Affairs Coalition. I work with the Economics Development Project. 139 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 We have been picked by the city to monitor employment as it relates to NTI projects. In doing so, there were some goals that were set early on that have been presented to us through something called Section 00820 of the Equal Opportunity Employment contracts. And those goals were 75 percent for minority participation, 10 percent for female participation. And, in addition to that, 80 percent of the hours worked on NTI projects were to be worked by Philadelphia residents. The goals as they are were somewhat ambitious. But we find this we have met those goals, we have tracked it, and some of those have even exceeded in certain areas. I am here today to let you know that we present this information to NTI, namely, Pat Smith's office, on a monthly basis, which we track through the efforts of certified payrolls submitted by those minority contractors through Hill International. Mine is a brief task, in stating 140 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 what it is that we like to do and what we do. We do this also in addition with a number of organizations throughout this city; such as, Temple University and the University of Pennsylvania. And I will be brief in that sense, and just submit our particular information for any questions later on in this procedure. Thank you very much.

Good afternoon, Madam Chairwoman, members of the Council. I have prepared testimony here, if you wish to have it distributed. My name is William Peebles, Director of the Diversity Apprenticeship Program, know to most of us as the DAP program. DAP is a program of the Philadelphia Revitalization and Education Program Incorporated, PREP. PREP is led by its Chairman of the Board of Directors, Mr. Sam Staton, Senior, and its managing partner, Mr. Anthony Lewis. I am here to testify before this 141 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 committee in support of the Neighborhood Transformation Initiative and its Work Force Development Employment Program. Specifically, I will address how NTI provides new opportunities for the minorities in this city to participate in the construction industry throughout the city. I want to commend the Mayor and the NTI director, Ms. Patricia Smith, for having the foresight to engage that as the training and employment entity of the NTI. As a result of the work we have put together as a team, DAP has assisted in gaining employment for over 100 city residents. DAP was created to move qualified minorities into the apprenticeships of the building trades. It is a public/private partnership founded by members of the Pennsylvania Black Caucus, Legislative Caucus, the Philadelphia Building Trades Council, and the Philadelphia Revitalization and Education Program. A number of partners developed its 142 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 training design. They include members of the building trades, the black elected officials of Philadelphia, PREP, the Philadelphia Office of the AFL-CIO, Cheyney University, Berean Institute, and other concerned citizens. DAP is an economic development program, not a job training program. DAP was and still is designed to provide economic opportunities to minorities who live in the city. Through NTI and this economic opportunity plan, DAP has placed 41 participants into different construction 15 trades. Note that I said apprenticeships, not just members of the union. The key point is that city residents are indeed moving into unions on a career track that will allow them to earn self-sufficient wages, learn a profession, and in time possibly move into owning their own construction companies able to take on city construction contracts. Without NTI, these new apprentices may not have occurred. In the past, major projects did 143 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 allow city residents to work as union members, but not initially as apprentices. This format has led to, I believe, a stark lack of city residents in general, and minorities in particular, not joining the trades ranks as journeymen in the different 8 unions and 29 trades in Philadelphia Building 9 Trades Council. 10 69 other participants gained 11 employment related to NTI and other 12 nonconstruction employment. The participants 13 learned from the beginning of their training 14 to change their attitudes and values that may 15 have precluded them from seeking to improve 16 themselves. DAP's training model provides case management, behavior modification, life skills, and academic training designed to move our participants into the construction trades. However, we have found many employers have sought out our participants due to the training and standards we demand from our participants in order for them to be successful. 144 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 One area DAP will improve in the coming year for NTI is to have more contractors, both minority and majority, sponsor our participants. Many trades will need to recruit apprentices to take the place of those who are leaving the trades due to retirement or other reasons. As NTI continues, and neighborhood development and blight removal, specific trades will take on more apprentices that we expect to look more like the current demographics of Philadelphia.

Contractors, informed through direct meetings, prebid meetings, the city procurement department, and others who are notified of the availability of city residents, will find our apprentices from our program. Through NTI, that provides a city -- provides the city agencies a list of apprentices available to be placed on sites to be sponsored by contractors through the trades to meet and/or exceed the goals for city 145 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 residents as described in the economic opportunity plan. NTI has achieved unprecedented success for the city in terms of employment opportunities. The Work Force Development Training Program has provided career options for city residents, not just jobs. DAP expects that this next year of NTI activity will increase the number of participants gaining apprenticeships, as we have developed relationships and protocols internally and externally to better serve the residents of this city through the Neighborhood Transformation Initiative. Madam Chair, I want to thank you for allowing me to make this presentation.

Thank you both very much, and thank you for your patience. CDCs. Steve Mullen, Philadelphia Association of CDCs. Rick Sauer, Philadelphia Association of CDCs, please come forward. Blaine Stoddart, Partnership CDC; 146 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 Steve Culbertson, Frankford CDC; Claudia Sherrod, Point Breeze CDC; D.K. Johnson, United Communities CDC. All right. After Mr. Sauer, then, is John McDonald, IMPACT Services, here? Mr. McDonald here? Is Guillermo Salas, HACE, here? Is Manny Delgado, APM, here? All right. Thank you. Thank you for your patience. Please identify yourself for the record and begin your testimony.

Thank you, Councilwoman Blackwell and other members of Council. My name is Rick Sauer, and I am the Executive Director of the Philadelphia Association of Community Development Corporations, which is the citywide association of 80 local CDCs and other organizations working to rebuild communities and revitalize our neighborhoods. And I want to thank you for the opportunity to testify on sort of the wide 147 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 range of issues around housing, community development that are before you today. I am primarily here about creating a Housing Trust Fund for Philadelphia. And seed funding for this historic initiative is identified in the '05 NTI statement and budget. And, as you well know, legislation to establish a trust fund was recently introduced by yourself and Councilwoman Reynolds-Brown. PACDC initially proposed creating a Philadelphia Housing Trust Fund back about a year ago, when 15 Council Members endorsed such a fund as part of our Invest In Neighborhoods agenda. In following extensive research on Housing Trust Funds around the country -- which there is over 275 now, including about 51 right here in Pennsylvania -- we issued a report last fall outlining our proposal for creating a trust fund for Philadelphia. I think we all know that it is no 25 secret that housing resources in Philadelphia 148 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 are inadequate. The need for affordable housing dwarfs the number of units we are able to build each year. And while the city is committed to a significant pipeline of proposed rental and homeownership development projects, given current levels of funding it is going to take years to actually get these units built. Also, the wait list for city home repair programs are also years in length. And at the same time, while it was mentioned by Kevin Hanna, who testified earlier, the resources we are receiving from the federal government to address this crisis are steadily shrinking. In fact, since 1993, the real dollars the city has invested in housing production have shrunk by more than 60 percent. Without significant new funding dedicated to addressing our housing needs and spurring neighborhood revitalization, the lots cleared and assembled under NTI will remain vacant and many of our neighborhoods will 149 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 continue to decline. PACDC has formed a broad-based coalition of over a hundred organizations, including CDCs, members of the Philadelphia Affordable Housing Coalition, banks, the Eastern Pennsylvania Organizing Project, GPUAC, ACORN, and many others, to advocate for the creation of a $20 million per year Philadelphia Housing Trust Fund. They all recognize how investing in affording housing means increased stability for families and our city. Stable neighborhoods attract businesses, people, and investment. Here is what a $20 million Philadelphia Housing Trust Fund would do. It would help nearly 3,000 families a year, including creating nearly 400 more rental units and mixed-income homeownership homes; increasing housing production by city agencies by more than 80 percent; an increase in the supply of accessible homes; it would also help more than 1200 additional homeowners with home repairs each and every year; and would help 150 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 prevent homelessness being experienced by 1,300 families a year. The trust fund will also support neighborhoods with new investment to promote revitalization and improve the quality of life there. And in return for an initial investment of trust fund dollars, Philadelphia will leverage an additional $50 million in funding every year from outside sources; such as banks, investors, and the Pennsylvania Housing Finance Agency. It seemed clear to us, when we were talking about creating a trust fund, that it would have significant economic impact on the city. So to get a more accurate analysis, we hired E Consult Corporation to do a study.

They found the trust fund's investment will have an extremely significant positive economic impact, spurring $116 million in total economic activity for the city each year, while creating jobs and building the city's tax base. 151 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 Members of the Council should have received a copy of this report right here. And Steve Mullen, who was here earlier this morning, I believe, plans on returning here this afternoon to be able to testify on their findings. Recognizing the broad range of housing needs across the city, the trust fund is structured to be flexible so that it can address the specific housing needs of individual neighborhoods and residents, as well as the plans of local community-based organizations. And to ensure an equitable distribution of funds, half of the trust fund resources are targeted meeting the housing needs of those earning below 30 percent of area median income, which is approximately 20,000 a year for a family of four, while the other half will be used to address the needs of working families earning between 30 and 115 percent of median. Recognizing the challenges faced by the disabled community from the city's current 152 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 housing stock, the trust fund also balances the need to increase the creation of accessible homes, while ensuring reasonable cost controls are in place. Transparency and accountability have been critical to the success of Housing Trust Funds around the country. And we believe that it is essential that the Philadelphia Housing Trust Fund have an oversight Board that includes significant and meaningful community representation, and that a competitive RFP process is used to distribute funds. However, to avoid adding bureaucratic layers to our city government, the trust fund should be administered by staff from existing city agencies and programs. We believe that the accountability and transparency aspects of the trust fund contained in the legislation that has been introduced in Council needs to be strengthened to ensure the integrity of the trust fund, and we expect amendments to be offered to address these. 153 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 I would also like to briefly comment specifically on the funding sources contained in the trust fund ordinance that has been introduced. Bill 040594 supports two of our proposed funding sources, which Pat Smith mentioned earlier in her testimony that the Administration also supports. The first is including Philadelphia in the state's optional county affordable Housing Trust Fund Program, known as Act 137, which basically allows the county to double document recording fees and to use that revenue for affordable housing. 51 other Pennsylvania counties currently do this. And it is projected the source would generate $11 million per year, every year, for Philadelphia. Secondly, one and a half million in funding from NTI to help seed the trust fund is included in the NTI ordinance, as well as the Housing Trust Fund ordinance. And while we are glad to see this commitment of funding, we request the language 154 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 in the NTI program statement be modified to make the seed funding more flexible and usable. One of the benefits of the trust fund is the dollars it will leverage for trust-fund-supported projects. However, we are concerned that requiring the private sector to also provide matching funds up front of the trust fund may not be realistic and will slow the use of these funds. Also key, we believe that eventually funding level for the trust fund must reach at least $20 million per year in dedicated revenue for the trust fund to succeed, and have identified two additional sources to achieve this. The first is the increase in the city's growing housing and redevelopment assistance allocation from the state. And, secondly, a portion of the growth in the future real estate transfer tax revenue collected by the city.

2004 is a critical year in Philadelphia housing policy. As NTI funding 155 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 is dwindling, we need to focus on building on the groundwork NTI has laid and in providing the resources needed to achieve our housing and community development goals. Creating and implementing a Housing Trust Fund is a historic step forward for the city. We have worked hard to strike a reasonable and appropriate balance of competing demands that will result in an effective, sustainable source of new revenue for housing Philadelphians and spurring neighborhood revitalization. We urge you to pass Bill 040594 with amendments and support bringing funding up to a level of $20 million per year. I would also like to just briefly touch on a couple of other key housing community development issues before the Council today. The first is restoring funding for the second year of the Targeted Basic System Repair Program. I think we will all acknowledge that there were some initial startup issues with this program. But now ten 156 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 CDCs are engaged in targeted efforts to assist homeowners with home repair. Unfortunately, the previously announced $2 million in funding for the second year of this program has been eliminated in the proposed NTI budget. And we urge the city to follow through on its commitment to these ten neighborhoods to support this program for the full two years. Secondly, we support the addition of the million in new acquisition funding to 14 be issued through RFPs to support rental and 15 homeownership development projects. We also want to see the city immediately implement the proposed and long-discussed recycling agreement whereby acquisition funds currently being expended will be recycled for future acquisition use, as well. Thirdly, funding for economic development programs. We are glad to see the city has met the mandate to use 5 percent of its CDBG funds for economic development 157 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 activities by CDCs. But the funding that's proposed in the consolidated plan is a significant cut from the current funding year levels. While we are glad to see that the proposed Main Street Program funding will help address this funding shortfall, we don't think this funding should be viewed as a means to supplement our -- it should be used to supplement existing funding and not to replace existing funding that has been in place. It does not make sense for the city to invest hundreds of millions of dollars through NTI and then to reduce CDBG funds to support our neighborhood economies. Finally, we want to encourage the city to economize on their administrative costs. We continue to see a trend of the city's allocating less than half of its CDBG funding directly to programs that go on the streets and a significant amount of funding to administrative and program-delivery cost, as well as repaying previous Section 108 loans. While the city is faced with a cut 158 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 in CDBG funding for next year, it is proposing to increase funding on administrative costs. Given the high funding levels and the fact that the city receives its CDBG allocation because of the large housing community development needs, we think those dollars should be directly spent on addressing the needs of neighborhoods and residents, and urge the city to cut its administrative and program-delivery cost. We would like to acknowledge the past support City Council and the city's agencies have provided to local CDC communities and believe these investments have paid significant dividends to our neighborhoods and residents. PACDC and its members and allies look forward to working with you to better address our housing needs and advance neighborhood revitalization.

And while we realize the city has difficult decisions to make on how to allocate its limited resources, that's exactly why we urge the city to create and implement a $20 159 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 million Philadelphia Housing Trust Fund now and to allocate our other community development resources in a way that makes this partnership as effective as possible. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Thank you for your work and for speaking on behalf of all the CDCs. (Applause.)

Thank you, Mr. Sauer. Good afternoon.

Good afternoon, Council Chair Blackwell and members of Council who are here and those who are elsewhere. I have waited three hours to testify, I am here -- I will be brief. I am here for one purpose --

Please identify yourself.

I am D.K. Johnson, I am sorry, Executive Director of the United Communities Community Development Corporation in Northeast Philadelphia. I am here to 160 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 support the Housing Trust Fund, Bill 040594, and all the amendments to bring it up to $20 million per year. (Applause.)

We have experienced declining funds for affordable housing at the city, state, and federal levels in recent decades. In order to keep Philadelphia competitive with other cities, people looking for affordable housing can go elsewhere, we have a very small housing pie, and it needs to be bigger. Our CDC has a target area bounded by 4th Street, South 9th Street, Mifflin Street, and Wolf Street, the 7th Street Neighborhood Planning Area. And with the programs that are in place today, we are able to stabilize the perimeter of this target area, but we are not effectively able to address the deteriorated core of this area. It has a lot of vacant land, like many other areas in the city; and it remains 161 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 largely untouched, needing further housing subsidy programs. It is unrealistic to expect that market-rate housing will come in and take place in this area and many others in the city with lower property values. We also need to have the NTI program come and proceed into our 7th Street NTI district so that we will have more cleared spaces for redevelopment. We are ready and fully capable of undertaking more and larger affordable housing projects. We simply need the Council's support in passing this much-needed legislation and in funding it fully to make it possible for us to do this. We can't sit back and expect all the vacant land to attract market-rate development. It is just not going to happen. And good, affordable housing development in this neighborhood will spur reinvestment near by. So I ask for Council's votes on the Housing Trust Fund. Thank you. 162 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 (Applause.)

Thank you, Mr. Johnson. David Koppish. And also Leona Keitt. Leona Keitt and David Koppish come forward. (Applause.)

Is Phil Lord here? Phil Lord? What about Galen Tyler, Kensington Welfare Rights? No. 13 What about Jimmy Shrode, Disabled in Action. Okay. All right. You might as well stay. So it will be Leona Keitt, and Jim Shrode come forward. Thank you for your patience. Please begin your testimony.

Good afternoon. My name is Leona Keitt. I would like to thank Councilwoman for allowing me to testify today. I would like to thank Jannie Blackwell for amending and making the trust fund at $20 million and using real estate transfer funds 163 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 for it. Thank you. May name is Leona Keitt, and I am on behalf of over 150,000 physically disabled consumers who live in Philadelphia. Being disabled myself, I know firsthand how difficult it is to locate and secure affordable accessible housing. I became disabled in 1998. I lived in an inaccessible apartment with my four children. My sons had to learn responsibility before they were ready to. My older two sons became my care-giver instead of me taking care of them. Since our home was inaccessible, my sons carried me up the 32 stairs that were located at the front entrance of our home. Once we finally got into our home, their work was not done. I was unable to prepare meals for my children, since I could not reach any of the appliances or cabinets; therefore, all shopping, cooking, and meal preparations were done by them. In addition to our inaccessible kitchen, we also had an inaccessible bathroom. 164 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 I was not able to get into the bathroom because the doorways were not wide enough for my wheelchair. My sons, again, would have to lift me and assist me in toiletting and bathing. This was a very embarrassing and degrading experience for me. I was also virtually a prisoner in my home. Because I could not pass freely into any other rooms, I was trapped in my own home. I became very depressed because I knew who care for my family but was not able to because I was in an inaccessible home. My difficulties grew worse and I was eventually forced to enter a nursing home. My children were split between family and the foster care system. I lived in a nursing home for 11 months before I could not take it anymore. I moved into an only accessible unit, which was a one bedroom. My two sons and I shared one bedroom, but DHS would not allow my daughter to return home until she had her own room. It took me another year before I could find a 165 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 two-bedroom accessible unit The two-bedroom unit was only large enough for me and my sons. It took another two years before I could be successful in locating and securing a three-bedroom unit for our family. It took over four years for our family to be reunited, and we are still trying to overcome the emotional pain that that situation caused for all of us. Now life is very different because we live in a fully accessible unit that we can afford. I now come and go freely, without any assistance. I shop, I cook, I clean. I am the mother I used to be. I now have full time employment, and I could provide for my family. Most important, I have my pride back. However, this is only one story, and there are still thousands of others like me who are still searching and waiting for affordable, accessible housing in the city alone. Now, I am working at Liberty 166 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 Resources advocating for the housing rights of others. I want to thank City Council for giving me this opportunity to tell my story. And I would like to urge all of you to make sure that Philadelphia seizes this opportunity to create a $20 million per year affordable Housing Trust Fund. Bill No. 040594 is a good start, but it needs to be amended in order to create nothing less than a $20 million per year Housing Trust Fund. Thank you. (Applause.)

Go ahead.

My name is Jimmy Shrode, and I am here on behalf of Disabled in Action of Pennsylvania as an advocate for housing for people with disabilities that is affordable, accessible, visitable, and, above all, integrated. There is a severe housing crisis in the City of Philadelphia for poor people and people with disabilities. We are a part of 167 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 the Philadelphia Affordable Housing Coalition whose mission is to increase housing resources to create affordable, accessible, and integrated housing for people who make under $20,000 a year. We would like to thank you for amending the trust fund bill to include $20 million and also money from a real estate transfer tax. We feel that this $20 million fund is going to help bring much-needed housing money to the City of Philadelphia, much-needed housing to over 60,000 families in the City of Philadelphia. According to a study released by our coalition, the City of Philadelphia has the largest population of disabled people in the United States. According to the 2000 census, there are 354,409 people with disabilities. 151,250 of them are people with mobility disabilities. 3 percent. 168 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 To the city's shame, there is an overwhelming lack of affordable and accessible housing for people with disabilities. There are only 2,100 accessible subsidized units in the entire city for people with disabilities, in which there are long waiting lists to get in. In OHCD's budget it claims there are 66,000 people with disabilities in need of housing. That's six times more than seniors and ten times more than people with AIDS. And, yet, the city proposes to do very little for us and acts as if Section 811 housing is a housing choice. It is a housing choice that institutionalizes and segregates us as disabled people. I refuse to believe that it is a real housing choice until the city proposes then to segregate all minorities on the same basis, then that will be justice. Partnering with nursing homes to build housing which isolates and stigmatizes us is never acceptable. I would also like to point out, of the 22 families that were displaced to make 169 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 room for Jefferson Square, three of those families had people with disabilities in them. And one of them, the head of household was a person with disabilities. The city moved them out to make room for Jefferson Square, and their whereabouts are still unknown. The city spends more money on shelters and transitional housing and DHS placement for children than it does on permanent, affordable, accessible housing for people who make less than $20,000 a year. It takes $25,000 a year for DHS just to house one child, when that money could go to house the family, instead. Therefore, Disabled in Action, in addition to 90 other organizations, supports the Housing Trust Fund to be created to provide Philadelphia with badly needed new resources for housing, complement the Neighborhood Transformation Initiative, increase city housing production by 80 percent, assist 1,200 additional homeowners per year with home repairs, increase the supply of accessible housing, and prevent over 170 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 1,000 families each year from becoming homeless. We fully support Bill 040594, the trust fund, to create a $20 million a year affordable Housing Trust Fund. Nothing less than million per year will begin to make a 8 dent in our city's crisis in decent, 9 affordable, accessible housing. 10 We urge you to include Philadelphia 11 in the state's Act 137 County Housing Trust 12 Fund Program, which allows counties to double 13 document recording fees and use the increased 14 revenue for affordable housing. 5 million 16 in NTI trust funds as seed money for the 17 Housing Trust Fund.

Furthermore, the trust 18 fund must mandate that 10 percent of all 19 housing built with this money be accessible 20 for people with physical disabilities, and 4 percent for people with sensory disabilities, and all of the new housing must be 100 percent visitable. We urge that Bill 040594 be amended in order to add these revenue sources to 171 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 create this trust fund. The city has constantly found the will to exempt law firms from paying taxes with the promise of a new building near 30th Street Station. You found the will to grant Comcast, a growing monopoly in the country, a 20-year tax exemption for its new headquarters. The city has bent over backwards for the Phillies and the Eagles to keep them here by building them two new stadiums. And now at NTI we build green spaces so that marigolds will have housing, and yet human beings won't. Don't tell me the city can do nothing for us. We pay taxes. We are citizens of this city. If this august body be truly democratic and listens to the will of the people, rather than special interests, then do this for us. Thank you very much.

Thank you, Mr. Shrode. (Applause.) 172 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525

Jeff Thul and Tom Earle, Liberty Resources, are you here? Jeff Thul? Come forward. Is Tom Earle here? All right. We welcome you. Thank you very much for the testimony. Thank you for your patience. Please identify yourself and make your testimony.

Good afternoon. My name is Jeff Thul. I am from Liberty Resources. On behalf of the Liberty Resources, I would first like to thank the members of City Council for the opportunity to testify here today. Liberty Resources is a place where consumers with disabilities in Philadelphia and the surrounding counties can receive support, advocacy, and services in order for them to live independently in their own community. Liberty Resources serves over 3,200 people with disabilities annually. Out of these 3,200 people, approximately 700 people 173 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 with disabilities each year contact Liberty Resources for assistance with locating affordable accessible housing. Because of the dire unmet housing needs of our consumers, Liberty Resources has joined with the myriad of other community organizations, the Philadelphia Affordable Housing Coalition, to effectively address the housing crisis facing Philadelphians with disabilities. Liberty Resources recognizes that the work that OHCD has put into this plan, considering the significant reduction in anticipated budgetary resources provided in this Year 30 plan. It is with this disheartening fiscal reality in mind that all of us housing advocates, consumers of housing, and those seeking housing, together with OHCD, must develop and support innovative and creative solutions like the Philadelphia Housing Trust Fund to help solve our housing crisis in Philadelphia. Sadly, Philadelphia is one of the 174 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 only large cities in the United States that does not have a Housing Trust Fund. For our testimony today, we have identified some problem areas in the currently proposed Year 30 plan that are potentially troubling. First, OHCD hints that they are aware of the housing needs of persons with a disability in the city and state, that there are approximately 66,000 persons with disabilities that have a housing need. However, we are baffled by the manner in which the need is categorized in the strategic plan. 4, Estimated Housing Needs, persons with disabilities are listed in a category designated Nonhomeless and, in turn, prioritized as such. We believe that this is an inaccurate assessment. The reason being that many persons with disabilities are forced into unnecessary institutionalization because there is a lack of affordable accessible housing in the city. When disabled persons can no longer 175 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 live in their homes because they are not wheelchair accessible and affordable to those who can live on less than $20,000 a year, they are forced into very costly institutional care at a great expense to taxpayers. Many of the 66,000 persons with a disability who have been recognized in this plan as nonhomeless are in fact harbored in an institution, either a nursing home or boarding home or shelter. Institutionalization is never a solution to ending homelessness, and most of the people we meet would never consider this an option and certainly not a home. Therefore, we believe that most in this population are in fact homeless. The real answer to meeting the needs of our population is to provide more permanent, affordable, accessible housing so that they can then be considered nonhomeless. If the city were to rethink their approach to housing this population and create more viable options for persons with a disability, then our city would, in return, 176 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 save thousands of dollars that would have been dumped into institutional care for each person housed in their own home. To sum this up, providing permanent homes would save the city money. Second, the plan omits the additional $10 million obtained last year by the Philadelphia Affordable Housing Coalition to supplement the city's basic systems repair, accessible modifications, and housing production programs.

These three programs specifically target the need of our most vulnerable housing population, those making $20,000 or less a year. As identified in a comprehensive study by the University of Pennsylvania, Closing The Gap, the city has a crisis-level shortage of housing for those earning $20,000 or less. While OHCD acknowledges this crisis, stating that persons living on less than $20,000 annually do have the most pressing housing needs, its proposed plan has dedicated 177 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 less than percent of its total budget to the creation of more affordable homes for this population. Considering that the total resource allocation for this budget increased by $84 million, compared to the preliminary consolidated plan, it is shameful that only 8 percent has been reserved for those with the most dire needs. The math simply does not add up. Addressing crisis by allocating 8 percent of the entire budget falls woefully short of the mark and is unacceptable. It is this population, those making $20,000 or less per year, that the city must focus its priorities. And the solution is to create a Housing Trust Fund in Philadelphia. Bill No. 040594 is a good start, but it needs to be amended in order to create a $20 million per year affordable Housing Trust Fund. Nothing less than $20 million per year will begin to make a dent in our city's crisis in decent affordable accessible housing. Lastly, on a positive note, we 178 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 applaud the section of the plan where by OHCD requires that percent of all newly 4 constructed dwelling units be designed and 5 built as accessible units with people with 6 fiscal disabilities, mobility impairments, and 7 4 percent for people with hearing and vision 8 impairments. This supplements the momentum that the city has gained through Councilwoman Blackwell's reintroduction of a housing and disability ordinance. Let's all continue to build on this momentum with the establishment of a permanent Housing Trust Fund for the City of Philadelphia Thank you.

Thank you very much. Francis Carney, United Communities of Southeast Philadelphia. Liz Robinson, Energy Coordinating Agency. Kai Sjogren and Sister Margaret McKenna from New Jerusalem. 179 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 We will be ready for questions shortly, all of you who are waiting. We are just about there. Thank you for your patience, too. Please identify yourself for the record and begin your testimony.

Thank you. Good afternoon, Councilwoman Blackwell. I am Liz Robinson. I direct the Energy Coordinating Agency of Philadelphia. Now, my testimony is going to focus on two issues, energy affordability and homelessness prevention. We are now at a critical juncture for energy affordability in Philadelphia for a number of reasons. Natural gas prices have almost doubled in the last four years, creating an unprecedented crisis for low-income gas customers and our local gas utility. PGW issued a record-breaking 135,000 termination notices this spring and is now, as we sit here, in the process of terminating thousands of customers for nonpayment. 180 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 PGW expects to shut off 35,000 households this year. Likewise, PECO expects to shut off 68,000 households systemwide. This will set new records for both utilities. As ECA and other researchers have shown, utility terminations lead to housing abandonment, homelessness, and even fatal fires, as people turn to desperate measures to provide heat, light, and water in their homes. The new building code, which has just been adopted statewide, the Uniform Construction Code, which embodies the International Energy Conservation Code 2004, has just gone into effect in Philadelphia. The national Energy Star standard is now under active consideration at both the city and state levels for affordable housing and market-rate housing. For all of these reasons, ECA and OHCD need to be spending more time, not less, in training and working with architects, builders, housing developers, and community development corporations, as well as with housing inspectors and city code officials to 181 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 ensure that affordable housing in Philadelphia is truly affordable. Why use scarce public dollars to subsidize the construction of an affordable housing unit if its low-income occupants cannot afford to live there? Under the RDA Affordable Housing Program, about 350 to 400 new and rehabbed residential units are built each year according to the City of Philadelphia's small building specifications, a major component of which is an energy-efficiency requirement that all units be built so that the associated utility costs are as low as possible. A considerable amount of time and experience has gone into the energy-related aspects of the specs. ECA and OHCD have just completed a new contractors' guide to help architects, builders, and contractors follow them more easily. When compared to housing that is not built to city specs, an RDA unit will save on average $110 per year in natural gas and about $25 per year on electricity. 182 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 This means that, over a ten-year period, a low-income resident will save about $1500. The energy savings in the 350 units built per year amount to about $500,000 over ten years. To assure that RDA housing is in fact meeting the energy specs, regular on-site inspections are required. Currently the city has only one inspector, the Energy Coordinating Agency, which is contracted at $75,000 a year to perform all RDA inspections and related trainings. Reducing this contract will certainly have a negative impact on the detailed inspection and monitoring process and will result in higher utility bills for low-income residents. If only 50 out of the current 350 units now being inspected annually were not built to the spec, the additional cost to the low-income residents in these units would total about $5,500 per year, or $55,000 over 183 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 ten years. This increase in utility costs is more than twice the amount proposed to be cut in the inspection contract, and this represents just one year of construction.

This is a program which has returned handsomely on the increment the city has made by making housing more affordable to maintain year after year, by improving the quality of housing, and by increasing the knowledge and skills of the housing community in the region. As we know all too well, when low-income people cannot pay their gas bills, that impacts immediately on PGW, which in turn impacts directly on the city itself. This year for the first time PGW is unable to pay its $18 million annual fee in lieu of taxes to the city. For all these reasons, it is essential to maintain the ECA technical services contract at least at its current level. ECA has recently realized that the city specs, which were developed several years before the national Energy Star standard, are 184 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 in fact comparable to Energy Star. We are now in the process of rating a number of units to see how they perform on the home energy rating system scale. Thus far, all four homes we have analyzed have passed. This means that the set of standards developed in Philadelphia a decade ago and painstakingly improved over the years are in fact comparable to the Energy Star standard developed by the EPA. This is extremely important because Energy Star has become increasingly accepted and adopted all across the country as a standard for energy efficiency. ECA is also working with the Pennsylvania Housing Finance Agency, PHFA, to have them adopt the Energy Star standard for affordable housing all across the Commonwealth. Real progress is now occurring in their homeownership choice program. Philadelphia has been the leader for the rest of the state in this area. Philadelphia needs to continue to provide leadership by extending 185 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 the Energy Star standard beyond affordable housing to market-rate housing, as well. Now that hundreds of new housing units are being built in the city, it is critical that these units be energy efficient and durable. The Energy Star standard needs to become the minimum acceptable energy standard for all housing in Philadelphia. The Energy Star rating on a home has market value. As energy prices climb, consumers are increasingly aware of energy efficiency in new homes. Energy efficiency not only means lower monthly bills, it also means higher-quality construction and longer-lasting appliances. Like the Good Housekeeping seal, the Energy Star label tells consumers they have found a quality product. Tax abatements for all buildings, whether residential or commercial, should be tied to Energy Star or equivalent standards. Certainly all public subsidies, 186 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 whether CDBG, HUD, state funding, or tax credit financing, should be used to build energy-efficient housing. Energy efficiency and affordability can give Philadelphia a competitive advantage in its efforts to attract the middle class back into the city to live and work. We urge City Council to fund ECA's technical services contract at least at its full level. Further, we urge Council to pass a resolution requiring that all housing built with public funding or tax incentives meet or exceed the Energy Star standards. Furthermore, we urge the Administration to use the Energy Star standards in all publicly funded home repair and rehabilitation programs, as well as in new market-rate construction. There are dozens of programs in Philadelphia, from lead abatement, to community revitalization, which are attempting to solve problems of public health, neighborhood deterioration, and blight. However, if they are replacing 187 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 windows or furnaces or making other needed repairs, and doing so with energy-inefficient materials, they are merely solving one problem and creating another. Energy affordability is a crisis in Philadelphia for all-low income people.

As we have seen from newspaper reports of the recent PUC public hearings, PGW cannot solve this problem by itself. Leadership at all levels of government, city, state and federal, is urgently needed to create an energy-efficient and affordable future for all of us. Homelessness prevention. ECA believes it is critical for Philadelphia to continue to operate homelessness prevention efforts and to evaluate them in order to refine the program. Given the demographics of Philadelphia, the financial problems now facing the city, the sluggish national economy, and ballooning federal deficit, combined with rising energy prices, record levels of utility termination and mortgage 188 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 foreclosure, it is safe to assume we are in for another period of rising homelessness. The city simply does not have the resources to provide emergency shelter for all the homeless people who request it. It now costs $24,000 a year to provide shelter for the average family of four. It is important to note that, in Philadelphia, this average family actually lives more than a year in shelter. In contrast, it costs approximately $1,000 to prevent homelessness for that same family. The city must work harder to find ways to prevent homelessness and to reduce the demand for shelter. Prevention is an infinitely more preferable response to homelessness than is shelter. Not only is it far less expensive, but it is much better social work. Sparing a family the indignity and disruption of emergency shelter helps to preserve the fabric and cohesion of the family. Most people find that losing their 189 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 home brings a loss of self-respect and self-confidence, as well. This is supported by the fact that the single best predictor of shelter stay is previous shelter stay. Since 1996, ECA's community-based homeless prevention program has served 42,723 clients. Emergency housing payments were paid to 7,279 households during this seven years. The program also secured full-time employment for 817 of these clients. The program has been evaluated twice by the University of Pennsylvania, and both times been found to be highly effective in preventing homelessness. A study of homelessness prevention performance show that the program prevented homelessness among 99 percent of program participants. ECA is working to improve the program even further by refining the targeting of clients and forging relationships with shelters to help them move their clients more quickly into permanent unsubsidized housing. The most recent analysis, which was 190 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 performed by OESS, found that ECA's program reduced shelter stay for clients. ECA believes it is critically important for the city to have a comprehensive plan to address homelessness, and that plan must incorporate prevention. It will be essential to hire an outside evaluator to assist the city in evaluating its current homelessness prevention efforts and helping it to plan for the most effective use of its increasingly scarce public resources. Thank you for your commitment to energy efficiency, housing affordability, and to a more livable city.

Thank you very much. (Applause.)

Is Rosemary Cubas, Community Leadership Institute, here? Habeebah Ali and Charles Thompson, Raise of Hope? Robert Meek, Disabilities Law 191 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 Project? Amanda Schreiber and Stephanie Gillard Center for Social Change from Temple? Wendy Hyatt. Okay. Three people have come in. We have three people who came in since we spoke, and that should be our list, unless someone else comes in, then we will do questions. Okay? Thank you. Have a seat, please identify yourself. Thank you for your patience.

Good afternoon, Councilwoman Blackwell. My name is Stephanie Gillard. I am here because I am concerned about affordable housing. Right now I am in a situation where I have nine children in DHS that are not able to come home because I do not have a big enough house for them. It is very stressful not to be able to afford a home for my family. Constantly my kids are asking me, "Mom, did you find a house yet? Mom, can we come home yet?" And I have to tell them no. 192 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 I have nine kids, five girls and four boys, and me. And I just can't afford a house that big. DHS have lots of rules about how many bedrooms I need and which kids can share a room. I can't afford those rules. The judge already court ordered my kids to come home, but they can't because I don't have big enough housing. DHS tried to get me housing, but the lists were full. Philadelphia does not have enough affordable housing for families who want to be together. Right now I am getting training at the Temple Center for Social Policies, Working to Unite Families Program, and there are women in my class with the same situation as me. These women love and want to be with their kids, but they can't because they need affordable housing. Councilwoman, we support Bill 23 040594, but it doesn't go far enough. The trust fund needs to be at least $20 million each year to be effective in creating 193 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 affordable housing in Philadelphia for the families that desperately need it. Thank you, Councilwoman, for listening to my speech.

Thank you. (Applause.)

My name is Wendy Hyatt. I am the Housing Case Manager At Women Against Abuse. I am here today in support of the creation of a $20 million affordable Housing Trust Fund. Bill 040594, sponsored by Councilwoman Blackwell, is a good start. But as the person who spoke before me said, it does not go far enough. We thank you and Debra McColloch for coming to our community meeting last Wednesday. We now need this bill to be amended so that it results in a $20 million Housing Trust Fund originally asked for. Women Against Abuse is also a supporter of the Affordable Housing Coalition. I am speaking to you as someone whose job it is to know every type of 194 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 available housing in Philadelphia. Every day I meet with women and their children to help them navigate this system. These meetings are frank and limited. Public housing waiting lists are closed. Security deposit funds have run out. Transitional housing programs have lengthy waiting lists. These women are frustrated and often trapped. Faced with these options and fixed incomes, many people fall into despair at a time when they most need their courage. Currently our emergency shelter can house only 46 women and children. Our Transitional Housing Program consists of a mere 12 units. Currently there are no 18 domestic violence services for male or transgendered survivors of domestic violence. We receive approximately 15 to 20 shelter-related requests per day. When someone leaves an abusive relationship, they often have nowhere to go. This is particularly true of those with few resources and the disabled. 195 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 Lack of affordable housing and long waiting lists for assisted housing mean that many women and their children are forced to choose between physical and psychological safety and the uncertain dangers of homelessness. For example, many battered men and women have to leave their jobs because of workplace stalking. Disturbances by the abuser and accounts of police visits damage their reputation as a reliable tenant. One often leaves suddenly, with no 14 money having been saved. Survivors must purchase clothing, furniture, and house items all over again. For many, these hurdles are just too much. When their 60th day comes at the shelter, they return home hoping to survive, hoping to wait it out Sometimes a survivor will hastily form a new relationship in exchange for housing and become vulnerable to new violence. They need access to safe, decent, affordable housing in order to permanently end 196 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 the cycle of violence. I would like to share with you the story of Lisa. Lisa was attacked by her husband. He kicked in the door and beat her with the vacuum. When he tried to go for his gun, Lisa fought him until the police arrived. Because of severe injuries in her hands that she sustained from defensive wounds, Lisa had to quit her nursing job. She came into the shelter and applied for transitional housing. Two days before Christmas she and her four-year-old son had reached the limit of their stay. The transitional housing program she was accepted to still did not have an available apartment. She slept on the couch at her brother's house for a month, waiting for space to open up. During this time, she also began a new semester at college and continued with her son's speech therapy. Fortunately, Lisa was able to hold on to all of these things and fight the onset of severe depression and is now in transitional housing. She is also beginning 197 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 an internship as a Congressional Aide. Lisa is a success story. But in eight months, she is one of only six women from the shelter who were able to enter our transitional housing program.

Taking into consideration the continual changes in federal housing policy and changes in local housing markets, we need to develop a response to the transitional and permanent housing needs of those who are survivors of domestic violence. Help to end domestic violence has to come from the top and be supported by local city administrators. The city must send a message that it cares about these survivors. We are grateful that the Mayor has designated funding to support the increase in domestic violence shelter beds and hotline services. But the domestic violence community desperately needs your support for affordable housing. And we are asking that you support in full the housing initiatives proposed here today, including the amendment to Bill 040594. 198 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 Thank you for your time. )

Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Would Steve Culbertson, Frankford CDC, and I saw Claudia Sherrod, Point Breeze CDC, come forward. Thank you for returning and your patience. Please identify yourself and make your testimony.

My name is Steve Culbertson, and I am the Executive Director of the Frankford Community Development Corporation. I am a member of the Philadelphia Association of Community Development Corporations. And I am here today in support of all of the bills that have been presented before Council. I would like to thank Councilwoman Blackwell, President Verna for allowing me the opportunity to testify. I do not have written testimony. I would like for a moment for us to suspend the current circumstances surrounding the use of 199 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 taxes for revenues for the City of Philadelphia and think rationally for a moment about the use of the real estate transfer tax which is gained by sale of houses between two individual parties. To me it makes complete rational sense to use the real estate transfer tax to fund housing in the City of Philadelphia. And even if we could figure out a way so that the real estate transfer tax continues to give to the city the same amount of revenue or slightly more revenue each year into the future, while still supporting the Housing Trust Fund, I would think that that would be a good compromise. And, so, I would like to encourage Council to think about how we might use the real estate transfer tax, which indeed many of us pay when we build affordable or market-rate housing, to fund the Housing Trust Fund in perpetuity. It has been testified any number of times today by many friends of mine that we have a reduction in the amount of resources 200 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 available from Community Development Block Grant and HOME funds to the City of Philadelphia to build affordable housing. And it seems to me that this is a ready source, even if we would say we are not going to use it for the next couple of years, to use the real estate transfer tax. And, so, that's really the only thing that I want to say today. Is that we need Housing Trust Fund, and we need it funded at a reasonable level. And if we can figure out in the future how to use this source and maybe other sources to build more affordable and mixed-income housing, it would be a good thing. Thanks.

Thank you very much. And I will say that I personally agree with you. Thank you, Mr. Culbertson. (Applause.)

Thank you. Ms. Sherrod.

Claudia 201 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 Sherrod. S. Chairman Councilwoman Jannie Blackwell, in absence of our President Anna Verna, to our distinguished members of City Council of the City of Philadelphia, it is a pleasure to appear before you this afternoon. Thank you for inviting me to testify before your committee. I am pleased to come before you today to discuss the important work associated with community and economic development in the Point Breeze community. This afternoon I will highlight a few of the organization's accomplishments and discuss the importance of working with all existing organizations in a geographical region. First, no organization should be perceived as the only viable developer in the South Philadelphia area or entitled to receive an abundance of resources to the detriment of other groups. 202 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 Although we are a small grass-roots, community-based organization, we are dedicated to improving the quality of life for every resident of the Point Breeze community. It is imperative that the Redevelopment Authority, Office of Housing and Community Development, and Philadelphia Housing Development Corporation use its resources to inform every organization of the opportunity to participate in the funding process. We need access to the funding sources and training seminars to continue building our community. We have created several projects to increase the quality of life in our area. In December 2003 we submitted the Point Breeze On the Move Project. This project was submitted in conjunction with Habitat For Humanity. It is my understanding that Habitat has received some level of financial support for a similar project. Will our project receive funding? This comes from the proposed plan for Year 30. 203 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 When will we receive notice about funding for our project? S. must be included in any discussions or planning meetings involving the Point Breeze community. We will not accept nor support a development plan for our neighborhood that we did not develop. We know what our community and its residents need to increase their quality of life. The NTI housing investment strategy for Point Breeze must include financial support for local groups. Allow me to take a few minutes to discuss the initiatives we have begun to change our community. We have hired a coordinator to manage the Point Breeze Business Corridor. The corridor will design programs to increase its economic activities in the commercial corridor. We organized a new business association, worked with the Parking 204 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 Authority, Commerce Department, and PCDC; completed a marketing survey with the assistance of Temple University; revised the strategic plan with the assistance of the University of Pennsylvania; developed a plan to enhance the Breeze by building a new building. Economic development committee, local elected officials, and business leaders and residents are working collectively to change and increase the quality of life and appearance of Point Breeze. We are exploring an Empowerment Zone and Elm Street Project designation. The above initiatives are several examples of the many efforts that are a huge piece of the building block of Point Breeze. We have outlined several priorities for our future community development plans: The creation of youth programs that are designed to prevent and combat juvenile delinquency; we need a dedicated funding source; we need to restore support for community economic development programs. 205 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 Council has mandated that the city use percent of its CDBG funds for its CDC 4 economic development activities. The proposed 5 consolidated plan is inadequate.

We urge that restoration of Year 29 levels of funding for CDC economic development in particular funds that were cut out from the facade and Security Grant Program, SBCIP, predevelopment grants, planning and marketing grants, the neighborhood development grant program and the special services district program should be restored. These programs are vital elements to the success of our programs designed to maintain and improve the economic viability of our neighborhoods. It does not make any sense for the city to invest hundreds of millions in neighborhoods through NTI and then reduce the funds to support our neighborhood economics. Planning and Administration needs. , the Community Development Coalition, and other smaller organizations would like to have access to the 206 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 various sources of funding so that we can have input in creating and implementing the consolidated strategic plan for our beloved community. Affordable housing. S. supports affordable housing initiatives. However, we should be included in the planning of the vision for affordable housing in our neighborhood. Again, we cannot support a plan that we did not create. We support increasing the funding to the Universal Business Center. This institution has been successful in building the economic capacity of local individuals and businesses. Geographical allocation of resources. South Philadelphia is one of the most economically and racially diverse areas of Philadelphia. We are a mix of neighborhoods and individuals that range from low income, to middle class, to affluent, all held together by a strong foundation and commitment to community and our middle-income 207 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 foundation row homes. of the plan. We believe an Enterprise Zone designation would help the area. South Philadelphia, especially the Point Breeze area, should receive substantial consideration for Year 30, restore funding for the second year for the targeted base system repair program. After the initial start-up issues with the program, ten community development corporations are now engaged in target efforts to assist homeowners with home repair. Unfortunately, 2 million in funding for the second year of the program has been eliminated. The city must follow through on its commitment to these neighborhoods. The Targeted Based Systems Repair Program must receive the additional financial support needed to stabilize these neighborhoods. We support the addition of $15 million in new acquisition funding. We believe it should be funded directly from NTI. In addition, the city should immediately 208 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 implement the proposed recycling agreement for acquisition funds to ensure that a portion of funding being spent on acquisition will be available to support future acquisition needs, as well. Economize on administrative costs. On the proposed plan, less than half of the city's CDBG funding is proposed to be spent on actual programs and services, continuing a long-term and disturbing trend. In fact, we have almost a million less in CDBG resources than we had in last year, but CDBG dollars spent on Administration is proposed for an increase of more than 1 million. CDBG funding is given to the city because of our high levels of poverty and must be spent directly to address those needs. The city must do a better job of cutting administrative costs. In addition to all of the above, we urge you to view and support the Housing Trust Fund. We urge you to support the proposed $20 million Housing Trust Fund by passing Bill 25 040594, with the proposed amendments. 209 RES. ).

Philadelphia desperately needs new resources for housing. A $20 million Housing Trust Fund will build 400 new homes per year, repair 1,200 homes per year, and help prevent homelessness, while leveraging 50 million per year in outside resources to the city and having a total economic impact of more than $115 million per year. We urge you to pass Bill 040594 with amendments and support bringing funding up to an eventual level of $20 million a year. I thank you very much, and God bless you. (Applause.)

Thank you Ms. Sherrod. John McDonald, IMPACT Services. David Koppish, are you still here, Women Community Revitalization Project? And then Steve Mullen from E Consult. I see Sister Habeebah Ali is there, 210 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 and Project Home, they have come in. And that is it for our list. Is there anybody I haven't mentioned here? Thank you. I see you. Thank you. Please identify yourself for the record and begin your testimony. MR. JOHN McDONALD: Councilwoman Blackwell, thanks for hearing my testimony. I am John McDonald. I am President of IMPACT Services Corporation. And to all of Council that's here. In the interest of time, there are two things that I would just like to present testimony on. One, I urge your support of the proposed $20 million Housing Trust Fund by passing Bill 040594, with the proposed amendments. Especially, to reiterate what Steve had mentioned, if you can find alternate sources of funding to eventually get us to that $20 million figure it would be a real push forward. Secondly, to restore support for community economic development programs, 211 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 especially support for the corridors, the various corridors, and all the things that go with it. Corridors are our most successful housing, really enable successful housing efforts to succeed. And WE just urge you to restore the corridor funding to Year 29 levels. Thanks for THE opportunity to present testimony.

Thank you, Mr. McDonald. Dave Koppish, Women Community Revitalization Project. Please identify yourself and begin your testimony.

Good afternoon. My name is David Koppish. I am with the Women's Community Revitalization Project. We have two other folks from WCRP which will be a part of this testimony, if that's okay.

Yes. Thank you.

One of whom is coming 212 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 down the aisle here.

Steve Mullen is here, who will be next. And I saw Habeebah Ali. Is there anyone else to testify, and then we will begin Project Home. Is that it? Please begin your testimony.

Good afternoon. Hello, Councilwoman Blackwell and all other Council people. My name is Stacy Moore. I am Co-chair of the Women's Community Revitalization Project, which is also a member of the Philadelphia Affordable Housing Coalition. Last year in June the Philadelphia Affordable Housing Coalition and City Council secured $10 million of NTI money which was supposed to fund the demolishing of homes. Instead, $2.5 million went to neighborhood-based rental production to create 100 new units of affordable housing. Another $2.5 million went to the Adaptive Modification Program to make homes wheelchair accessible, and $5 million went to the Basic Systems 213 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 Repair Program to help low-income homeowner/occupants repair their homes. That was a great day, and good work was done in the name of affordable housing, but our work is not done yet. There is still a shortage of 60,000 affordable homes in Philadelphia. Our neighborhoods need more help to rebuild on vacant lots, rehab abandoned buildings, and create responsible relationships with low-income homeowners who need help repairing their houses and want to stay in their homes. Because of these issues, as well as many other issues lending itself to the affordable housing crisis in Philadelphia, it is why the Philadelphia Affordable Housing Coalition has partnered with the Philadelphia Association of Community Development Corporations and other organizations who serve tax-paying voters like myself all over the city to ask City Council to help Councilwoman Blackwell, who we thank for introducing Bill 24 No. 040594 last week, by amending the bill and add incorporates more revenue, especially a 214 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 small percentage of the real property transfer tax, to ensure that the trust fund is at least $20 million a year every year. We also ask that the trust fund bill 6 be amended so that the oversight Board has community representatives on it. And it needs to have Council approval of seats, not just Mayor appointments, for true accountability to the communities we serve. I have heard many things from different testimonies today. I heard the city Administration congratulate themselves about Jefferson Square. However, they didn't mention the families that were displaced, 16 nor 3 of the families of the 22 families which 17 had disabled family members. 18 I heard other testimony which spoke 19 of how neighborhoods like Fishtown and 20 Northern Liberties now have more higher-income 21 residents, but there was no mention of what 22 was being done about the lower-income residents who move out of said and similar neighborhoods simply because they can no 25 longer afford to live there. 215 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 It seems as if in this testimony lower-income residents just disappear. I am here to let you know we don't disappear. We pay taxes, too. We vote, too. And we fight back and organize, too. (Applause.)

Before I go, I will leave City Council with this. I too am a Section 8 low-income rental occupant raising my son on my own. My Section 8 seven-year limit has already begun, but that is just one issue of the housing crisis. There are good, decent community folks I know personally who are homeowners in jeopardy of losing their homes due to eminent domain. With Section 8's new year limits looming over folk's heads, and other folks facing the threat of losing their homes with nowhere to go, what's my guarantee that, even if I wanted to be a homeowner tomorrow, that there would be a home out there for me that I could afford? What is the guarantee that once my 216 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 Section 8 seven years are up, that there will be affordable, decent rental apartments out there for people like me to rent? Philadelphia needs affordable, decent, visitable, accessible housing. We need a $20 million Housing Trust Fund. Thank you very much. (Applause.)

Thank you.

Councilwoman Blackwell, good afternoon. My name is William Dowell. As you may know, I worked in the area of affordable housing for years, I 16 guess, now. And I have been here almost every 17 one of these 20 years for at least one of 18 these hearings. 19 Today I am speaking as a member of 20 WCRP's Board of Directors. I am the only man on the Board, in fact. And I want to thank you for introducing your bill last week, a bill that has been long overdue in the politics of Philadelphia. 217 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 And although your bill is a very good bill, and we thank you for it, we still need the $20 million. And I am saying we need the $20 million because I have been out there for a lot of years. I have done affordable housing. I have done accessible housing. I have protested. My colleagues mentioned earlier how you gave the city money for both of the stadiums. I believe when you had hearings for the stadiums, I was one of the few people in the community who were for -- the representatives of organizations who spoke against the stadiums, and we have the stadiums. So, Councilwoman Blackwell -- and I know your heart is in the right place. And I heard my friend Steve Culbertson speak earlier about the tax money from the real estate. That's a good start, and that's a good way to put money into that trust fund. This will be a fund that must be continued. And I speak not only to you, 218 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 Councilwoman Blackwell, but I speak to my good friend Councilman Nutter, I speak to Councilwoman Verna. Good to see you again, Councilwoman. We ask you, as part of one of the people who sat around the table -- when we thought about the affordable coalition, I was one of the people that was there trying to tell the other people to get it together. Although, you don't see me out there fighting for them. I thank the people that are out there fighting for them, because they are a little bit younger than I am. I thank you, Councilwoman. But we do need the $20 million. We need it to be at $20 million. Because without that $20 million, anything less will just be a dent in what we need for both affordable housing, both accessible housing, and housing for women with children. We need $20 million. And anything less is, in my eyes, kind of a bitter victory. And I don't like bitter victories. I like sweet victories. 219 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 So I hope today you give us a suite victory. And I thank you for your time. And, ladies and gentlemen, I am sure that the Council people are going to do the right thing and give us the $20 million. Thank you very much. (Applause.)

Good afternoon, Councilwoman Blackwell, Madam President. My name is Veronica Howard, and I live in North Philly. Presently my home is part of the Mayor's eminent domain abuse. I stand alone. I live across the street from the Philadelphia Gas Works. I am the last of my kind as far as the Mohicans are concerned. 1800 North 8th Street once was a beautiful, vibrant community. My mother and father had eight children. I was born and raised in Philadelphia County. I have six brothers and one sister. Because of this -- we are all married, we grew up, we are graduates of Philadelphia area high schools. And I myself 220 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 am one. I am from Kensington High School for Girls. My father died and left me the property. Presently, I am the caretaker and landlord of 1839, along with my family. There was an article in the Philadelphia Daily News, of which I was the main attraction and my family. There was a statement made that, in spite of all the efforts that I am trying to make against the eminent domain condemnation, that it was fruitless for us to fight. I am here to tell you that the fight goes on as far as 1839 is concerned, and I want you to know that I am here to stay. Please support the $20 million trust fund because, in the long run, if you pass this, Councilwoman Blackwell and members of Council, you won't go wrong. I am a part of history, and I would like for you to know that, along with my family and all the families that have left the 1800 block of North 8th Street. Please support the trust fund. I am 221 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 here to testify on behalf of my colleagues here. Because I am a member of WCRP, a member of CLI, Community Leadership Institute, and also a member of the Philadelphia Housing Coalition. That's why we are here today, and I urge you to pass the bill. Thank you, and thank you for allowing me to testify. (Applause.)

Good afternoon, my name is David Koppish. I am with the Women's Community Revitalization Project otherwise known aggravates WCRP. Since its origins in 1987, WCRP has created about 125 new units of affordable rental housing in Eastern North Philadelphia. But for every unit that we build, we have about 40 families who are equally in desperate need of housing that apply for that unit. Every day dozens of folks, mostly working people, from every corner of Philadelphia, call our phones, walk through our doors in dire need of housing. 222 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 What we see very day is just the tip of the iceberg that is the housing crisis in our city. You heard other people's experiences with the crisis every day. Last spring we released a study that was conducted by the University of Pennsylvania entitled Closing The Gap, which documented that nearly in Philadelphia households are living on incomes below $20,000 a year and pay more than they can afford for their housing costs. That's 130,000 Philadelphia households living near or below poverty, struggling to keep a roof over their heads, living in dangerous, overcrowded, or dilapidated conditions. I want to submit for the official record photographs of a woman who couldn't be with us today. The house that she lives in, which was condemned by L & I, she has nowhere else to go, she is still living in this house which is not fit for animals. Last year, members of WCRP and other Philadelphia Affordable Housing Coalition 223 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 groups testified to you about this crisis and the need to dedicate local dollars to ending the crisis. You heard our cry and responded by shifting $10 million of unspent NTI demolition monies into existing affordable accessible housing programs, which Stacy enumerated. And we applaud you again for this act. million of NTI for affordable rental housing. 5 million short of last year's infusion, we urge you to support those line items as proposed. However, the affordable housing crisis in Philadelphia demands a long-term, strategic, and well-funded plan or our neighborhoods and our city will continue to die. In the first few pages of the consolidated plan, the city states that rental housing for very low-income households is OHCD's top priority. Then why is it that the 224 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 amount the city will spend on the production or preservation of affordable housing for these households is less than percent of 5 the entire budget, OHCD and NTI budget combined. Closing The Gap calculated that 60,000 new units of affordable rental housing are needed now to end our crisis. As currently funded, it would take Philadelphia nearly 200 years to build our way out of this crisis, despite this year's and next year's small increases from NTI. We can no longer afford to throw crumbs at this problem. Our housing stock continues to get more expensive, and the ranks of the ilhoused, the overcrowded, the doubled and tripled up, the homeless, the evicted, the foreclosed keep growing and will not go away until a long-term plan with dedicated local funding is enacted. Last week we took an important step towards making the affordable housing crisis a public policy priority in Philadelphia. Councilwoman Blackwell introduced Bill No. 225 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 040594, at our request, which would create a Housing Trust Fund in Philadelphia. We applaud her leadership on this issue, a trust fund with a dedicated source of local funds that can only be used for addressing the housing crisis at that locality. More than 275 municipalities, counties, and states around the country have a trust fund. Philadelphia does not. Virtually every other county in Pennsylvania has a Housing Trust Fund. Philadelphia currently does not. Instead, we continue to rely on ever-shrinking allocations from Harrisburg and Washington to address housing problems in our city.

And, as a result, the production of new affordable housing in this city has declined to its lowest level in about seven years. To make things worse, PHA has systematically reduced its housing stock in the past ten years, and there is a virtual freeze on any new vouchers, in addition to 226 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 time limits. Again, we applaud Councilwoman Blackwell for taking the step to introduce this bill which would create a trust fund, a long-overdue step. We need this trust fend because our Community Development Block Grant continues to shrink. We need this trust fund because we have a shortage of 60,000 units of affordable rental housing in our city. We need this trust fund because 130,000 Philadelphians are in desperate need of decent, affordable, and accessible housing. People want this. I have here -- and I want to submit all these, as well, for the official record -- approximately 2,000 signatures from Philadelphians who desperately need housing that people have been collecting over the past several months. These are people in every Council district that want to see a $20 million trust fund. These are approximately 2,000, and there is more coming in, original signatures 227 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 from folks all around the city. The bill is a critical first step, but it needs to be amended and strengthened so that the trust fund would create an actual noticeable impact on our housing basis. We need a trust fund that will generate at least $20 million a year. And we applaud Councilwoman Blackwell for committing to amend this bill in the following ways. One, dedicate a percentage of the future growth and real property transfer tax revenues, as many other people have suggested here today. Real property transfer tax revenues have tripled since instituted about 15 years ago. Recent jumps in this revenue stem largely from the real estate boom in many neighborhoods that were less affordable, thus pushing poor working-class families out. Most housing trust funds around the country are funded with real property transfer tax revenues. Taking a percentage of future growth above current revenue levels would have no effect on the current operating budget 228 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 difficulties that we are currently going through. That is important to remember. This is another amendment that we are looking for, dedicate the expected future increases in housing redevelopment assistance dollars, which are state dollars, into the trust fund; require that percent of all new 9 units built with Housing Trust Fund dollars be 10 fully wheelchair accessible, as other folks have noted here today; ensure that at least 5 percent of Housing Trust Fund dollars be used for homeless prevention programs and strategies; ensure that housing advocates and low-income persons have seats on the oversight Board for the Housing Trust Fund; and also ensure that minority-controlled contractors have priority on jobs produced by Housing Trust Fund dollars. A $20 million Housing Trust Fund, with these small amendments, would achieve the following: It would provide Philadelphia with badly needed resources for affordable housing development; it would increase affordable housing production by nearly 80 percent in 229 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 Philadelphia; it would assist 1,200 additional homeowners each year with home repairs; it would increase the supply of wheelchair accessible housing, and it would prevent 1,000 families roughly every year from becoming homeless. A $20 million Housing Trust Fund would also leverage $50 million in new development monies each year for Philadelphia. A $20 million trust fund every year would also have a total economic impact through new tax revenues, jobs created, et cetera, of about $115 million every year. So this is an investment, it is not a hand-out, this $20 million trust fund.

But to achieve all this, it cannot be less than $20 million per year, and it must include a dedicated local revenue source, such as a small percentage of the real estate transfer tax. Therefore, in closing, we urge you to use your power to amend and pass Bill No. 24 040594 to create a $20 million per year Housing Trust Fund for Philadelphia. And 230 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 thank you for this opportunity to testify. (Applause)

Thank you very much. Thank you all very much. Steve Mullen, E Consult. Are you here? Mr. Mullen, as you are coming, I will note that somewhere around 1980 we had a young lady -- I don't think it matters if I say her name now -- her name was Judith Stone. And she came to us, to my office, seeking help. She had let a boyfriend move in. She lived somewhere in North Philadelphia. And I don't remember where she lived. But, she wanted him out. She found out she made a mistake, she shouldn't have let this fellow move in. And, so, we gave her money to file a Complaint to get him out, because she didn't have money. We didn't want her to have to go through the system and wait. Well, as it turns out, we saw the next week in the paper that Judith Stone was 231 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 killed with a hammer, the boyfriend, when he was served papers that he had to leave, killed her. He hammered her to death. So we are not unmindful. And, obviously, all these years later, that was before many of us in this room 8 were here, and it is one of the past sad housing stories that we talk about for people in trouble. And that's why we always take our job seriously, and try to help each and every person who needs help, and always consider every story that we hear seriously. One never knows. Mr. Mullen, thank you for your patience. Blaine Stoddart, we see that you are here. After we call Sister Habeebah, we will call Blaine Stoddart from the Partnership CDC. Mr. Mullen.

Yes. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman, and good afternoon members of Council, President Verna, Councilman Nutter, and I see Councilman Clarke and 232 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 Councilman Kenney and Councilman Goode, and to all the interested participants today. My name is Steven Mullen, and I am a principal with E Consult Corporation here in Philadelphia. And I am here today to testify in support of the Housing Trust Fund bill, 040594. And I want to thank Council for the opportunity to -- for allowing me to testify in favor of such a promising program. E Consult was asked and then engaged by the Housing Trust Fund to estimate the potential annual economic and fiscal impacts of an implemented program as envisioned by the Housing Trust Fund, and that is at the $20 million annual level. It is my understanding that our report has been distributed to all Council Members, along with other information provided you by the Housing Trust Fund. And what I would like to do today is just give a very brief summary of our findings there. I would like to summarize our 233 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 estimates. But, first, I would like to outline the assumptions that were established for this program, which, actually, the fellow testifying just before me outlined many of these assumptions, too. And I will just note them here, because these were the assumptions that we used to generate the economic impact, the potential economic impact, numbers. First, that we examined this $20 million annual funding scenario that contemplated the following each year: Building 400 affordable rental and homeownership homes in each year, repairing and preserving more than 1,200 additional homes each year, preventing more than 1,300 families from becoming homeless each year, and, as noted before, leveraging approximately $50 million in outside investment for Philadelphia each year. Based on these program assumptions, we estimated the following potential economic impact, economic and fiscal impacts, on an annual basis. 234 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 One, $116 million of total -- let me phrase it here. Actually, this program fully implemented would generate $116 million of total economic activity for the city, $193 million for the region, and $230 million for the state. The reason those get larger and larger is that the economic impacts go beyond the city borders. So this is, actually, something that's very attractive for the entire State of Pennsylvania. Approximately 400 jobs could be generated for the city, up to 1,400 jobs for the region, and over 1,700 jobs for the state each year. A total of over $13 million in wages and salaries by city workers, $42 million in wages and salaries throughout the region, and $53 million in wages and salaries throughout the state each year And, finally, $1.2 million in city taxes, $2.6 million in regional taxes, and $9.4 million in state taxes per year. I do want to note that while these 235 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 are based on a $20 million annual fund operation, smaller fund amounts would generate such benefits, and proportionally lower. In addition to these quantitative benefits, we also note the following potential qualitative impacts which we believe are very important, too. Improved living conditions for many low- and moderate-income households; improved financial conditions for many households; enhanced overall health and safety conditions for many communities; and improved quality of life for many families and neighborhoods. In summary, we estimate the proposed program would generate significant economic and fiscal impacts to the city, region, and the state. And, at the same time, they would generate important qualitative benefits for the city and its citizens. I would like to thank you for allowing me to testify in support of this Housing Trust Fund Bill 040594, and thank you very much.

Thank you, 236 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 Mr. Mullen. (Applause.)

Is that Neighborhood Gardens you are from, with Sister city, Project Home? Okay. We called New Jerusalem earlier, yes. All right. Come up. New Jerusalem, Sister Margaret McKenna.

Kai Sjogren representing Sister Margaret McKenna.

Then we have Sister Habeebah Ali. And we have Thomas Earle, Liberty Resources. Okay.

I thank you for this opportunity. I want to say hello to President Anna Verna. You may remember that I gave you a copy of Nickel and Dimed when I was in a meeting with you. Nickle and Dimed is a book that was written by Barbara Erinreich which resulted --

Use the microphone.

Thank you. I am not used to this. 237 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 Which resulted in -- or came about as a result of her putting herself in the place of a disadvantaged and underprivileged person looking for work, and working at minimum wage and like jobs, given that she had little to no skill. And it was a very difficult thing for her to do. I myself can identify with her to some extent, having decided to devote my life to underprivileged and disadvantaged people. So I am here today representing some of them. And they come from New Jerusalem, which is a recovery community, a grass-roots community, in North Philadelphia. Folks who are in this community are there in part as a result of this housing crisis, because it is a kind of a trigger that will bring on the symptoms of addiction. And folks in our community have determined that they are going to learn to control this disease. They live comfortably with us for six months to a year, and then are thrust back out into the community, where they have to 238 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 seek out affordable housing. Some of those folks were in a meeting with me this morning, at which I told them that Jannie Blackwell had determined that our cause was so important, that she would not only support the Housing Trust Fund, by which half of the funds would be made available to people such as our own -- the other half are more available to middle-income folks; I didn't try to explain that to our folks, they might have been discouraged. But I was able to say that the meeting that we had with Jannie Blackwell last Wednesday night was productive; that indeed she is not only going to sponsor the Housing Trust Fund bill, but she is talking about sponsoring an amendment by which the real estate transfer taxes would be included and by which we could accomplish a $20 million fund. (Applause.)

Our folks were empowered by the notion that their participation in the political process could indeed produce results of that magnitude. 239 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 I heard them say that they are not in the habit of voting because too often what they hear politicians say is not what politicians do. (Applause.)

And I am actually very glad that I do not have them here with me today. Because I think they would be dismayed at the fact that so few people who are going to help determine their faith are in this room. And if they are in this room, that they are not listening (Applause)

No doubt that when we are talking about what will help the least of these our brothers and sisters, we get preoccupied with other things. I believe that you two women sitting in front of me, three, perhaps more, are genuinely interested in providing for the least of these. And, indeed, the measure of the worth and the wisdom of this institution matters in terms of how we treat folks at this 240 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 economic level. So I look forward to going back to the folks in our grass-roots recovery community and saying, yes, these politicians care. They want to empower us. And they know that we are going to vote. And, so, they are indeed going to support Housing Trust Fund bill that will allocate $20 million a year at a minimum for our purposes. Thank you. (Applause.)

Sister Habeebah Ali. SISTER HABEEBAH ALI: Good afternoon, Councilwoman Blackwell, Madam Chair, Council President Verna. It is always a pleasure to come before you all. Councilman Cohen, it is good to see you. Councilman Goode. I know that Councilwoman Miller is probably listening, and I have seen Councilman Clarke. I want to thank all the Council people who have bothered to stick around this afternoon, and hope that everybody else is 241 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 listening from their offices. Because I know that there is much work to be done at this level of city government; and that often, because I have visited your offices, I do hear this playing, and I know that they listen and their key staff people are listening. You have heard all day, and Councilwoman Blackwell and Council Reynolds-Brown, I want to thank you for introducing this bill. But talking to Councilwoman Blackwell is preaching to the choir. My plea is for all the other Council Members who are in my earshot or who will be in my earshot, because I plan to come to your offices, along with my colleagues. We are in the need in the City of Philadelphia for this $20 million Housing Trust Fund to be implemented, to be implemented at the new fiscal budget. We need the amendments to be approved. We need Council to approve this trust fund. 242 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 Councilwoman Blackwell has already made her position clear. I am speaking as a formerly homeless mother of the City of Philadelphia. I have been voting since I was years old. I have 7 not missed a vote. My mother wouldn't have it 8 any other way. She dragged us to the polls. 9 Because I realized that voting in 10 this country is not a right, it is a privilege 11 for people of color and women. They had to 12 fight to vote. And we educate people. 13 And our homeless constituents helped 14 register over 2,000 new registered voters this 15 year. And that can make or break a Council 16 person's election. 17 We have to make housing and homeless 18 a priority. There are currently 66,000 disabled people in the City of Philadelphia who are in need of accessible housing. The older we get, the chances are, if we are still privileged to live long, we will need accessible housing. I have raised four, and I am happy to say, productive children in Section 8 243 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 subsidized housing. Two of them are now homeowners, the other two are tenants, and they are giving back to the City of Philadelphia. I want to say that I support OHCD, the Redevelopment Authority, the Office of Housing and Neighborhood Preservation. And I am happy for an opportunity that these offices are allowing my nonprofit organization, Raise of Hope, to help house people, particularly homeless men, ex-offenders, and drug addicts, recovering addicts. We went to Harrisburg and we fought like hell. We stood in the freezing rain because the government had the audacity to remove the money from the drug and alcohol recovery programs. And when we went there and we pleaded for this money, and we got poured on and soaked. They would not let us in. They would not let us in the State Capitol. Thank God there were some neighborhood churches that let us in. We must establish this trust fund so 244 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 that we can be competitive with other metropolitan cities. And this $20 million trust fund will generate more income for the City of Philadelphia. While I know in the Year 2000 the Philadelphia Housing Authority opened application for Section 8 applicants, in less than a month, in two weeks, over 27,000 Section 8 applications were received from people who need subsidized and/or affordable housing. While I support the programs at 1234 Market Street, I have issues with Section 8 and with PHA. And I don't pick no bones about it. And the city will continue to know where we stand. There is a seven-year time limit on Section 8 subsidies.

It is not mandated from the Department of Housing and Urban Development. This is something that Mr. Green is implementing as a trial program. I still live in subsidized housing. If you are legally handicapped and can prove that, or 55 years old, it does not pertain to 245 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 you. Well, I won't be 55, God willing, in six years. Of seven years, one year is gone. I have raised my children. I have contributed to this city for the majority of my adult life. And now I am told the way this economy is and our government -- no one is asking for a free hand -- but you would have to make dollars an hour to afford a 11 one-bedroom apartment in the City of 12 Philadelphia that goes for $704. And this is 13 what HUD approves. 14 People cannot at the minimum wage, and at the wages that we are making, and the way the people are being laid off in droves, in every councilmanic district, we cannot afford to live in housing. Our shelters are overcrowded. And at this point in time our city government spends millions of dollars more in temporary housing in the shelter system than it does in new affordable housing. I think there is something wrong with that picture. And we, the Philadelphia Affordable 246 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 Housing Coalition, is making history with partnering with PACDC. And I thank Councilwoman Brown. I thank Councilwoman Blackwell. But all the other Councilmen and women have to support this trust fund bill so that you can become a part of the major metropolitan cities across this nation that have trust funds. We must look out for the poor, the needy, and the homeless. So, you know me, I can talk as long as you give me a microphone. But I am pleading to City Council that are in this room 15 today, and those who are elsewhere in the earshot. I want to thank Councilwoman Miller and her office that have supported us. Raise of Hope is getting ready to do things in a large and different way for ex-offending men and women. We have women that are being arrested in our city at alarming rates. And when these ex-offenders come out and they have done their time, they have got off parole, 247 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 they have got off probation, they are being penalized. They can't get their children from OHCD because they can't get subsidized housing. Most people is not going to hire an ex-offender. And we are begging City Council to help us. We do not want to see women and children and men thrown in the street in droves. And I happen to feel personally that a government that cannot support its most needy citizens does not deserve the right to represent the government. We are going to vote like our lives depend on it, because it does. I want to thank you for your time, and ask the Creator to continue to support you and keep you well and doing what is right for the citizens of Philadelphia, the most poor and underprivileged, as well as the most tax-paying, heavy corporate contributors. Thank you. )

Thank you very much. Mr. Earle. 248 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525

Yes. Good afternoon, Councilwoman Blackwell. Thank you. My name is Thomas Earle. I am the current Executive Director of Liberty Resources, the Center for Independent Living for People with Disabilities in Philadelphia. My testimony will be brief and it will focus on three points. One will be OHCD's Plan 30, the second will be NTI, and lastly will be closing comments on the trust fund, the proposed Housing Trust Fund for the City of Philadelphia. First, I would like to applaud the Office of Housing and Community Development with respect to the 10 percent new construction requirement for accessibility, that all new units constructed with monies from the Office of Housing and Community Development be required to be constructed in an accessible way so that people with disabilities, including people who use wheelchairs, can use those units. I commend Secretary Hanna, Executive 249 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 Director Debra McColloch, and Special Needs Director Dana Mintz for making that requirement in plan 30. (Applause.)

Secondly, last year at this time we were gathered here with the Philadelphia Affordable Housing Coalition. And at that time we were applauding the leadership efforts of Councilman Nutter, who proposed legislation that would divert $10 million worth of funding from unused demolition funds from NTI to the Basic Systems Repair Program, Rental Production Program, and the Accessible Modification Program. That bold move became a reality when City Council unanimously supported that bill. And those programs received much needed additional funding this year, which has proven to be directly beneficial to people in Philadelphia, including the people that I work with at Liberty Resources who have disabilities. This year we are on the advent of a new innovative idea, and that has come under 250 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 the leadership of you, Councilwoman Blackwell, and that is the proposal of the Housing Trust Fund. That trust fund, however, must be amended. And I applaud your effort and am in agreement with your staff that that trust fund will be amended to be fully funded at the level of $20 million for the year, including the modest usage, eventual usage, of the real estate transfer tax. It is done in a smart way, a way that won't interfere with the city's current budget crisis, and it is a win/win situation. We have heard a number of people testify today. We have heard Steve Mullen testify briefly about the economic impact analysis of the trust fund. And it is time that the city, City Council, the Mayor's Office view this as an investment in the city's future, not as an expenditure. A $20 million trust fund will have an economic impact of $116 million in the city from year one. 251 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 This is a tremendous advantage to the city. We are the only major city in the country that currently does not operate a trust fund to ensure that everybody has a right, a human right, to housing that's affordable and accessible to their needs. Many Council people are not here in chambers today, many are. However, the ones that are not here are being visited. We have teams of advocates in the hallways as we speak visiting every Council person to get their support for passage of this bill tomorrow. And we ask that you all work in a unified method to reach a unanimous consensus to pass this bill tomorrow. Thank you very much. (Applause.)

Thank you very much. While Blaine Stoddart comes forward, I will call the names of those who were not here, as far as we know. Project Home is here, and that is it. Let me call names. 252 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 Phil Lord has come. Okay. While Blaine Stoddart, Project Home, and Phil Lord. I will call the -- Terry Mushovic, Neighborhood Garden's Association? Okay. Let me see. Mageedah Rasheed? Still not here. Is Guillermo Salas from HACE here? Manny Delgado, APM? Phil Lord is here. Galen Tyler, Kensington Welfare Rights Union? Robert Meek, Disabilities Law Project. That's everybody on the list. Is there anybody else whose name we haven't called who would like to testify? Okay. That's it. Welcome, Mr. Stoddart.

Thank you. My name is Blaine Stoddart. I represent the Partnership CDC in West Philadelphia. Council President Verna, to the Honorable Jannie Blackwell, to the Council people that are present here today, it is good 253 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 to see you. Every time I come here I have prepared statements, but not today. I don't read them anyway. I normally talk from my heart. The last time I was here, Councilwoman, it was an NTI bill for $25 million for demolition. And at that time -- and I am very happy the NTI people are here. At that time I was somewhat critical of NTI. I want to first talk about that a little bit, the NTI bills and how that is moving forward. I really believe that the leadership of NTI, they are good people. Herb Wetzel, Kevin Hanna, Pat Smith, Debra McColloch, and Scott Whiles, and all the other people who run NTI are really good people. Because in my private conversations with them, I found out that they are really good people. It is just, Councilwoman, that the bureaucracy sometimes is a hindrance to progress. And, so, I am here to sort of push 254 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 the bureaucracy so that we can get some things done in West Philadelphia, but across the city. Because many of the CDCs face the same barriers that we face. So hopefully that clarified, further clarified, the statements I made the last time. To the President and to the Council people, I am here to request that you fully fund the Housing Trust Fund proposed by the Philadelphia Association of CDCs, and fully fund the $20 million. You say to me, Mr. Stoddart, why should we fund this? Everybody comes in here begging for money. Well, I think the best reason that I can give is because it is self-help. The block grant, as you know, continues to dwindle. And as the population of the city continues to go down, our block grant will continue to go down. And that's the only pot of money that we have been using to fund community and economic development and affordable housing. 255 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 So the trust fund actually creates a permanent pool to actually supplement block grant funds. And, from my perspective, I don't care how we get the money, whether it is from sales tax, whether it is from gross receipts tax, where it is from recording of deeds. I don't care how we get the money. But if we can create something that helps someone, teaches someone how to fish, instead of giving them the fish, it makes sense. So the trust fund, the trust fund is actually teaching people how to fish because it creates a permanent source of funding so that more affordable housing can get built around the City of Philadelphia, and it addresses some very important ongoing needs in the City of Philadelphia. Administrative costs, this is my third point. Administrative costs now take up half the block grant, so there is less and less money for actually housing development and economic development in the neighborhoods. 256 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 So, that's one more reason to fund, fully fund, the trust fund. Last, but not least. The economic development budget as proposed a few years ago by Councilman Goode proposed that we set aside 5 percent of block grants for economic development and neighborhood retail development. I am urging City Council not to cut below the 5 percent, but to actually increase the dollars for community economic development and neighborhood revitalization. Councilwoman Blackwell, as you know, on 60th Street, we are going to start construction this summer on our first couple of units on the 100 block of 60th Street because nobody except you thought that we could do something on 60th Street because the area was so run-down. And now because of your assistance and the assistance of the Commerce Department, through these dollars, through these operating dollars, we are going to be able to take a dilapidated area in the Third Councilmanic 257 RES.

040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 District and begin to do something, begin to do some blight removal, and begin to do something constructive with the blighted commercial corridor. So this proves that it can be done and we can do something, even when people have given up hope on the neighborhood commercial corridors. Last, but not least, in the commercial corridors we have special service districts. Some of them are voluntary, some are not voluntary. But we have special service districts in the Mercy area, in West Philadelphia. We have a West Philadelphia Special Service District. We have a Frankford Special Service District. We have a Germantown Special Service District. And there is a Mt. Airy Special Service District. And the Commerce Department historically has helped to fund these commercial districts, and we are asking that the funding be restored. And, finally, I am going to give you 258 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 one example of how government dollars can leverage additional dollars. In 1996 the Commerce Department gave us a zero percent interest loan to create a cleaning company in West Philadelphia, to man special service districts, to create jobs, and to take people off Welfare to Work. The name of that company is Service Works. And thanks, again, to Councilwoman Blackwell and Councilman Goode, they gave us $28,000 to start this company. Since then, the company Service Works has paid, with this $28,000 -- keep your eye on that, now -- this company has paid over $700,000 in city taxes, Service Works. $700,000 in wage tax and other taxes back to the City of Philadelphia based on a $28,000 investment, which was a job-creation grant to help the partnership CDC create jobs in West Philadelphia. The company has 90 employees, and it has paid back in city taxes over $700,000. So it goes back to teach us how to fish, don't give us a fish, and that's what 259 RES. 040345, 040618, 040619, 040501, 040525 the trust fund is about. Thank you very much.

Thank you very much. Hold on a minute so the stenographer can change. (Short recess.) 260 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04

Thank you very much, Mr. Stoddard, for your remarks, and all the work you've done in our City, and especially in West Philadelphia, and the work you continue to do. We're grateful. Phil Lord.

Good afternoon, President Verna, Councilwoman Blackwell. My name is Phil Lord, and I'm Executive Director of Tenant's Action Group known as TAG. And we'd like to thank you for the opportunity to testify on the Consolidated Plan. TAG is a 30-year old non-profit organization that educates, organizes tenants, to improve residential housing. Along with its long history, TAG has received funding from the City of Philadelphia through OHCD, it's fair to say that TAG would not exist today were it not for OHCD. Safe, decent, affordable and accessible housing is not a product or a 261 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 privilege, but a human right. And that's TAG's position. And we believe in that light that certain things have to be done that are not currently included in the Consolidated Plan, nor are they clear from the Housing Trust Fund as it exists right now. However, we do support the Housing Trust Fund legislation, provided certain changes are made. As has been discussed before, we think there has to be a $20 million trust fund, not a small trust fund, to make a significant impact on the City. We also believe to make it a $20 million trust fund, there has to be transfer taxes included in that or at least the increase in transfer taxes. We realize that this is a sensitive issue for the City, that money is short, but we think housing is an important priority that has to be recognized by the City of Philadelphia in order to go forward. V. , rental assistance. We think that's very good. E. funds for doing that. It's a very important program. TAG is involved in that program. That program has saved a lot of lives. And we really appreciate that. Our fundamental problem with the Consolidated Plan is that it continues a trend towards home ownership, rather than supporting tenants. And we believe that needs to be shifted more the other way. We pay a high price for this neglect. We, from our viewpoint, increase shelter costs, deteriorate the housing stock, increase social problems, result from not having more money and more attention paid to the tenants in the City of Philadelphia. We talked about trying to get more people in the City and trying to increase the attractiveness of the City for businesses. We're convinced that in order to do 263 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 that, the rental housing situation has to be improved as well. The Tax Reform Commission, which was -- testified earlier, was mentioned earlier, stated in their plan they have no 7 reference whatsoever to residential tenants. We don't believe you can plan for a city without including residential tenants as part of that plan. We believe if you do include tenants, you'll realize that things like predatory lending affect tenants. The amount of real estate taxes also affect tenants. Home ownership is not for everyone. Low income people who get involved in home ownership who don't have the resources to deal with capital improvements very often wind up a tremendous risk and could be on the brink of foreclosure as a result. Bright removal, which we believe is crucial to the City, cannot happen simply through L & I and through the City's 264 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 activities alone. It requires informed citizens able to complain and get activity around code enforcement requirements, in order to make it work properly. Tenants are the first to know whether or not a building's being properly maintained, and take action accordingly. So tenants have to be informed about their rights. The opportunities to complain have to be encouraged and responded to quickly. There's a study by Fannie Mae Foundation, Eviction's the Hidden Housing Problem, written by Chester Hartman and David Robinson. And it cites several studies to show that typically the poor, women and minorities are the people who are being evicted in the City of Philadelphia. We think this supports displacement, resulting in homelessness.

We need to support eviction prevention programs that provide services to keep this from 265 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 happening. One of the most important programs currently existing is the Homelessness Prevention Program in the City of Philadelphia. That program is not adequately funded. The trust fund would add more funds to that program, but right now there's no commitment to add a certain amount of funds. We're convinced that there has to be a clear commitment to increase the amount of funding for homelessness prevention. That program provides back rent and securities deposits for people who need to move or need to deal with arrearages and avoid eviction. So that's our conclusion, that if the trust fund is adequately funded, we would definitely support it. We think it has to be funded. We think we need a dedicated stream of funding, that the intermittent funding that NTI provides is inadequate, and we 266 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 have to go forward with a more complete and comprehensive plan if you're going to have a meaningful notion of a human right in the City of Philadelphia. Thank you. )

Thank you, Mr. Lord. It looks like you are our last. Is there anyone else -- we're making an announcement -- who would like to testify? Okay. You will be the final person for the day to testify. And then we will have questions and answers from the Administration and members of Council. So, if any are not in the room who would like to ask questions, the final person testifying is about to speak now. Thank you.

Thank you, Councilwoman Blackwell, and other members of Congress -- or Congress -- Council. My name is Terry Mushovich, and I'm the Executive Director of the Neighborhood 267 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 Gardens Association. And I just mainly wanted to come and thank OHCD and City Council for the funds, the block grant funds that have been going to support City residents, greening of former vacant lots and areas in their neighborhoods. Neighborhood Gardens actually holds title to about of these gardens, in 11 support of the efforts made by local people 12 to take former eyesores and make them into 13 really productive amenities to the 14 neighborhood, and to the housing that's in 15 the neighborhood or being built in the 16 neighborhood. 17 The block grant funds we receive go 18 toward physical improvements to the 19 gardens, by adding new fencing, sidewalks, 20 those kinds of things, water services. 21 And those are kinds of things that 22 cannot be often afforded by the low income 23 or moderate income gardeners. 24 And so, it's very nice to have the 25 black grant funds that are then matched 268 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 with private dollars, to make those kinds of large physical improvements to the gardens. And we're delighted also that the City is so supportive of the greening aspect of the NTI program, the City Green Strategy or the Green City Strategy. And thank you very much for the opportunity to make some comments.

Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you all.

I'm here from Project H.O.M.E.

Yes, ma'am. I'm sorry.

My name is Hyacinth King, and I'm a resident and board member of Project H.O.M.E., a multi-service, non-profit organization providing street outreach supportive housing, comprehensive services, and community and economic development. I come before you today concerning the program services and budget outlined in 269 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 the NTI program, Consolidated Plan, proposed Housing Trust Fund legislation. Our highest priority is that the Philadelphia Affordable Housing Trust Fund be created with ongoing dedicated local resources significant enough to make a dent in the problems of affordable housing and homelessness. We believe that homelessness can be best addressed by providing affordable housing opportunities. There is a plan in place for a shelter usage to be significantly reduced by 2006, but it is simply not possible unless affordable permanent housing becomes more available. We are grateful for the introduction of Bill 040594, and can support it with proposed amendments, as recommended by the Philadelphia Association of CDCs. There are also additional measures that we believe that the City can take to prevent homelessness and address it. And we hope to have OHCD's support on these 270 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 issues. For instance, increased targeted rental assistance can be more cost effective than allowing households to become shelter users. We know that OESS's expenditures on family shelter contracts exceeds $10,000 a year or over $850 a month. Increasing rental assistance may allow some families to never experience homelessness, and also reduce the strain on OESS's budget. We know that this year our outreach hot line received an unprecedented number of calls from people who were not homeless but whose homes had no heat, placing them in a gray area between house and homeless. For these households and others like them, we advocate for a data-driven system that reflect families at risk of homelessness. Housing preservation activities are funded at $35.7 million, a 5.7 million decrease. 271 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 We are specifically asking Council to restore funding for the second year of the Targeted Basic Systems Repair Program. While we acknowledge that there were startup difficulties with the program, ten CDCs are now engaged in targeted efforts to assist homeowners with home repair, and most issues have been resolved. Unfortunately, $2 million in funding for the second year of the program has been eliminated in the proposed NTI 2005 budget. The City must follow through on its commitment to neighborhoods to support the program for two years. I thank you for the opportunity to testify today. I have also distributed testimony prepared by Sister Mary Scullion who was unable to come before Council in person today because her testimony was delivered by me.

Thank you. Thank you very much. (Applause.)

Thank you 272 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 again for your patience, and we thank you all for being here. Now we'd like to ask the Administration to come back. We want to ask questions about the 21st Review Forum, about NTI, CDBG and also the DCED grant. I also have questions from Councilwoman Blondell Reynolds Brown, who will be back. And I will return her questions. Our first question really is about the 21st Century Review Forum. In it there were many questions about the whole NTI concept about money allocation, follow-through of commitments, about accountability to drive NTI goals. And our question is: What have we done -- Given the negative statements made in this report about NTI, what have we done to improve on the ability to deal with leadership accountability and cohesiveness between City agencies and follow-through on commitments that are questioned?

My name is Patricia 273 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 Smith, Director of Neighborhood Transformation. Councilwoman Blackwell, as you may well know, the specific recommendations of all the Review Forum are under review by the Mayor. And I understand that it's a priority for him, as soon as the budget process is wrapped up. I just wanted to state a couple of things, just to clarify, in terms of leadership and roles within NTI which may not have been as apparent. For example, we really see four core functions of the Neighborhood Transformation Initiative. There's blight removal activities. And those core functions are generally handled by what we traditionally call the City's operating departments which report up through the Managing Director's Office. And that includes everything from the demolition activities to anti-graffitti work, to other code enforcement and quality 274 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 of life issues. Then the other core function of NTI relates to the community planning work. And that's led by the City Planning Commission. And that work is also part of -- That agency is also part of the team. The third core area is the housing and community development work which is led by Secretary Hanna, and he is responsible for the day-to-day operations of the City's housing and community development agencies, such as the RDA, PHDC and OHCD. I personally am a member of the Mayor's staff. I... So I run point on coordinating various activities across government, dealing with policy issues, budgetary issues and the like, and troubleshooting problems. As a group, the Administration comes together once a month as part of what we call the Community Development Cluster, that represents all these different parts of government that are playing an active role in the implementation of NTI. 275 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 Monthly reports are submitted and reviewed by myself and the Chief of Staff. That is sort of like the mechanism that's in place that oversees the implementation of NTI. I don't know if Secretary Hanna has anything to add.

Let me ask a question. With regard to the Housing Trust Fund and the funding goals, we've talked about the $1.5 million that would be the core of this grant. And we wanted to make sure that there was an agreement, in terms of the 1.5 coming out of NTI, as opposed to in some of the earlier... the preliminary plan being questioned, that it would be a result of a match. We want to make sure that the 1.5 is solid.

The logic behind that... You're referring to the request that the $1.5 million invested by NTI be matched by a like $1.5 million from the private sector. 276 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 The thought behind that logic was that it didn't make sense to the Administration that public money be the only money invested in Housing Trust Fund, that the philanthropic community, private companies who also receive huge benefits, public benefits from tax breaks, et cetera, ought to also contribute to the Housing Trust Fund. That's why that particular stipulation was put in the original legislation, as recommended by the Administration. We didn't just want it to be public money.

Well, then are the private dollars then there?

It was one of the -- When we met a couple of times with the housing advocates regarding the trust fund, we talked about the Administration working with the trust fund to, you know, fund raise the $1.5 million. That money has not been raised yet, but we view it as a challenge grant, to 277 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 both the private sector, to join hand in hand with the public sector in helping us to capitalize the trust fund.

All day we've heard people talk about the Housing Trust Fund and the $20 million. I've been -- I'm concerned now about the 12.5 that I assumed would be on board even if -- I'm not sure where the rest of my colleagues are concerning another tax issue. As you know, we've been having tax issues. And we're at a standstill now, in terms of the City overall budget, due to the whole tax issue overall. So, my question is, in view of this $1.5 million that we assume would start the trust fund, because the rest of it leading up to 12.5 would be as a result of an increase in real estate or deed transfers. We know that would provide over the year more funds. What do we start out with, if we pass this bill tomorrow, in terms of this 278 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 1.5? Can we assume that we will start out with at least that, and at least have the money for deed and... for deed and mortgage or real estate increase fees added on, so that we know if we pass legislation tomorrow that we have no less than 12.5 starting with.

Let me make a couple statements relative to the Housing Trust Fund. And I regret --

Point of order, Madam Chairman.

Point of order, Councilman Cohen.

If you're asked to speak, would you please speak directly into the microphone and slow down a little bit. It's much easier to follow what he's saying.

Yes, sir. I want to make a couple statements relative to the Housing Trust Fund. And I regret that I did not include certain statements in my written and submitted 279 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 testimony. First of all, it is the Office of Housing and the Mayor's Administration absolutely, positively supports the development or the creation and the ongoing development of a Housing Trust Fund for the City of Philadelphia. I agree with the advocates, with the CDCs. I think it's a travesty that there is not existing already a Housing Trust Fund in a City this size. Let me go on record as saying that, number one. Number two, we would... (Applause and cheers.)

Thank you. We as the Administration would love to see a $40 million Housing Trust Fund. (Cheers and applause.) VOICE IN THE AUDIENCE: Hallelujah.

We acknowledge the fact that there is a lack of, a total lack of affordable housing...

I wish we could vote for that for you tomorrow. 280 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 Okay? (Laughter and applause.)

...a terrible lack of affordable housing in the City of Philadelphia. $20 million won't cut it. I mean, it will take a lot more than just that. However, the economic reality of our situation in the City of Philadelphia is this: The General Fund is hemorrhaging. You all have talked for the past couple of weeks, maybe a month or so, about how we're going to balance tax cuts with changes in the provision of certain services. That being the case, the Administration -- And we've had these discussions with the advocates. The Administration can not in good conscience, given what's happening with the General Fund at this time, support having the transfer tax dedicated to the Housing Trust Fund. (Moans in the audience.) 281 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04

Relative to what we do support, again, the one and a half million dollars is a given. It's mine and Pat's personal opinion that that one and a half million dollars ought to be matched with private dollars. As far as the recording fee is concerned, again, we are in lock-step there. Once the legislation is passed in Harrisburg we will, as strongly as you all, advocate for that recording fee to be dedicated specifically to -- the incremental increase in the recording fee to be dedicated to the Housing Trust Fund; in fact, all increases in the recording fee to go that way, to the extent that it does not hamstring that particular department in its ability to get stuff done. So, we have no problem with the recording fee. Now, there's some debate as to how much those... I call them three taken together: The NTI, the private match, and the recording fee, how much those three will generate. 282 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 I've heard, as far as the recording fee is concerned, that that could generate from $5 to $7 million in new monies for affordable housing. If you take that and -- Call it 7. Take that and add that to the 1.5 plus 1.5 or 3 million, then you're up to $10 million. What I would -- The point I would like to get across to, again, the Council and to the advocates is, again, we'd love to see the Housing Trust Fund be at $20 million. It may not get to that point on day one, in year one. Our hope is, our expectation is, as we continue to talk and discuss and look for new ways to fund it, we'll eventually get to $20 million and beyond. It just may not happen in this coming -- this upcoming fiscal year.

We were just given today responses to the March 29th hearing; invaluable information. And so, obviously, we haven't been 283 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 able to review it. We wish you would not do that, as much as we request it. And I'm more patient than everybody. This is my area of interest. But even I have my limit. How are residential development projects listed impacted by Year 30 Consolidated Plan? And the second part of that question is, given the current backlog of projects and the focus on the Year 30, why is there -- why are we talking about so many RFPs in Year 30 which is a different focus than in previous years?

I'm sorry. Could you repeat that second question?

We're focusing a lot on RFPs in this new plan under NTI between the Consolidated Plan and the NTI agenda, NTI budget. We're focusing on doing funding through new RFPs. Why are we doing it more so than in previous years?

Want to address that?

The one RFP that we're 284 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 suggesting is in connection with the increase of $5 million per year to support acquisition. We were recommending that that money be allocated pursuant to an RFP process where we also look at whether the housing -- affordable rental housing or home ownership projects also can receive the funding commitment out of Community Development Block Grants. So we saw as an opportunity to link both acquisition dollars and the allocation of subsidy dollars to fully fund a project up front, as opposed to in a sequential type of a way.

Well, let me say, since you mentioned new units, new acquisition, that I have in my hand a copy of the letter from the Chief of Staff regarding $15 million that was to be available for land acquisition, and that we were to hear during this application. I will say as a matter of fact that applying for $5 million a year over the 285 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 next three years, depending on the Department of Community Economic Affairs, DCED, grant from the state is not acceptable. I would -- You know, $15 million. I want to make sure, because I've seen it in different ways between the NTI and CDBG plan. I want to make sure that the $15 million for projects already in the pipeline -- That was our discussion. That was the Administration's commitment, that we have $15 million for acquisition for emergencies or projects already in the pipeline. It wasn't for RFPs. It wasn't for any other use than for projects already hanging out there. That's why we had this need, because we had a commitment, made commitments in our communities. And then we were told in the middle of the road, no more money for acquisition. Therefore, we wanted to at least have the opportunity in some areas to 286 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 finish up projects that were already in the pipeline. So I want to make clear that this $15 million is there. That was the commitment. Here is my letter from Joyce Wilkerson. I'm absolutely very, very serious about this commitment.

As we discussed in that letter, Councilwoman Blackwell, the Administration agreed to investigate how we would fund an additional $15 million. As we discussed in our various meetings, one of the challenges of fully funding that $15 million solely out of bond proceeds is the impact that that has on the overall budget. Acquisition dollars, we tend to use taxable bonds or if we use tax exempt bonds, it's a qualified redevelopment bond. And the assumption is, if we were to add even 5 more million of -- $5 million in projects that would qualify for QRVs, as they're called, or taxable, it results in us having to cut out about $29 million -- 287 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04

That's not what you told me at the last hearing. Let me make my position clear. As Finance Chair, as Chair of the Housing Neighborhood Development Homeless Committee, I will not support a budget where the Administration does not meet its commitment. I've said that to you every private meeting, and I say it to you publicly. You made a commitment. And in the spirit of that commitment, I expect the $15 million to be there. I won't vote for this, and I won't advocate that my colleagues do it. They can do whatever they choose, obviously. But I will not support a budget... I will not support the application being approved if you don't meet your commitment. I mean, we have to draw the line someplace. We have to assume that we act in good faith here. We were promised a $15 million acquisition for projects in the pipeline. And I expect somewhere between 288 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 today and tomorrow that that $15 million shows up. That's where I stand. I'm sorry that we have to draw -- be hard lined, but you've got to know that I'm as sincere to the people who put me here as you are to the Administration -- to the Mayor who assigned you. I've got a commitment. When I make a commitment to people, I expect to keep my word. And it can't be because you all change your mind or redraw plans. It's not acceptable. We have to assume -- We have to be honest about this. If you make a commitment, I expect you to keep it. My next question is, would you submit to Council --

Madam Chair.

Yes, sir, a point of order.

I just to make a statement that I think Councilwoman Blackwell speaks for all members of City Council by the statement she just made. 289 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 Thank you.

Thank you, Councilman. Would you submit to Council a copy of the scope of work for the Preservation Development Initiative, as referred to on of the third quarter report?

Yes. The Preservation Development Initiative is a project of the National Trust for Housing Preservation. It was... The City of Philadelphia was invited to submit a proposal which would use resources that the National Trust make available for the preservation of historic properties. That proposal includes about $50,000 in technical assistance funds which the City has to match. Secondly, it included that... So, like, as a part of the National Trust funds, access to things like revolving loan funds that they sponsor for development of historic properties, as well as, I believe, 290 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 a tax credit -- syndication of tax credits for historic properties. Those are still developer driven, so a developer would apply directly to the Housing Trust Fund to access those sources. The technical assistance component of the resources that are being allocated is the focus on how do we begin to look at strategies for the preservation of eminently dangerous buildings in areas where -- that are high with historic resources. Under the City proposal, we suggested focusing under, I think, three areas. One area of the City would include the Bellmont area; a second area, I believe, was Brewerytown; and the third area was Strawberry Mansion, as neighborhoods where we can apply their technical assistance resources.

All right. We'd appreciate.

And we can provide a copy of the actual proposal that we 291 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 submitted.

Thank you. It was stated several times in the Consolidated Plan that the City is anticipating funding from Department of Community and Economic Development to set off reductions in funding. I want to ask you about the Commonwealth's commitment. I was in a meeting last week with the representatives from the Governor's Office about our plan. Those representatives said that they were waiting for the Mayor to submit his list of priorities. I talked to the Mayor today and asked him about this list of priorities so that we may receive state funding. And I said I was happy to ask it at this hearing. And he said fine. And I do know that some of the projects that the City has requested that we're talking about are projects for Cambridge, projects for Tasker, Mill Creek, 292 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 the Croydon, and even $810,000 site improvement money around Mill Creek. Those I know are issues that the City was concerned about. And I know that for the -- to be seriously considered, they have to be in the top ten or from the -- on the Governor's list. So, I'm asking you what you know about that. The Mayor has said to feel free to raise that issue here.

Was your meeting with Mr. Siegal?

He was one of the people in that meeting, yes. MS. McCOLLOCH: Deborah McColloch. The money of the project list that you were talking about is capital money from the state. The money that's in our Consolidated Plan is a different pot of money. Then the list of projects that was asked to be submitted goes to a different pot of money than the budget that's in our Consolidated Plan. 293 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04

Can you respond to both?

I can respond to the capital part. I can respond to the capital piece, not to the piece that's in the plan. Roughly three weeks ago Carl Green and I met with Mr. Siegel in Carl's office at the Housing Authority. At that meeting we discussed with Mr. Siegel, as a representative of the Governor's Office, what the City's priorities were in that. They included the PHA projects that you just reeled off, in addition to projects like Cecil B. Moore, what's going on in Brewerytown, several -- in Strawberry Mansion, several mixed income developments going on all over the City. I was unaware or if it was mentioned in the meeting, I didn't make mental note of it, but I was unaware that the Governor's Office was in fact waiting for something in writing from this office or the Mayor's Office, outlining what our 294 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 priorities are. I can assure you that once we leave these meetings, we'll jump right on that.

Thank you. Thank you very much. I'll ask two more questions, and then defer to my colleagues because I have several. On of the Consolidated Plan, the Administration anticipates a development of 1100 rental units. What are the actual numbers completed for '03 and what are anticipated for '04? MS. McCOLLOCH: We can provide the actual numbers for you. I don't have them with me at the hearing today, but we'll provide the production numbers for you.

Thank you very much. I will now defer, unless my colleagues are okay with me asking questions. Given the strong need for more 295 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 affordable housing within the City of Philadelphia, as is seen today, we want to talk a little bit about the percent set 5 asides for special needs housing. 6 Do we think giving so much talk 7 about poverty, about those with H.I.V. or 8 A.I.D.S., the mentally ill, the disabled, 9 homeless, that we should not perhaps raise 10 this level in special needs? 11 I remember many years ago when John 12 Kramer was here, when we started this, we 13 started the 20 percent set-asides. 14 But it looks like at this point, 15 given the great need in our City, that 16 maybe we need to consider raising that. 17 How feasible is that? And what would it 18 take to make that a reality? 19 Any of these questions, you can also 20 bring us a response tomorrow. We're happy to do that. Miss Minz.

Thank you. Dana Minz, Director of Special Needs Housing. 296 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 The feasibility of increasing the set aside from to percent would be a 4 policy decision by the City. And it 5 becomes a requirement for any development. 6 The feasibility is that we have 7 experienced difficulties in developers 8 identifying a particular special need 9 population. 10 So oftentimes we are negotiating 11 with them which population they will 12 utilize and set the units aside for. 13 But we certainly would have to 14 mandate it. It becomes a condition of 15 their contract with us. And they have to 16 submit the plan prior to going to 17 construction for our approval. 18

I 19 understand, because this is how it started 20 initially when we did special needs. 21 And so we say that to all those 22 housing advocates who are still in the 23 room, that the possibility is there. 24 And I've been in meetings where 25 there's been a question about who applies 297 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 for some of this. And so, we have to work to the CDCs and other housing affordability and all other housing groups, that we have to work together because it's up to us if we want to increase those numbers. Thank you very much. On there is a very large discrepancy between the emergency shelter bed capacity and the proposed number of both transitional and permanent housing. What do we need to do to reduce this? You know, this is my... This is the area God gave me to work in, so I will always work with the homeless population. And albeit we do -- we do a lot in this area, I was surprised to read that the gap between the transitional, permanent housing and emergency shelter beds is so wide.

The number that's in the plan this year, there's a footnote at the bottom of the table that explains that that number represents the number of shelter 298 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 positions and slots that are available and the anticipated use as a result of turnover during the course of the fiscal year. In the past we simply would identify the shelter bed capacity. This year we're identifying the capacity plus the anticipated use because of turnover. So as a result of that, there is a much greater number and possibilities of use than in the transitional slots because we do not experience that same kind of turnover and transitional housing as we do in shelter.

Point of order.

Councilman Cohen.

Could I get that? I couldn't get that.

He said repeat the answer, he said, please. Repeat that.

The number that's included in the Consolidated Plan for shelter usage includes the number of 299 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 shelter slots and the anticipated use as a result of turnover during the year. So you may have one or two or three households using the same shelter bed during the course of the fiscal year, which is different from transitional housing, where you may and oftentimes only have one household utilizing that transitional housing unit. That's different from how we reported the shelter bed usage in the past. We would usually just state the shelter capacity only, and didn't count the duplicate number of usage during the course of the year. So, we corrected for that this year.

How did that impact on the question raised by the Chair?

The differential is that in transitional housing you may have one household that utilizes a transitional housing slot for the entire fiscal year, so you're only counting that unit once; whereas, with shelter capacity, we have 300 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 households that utilize the shelter slot for four months, another family for maybe three months, and another family for the balance of the calendar year. You can count that for three times. So that makes up for the difference, and why you would have a larger number in shelter usage than you would have in transitional usage.

Couldn't the two years be put together in the same language so that we'd have a basis for comparison?

Possibly because this is an annual plan for only the 12 months fiscal year. We're attempting to provide information just based on a 12-month period of usage.

I think what the Councilman is saying -- and maybe you could write it and explain it in a clearer manner, because looking at the chart doesn't make clear that we're doing a better job because we're doing more in transitional housing than it would 301 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 indicate. It's not really clear. We don't really understand the answer, is what he's saying. I don't know what you mean either.

The tables that are in the Consolidated Plan, HUD asked us to identify the number of households that are being assisted in a housing unit. In shelter beds, you could have multiple households using that shelter unit during the fiscal year. In transitional housing you oftentimes only have one household being housed in the transitional slot. That's the distinction and the clarity we're trying to make, reporting households assisted, not just units available.

So you're saying emergency shelter are beds and transitional housing could be one family in a household.

Exactly, in an apartment unit, in a row home; whereas, the shelter 302 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 numbers are including shelters, multiple shelter, shelter beds, slots, et cetera. So there's a much larger number of shelter beds. And when you have multiple households that can utilize them over the fiscal year, your numbers are going to be much larger in that category than they would be in transitional housing. Is that helpful?

Yes, that's better. We're talking about... Obviously, Councilman, they...

Well, it's better but it doesn't answer your question. What's the benefit? MS. McCOLLOCH: Part of the issue is that we need to fill in the chart the way HUD tells us to use the chart. But we can add some additional text on page... Whatever page... on to explain it.

Let me ask another. I know we're being an average of 2400 shelter beds a day. Here we're saying for '04... If we 303 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 do 2400 a day, here we're saying emergency shelter beds for '04 were 12,969. That doesn't do it, does it? Doesn't add up; am I correct? We have permanent housing -- For '04, permanent housing, 225; transitional housing, 300. So, then transitional housing... Then we assume there's a 75 family gap between transitional and permanent, so they should move into permanent, right? And then emergency... I don't know. Then emergency shelter beds, if we do 2400 a day, I don't know how -- I don't know how the numbers really fit.

The number of shelter slots is the number that we request the capacity from OESS, the number of shelter slots that they fund with City funds, and also the number of shelter slots that are available privately that are not funded with the City, because the Consolidated Plan and HUD is asking us to identify all shelter capacity, whether City funded or 304 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 privately funded. So, the presumption is that a homeless person or a family could occupy that one shelter bed a number of times during the course of the year. That still counts as a household being assisted during the course of that fiscal year. So you could conceivably have four to six families or four to six individuals being assisted in that one shelter bed over the course of the year.

All right. Can we ask that when you do this, that it's spelled out like that?

Sure; absolutely.

Because there's no way we can figure any of that out, based on this chart on : There's been a lot of talk today and we will have more tomorrow about minority participation with the City's social service and behavioral health contracts. Does OHCD have minority participation goals, and how are they 305 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 reached, and who monitors them? How are we dealing with OHCD and those contracts?

I don't know that we have specific goals in behavioral health. But as far as the contracts entered into by OHCD, yes, we do have specific goals. And as I recall -- Well, first of all, those goals are monitored and administered by Vincent Coles. And as I recall... Again, this doesn't go specifically to mental health type services. But as I recall, I think there's a minimum percent minority 15 participation and several other goals 16 underneath that. 17 Those other specifics I can get to you.

Okay. How much of NTI's budget is allocated to marketing, and how do we do that or who does that?

For example, the marketing of the anti-predatory loan products, specifically that money has been 306 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 coming from a consortium of banks that are participating in the anti-predatory loan program, working with selected housing counseling agencies. We also... Donated to us by PNC Bank was marketing design services that came up with the Great City Great Rate, but that was donated design services. And Clear Channel donated, I think, billboard spaces for about 80 billboards throughout the City, to advertise the Philaloan three percent loan. And I understand in fiscal year '05 a new marketing campaign or slogan has been developed by PNC. In addition, as a result of the NTI partnership with Citizens Bank, Citizens Bank helped design and will contribute funds to market what we call the Don't Borrow Trouble Hot Line. That is a mockup of that ad. And we hope this fall when we hit home improvement season again, we'll be unveiling that as part of a media campaign. 307 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 Citizens is contributing approximately -- has committed to contribute approximately 30,000 per year for a five-year period, specifically for buying ad space and the like. And that's basically... I mean, the marketing resources that we draw on. OHCD historically has used things like the City's water bill, mailings, as well as other job -- not job fair... housing fairs and the like to market housing counseling services. I don't know if you want to add anything, Deborah. One other thing --

With regard to that, we want to make sure in all of that that minority firms are involved.

Yes, we have.

Historic preservation. There's historic property repair program listed on . I quote. It says, the City will work with the Preservation Alliance on the design and implementation of the program. 308 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 Our question is, should not this funding be administered by OHCD or PHDC, as with all other housing repair programs, with recommendations to the Historic Commission or the Preservation Alliance?

The intent of that language was just to make sure that we worked out and worked with and consulted with the preservation community on any design of a new program. It does not address actually who would administer that program. We really haven't gotten to that point. It could be administered by the Historic Commission or other -- OHCD, PHDC. But the intent was to say that we would work with the preservation community around what a program may look like.

Certainly, as you know, we have a task force dealing with this whole issue. And certainly we would like to be involved, and we're happy to assist in this regard. We've had one meeting, we will have one per month, and 309 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 then come back to the Council in September with recommendations about how to -- about how we think we should proceed. It's very interesting in the City that we have a -- we have a preservation program, but this preservation program is separate from zoning. And yet, you've got to go through -- And yet, the zoning refers you to them, and they go to zoning. And we've got some ways we do business that don't seem to all fit together under one structure. But we'll come back to you in September, after we have our three separate meetings with regard to those issues. UNIDENTIFIED WOMAN: Councilwoman Blackwell?

Yes. UNIDENTIFIED WOMAN: May I respectfully ask if you have any additional questions for the Program Review Committee, or other members of Council, or if we may be excused?

With regard 310 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 to the Program Review Committee, does anyone else have any questions with regard to Program Review Committee? (No response.)

No. Thank you. Thank you very much. I'll ask one more question, and then defer to Councilwoman Tasco. I guess Mr. Hanna, I should ask you. Why are we giving one point or allocating 1.5 million in HOPWA funds to the Track Program, and not directly to H.I.V./A.I.D.S. or H.I.V. or A.I.D.S. service providers? How do we direct this money? So many of these organizations provide a holistic menu of services on shoestring budgets, yet they have the expertise to deliver efficiently. Can you explain how you see us allocating those dollars?

I'll ask Mr. Wilds to speak to that. 311 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04

Thank you.

Thank you. Hi, Councilwoman.

Hi.

I am Scott Wilds. Track has historically -- And as you are aware, it's an offshoot of TAG. Track has historically done the rental assistance, the largest rental assistance piece of arranging for housing vouchers for folks who have A.I.D.S., to be able to live in their own apartment. This is the thing that is the single thing that everyone wants, is their own place to live. And Track, because it's large, has developed this special expertise. They have the staff. And while we also support some smaller groups, we thought it was the most efficient way to get the most number of vouchers out on the street. We do hope that in the next year we'll cut in half the waiting list that exists right now. And Track is a large 312 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 part of that.

Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Wilds. Councilwoman Tasco.

Yes. Thank you very much. I just like for you to go back and explain to me the acquisition process because I missed the initial question, so I didn't understand your answer. And I just want to get...

Can't hear you.

I was just trying to get a clarification on the acquisition, additional acquisition dollars that are...

Thank you.

...being appropriated. And the other thing is, will it be done -- I know we had the meeting, but I can't remember. With this -- You said the money will be -- you will put out RFPs for 313 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 the expenditure. Just explain that whole thing to me again, will you?

I'll be happy to. We in the administration said we would make it -- we would look at how we can identify an additional $15 million to support acquisition. Right now the NTI bond program budget carries $74 million to support acquisition activities over five years. That was actually a $24 million increase over the $50 million that was initially provided. We... To make those additional resources available, without adversely affecting the whole bond program budget, the administration is proposing that we take this money that we get each year -- and this is the base level that we received historically for decades. I know there's been some discussion about increased resources coming, but we're not talking about that. 314 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 We're talking about the base which we've gotten historically of about $5 billion [sic] a year. And we use those to support acquisition going forward in '05, '07, and in... I mean '05, '06 and '07.

That's where you proposed the $16 million.

Yes, that's how we're proposing to, you know, make up that $15 million is through the DCED grant to the City. The reason why we're suggesting that is that the type of bond financing that's used for acquisition activity is a more expensive type of debt. And therefore, if we were to issue additional taxable bonds, the impact could be us having to find about $20 million in cuts in the five-year budget. So, we didn't want to do that. So this was a good faith effort of our trying to meet the D [sic] for the increasing demand for acquisition, as well as, you know, maintaining the level of 315 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 commitment and the new programs that we wanted to fund out of the -- the bond proceeds. The other thing is, is that we have -- I know there was some testimony at the public portion regarding the recycling agreement. We're pleased to announce that we have finalized the recycling agreement. It's executed. That resources from the condemnation of tax delinquent properties will result in us being able to take those dollars, once they come back to the City, and then reprogram them for acquisition activities. We're also, wherever feasible, looking at the sale of property at fair market value, so that money can come back into the pot, because we realize that, you know, we want to try to sustain, you know, resources for acquisition activity because that's sort of like the first piece of money that -- that's sort of like the pre-condition for development, of course, is acquisition. 316 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04

Thank you very much.

Thank you very much. Could I ask a couple of other questions, and then I'll be done, just because I told Mr. Hanna I wanted him to put this on the record, about Logan. One, what's happening in Logan, for the record, so that the constituents over there will have a sense of what's going on; and secondly, the -- hopefully accommodations for Lack, the Logan Assistance Corporation.

First of all, just to give you an update on what's happening at Logan, we have... we have engaged the services of TRF, redevelopment fund, to help us ascertain the best way to redevelop that site. TRF has issued a couple of RFPs, one for market study, the other for geo-technical studies; both, again, aimed at trying to figure out what can be, from a 317 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 geo-technical standpoint, built on the site, and then what's the highest and best use for the site, from a marketing standpoint. Those folks are actually out doing their work literally as we speak. I would expect that within the next -- probably within the next 30 days they ought to have a preliminary draft of their recommendations. From that we'll just kind of move forward. My expectation is that once we get that work back, we'll use that as a part of an RFP that will go out for developers who will, based upon those studies, come back and tell us how best or how they would propose to redevelop the cleared site. That's one thing. Relative specifically to Lack, the Logan...

Assistance.

...Assistance Corporation, we have committed to fund Logan's operations for another year, to the 318 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 tune of... What is it? $150,000, with the understanding that this will be the final year of our funding their operations, at least in this particular fashion. There are still a number of folks who need to be settled or whose relocation need to be settled. The Redevelopment Authority is currently negotiating with the individual who was at Lack who was responsible for that, in an effort to try to bring her on board. The expectation is, therefore, that the RDA will complete the settlements with those folks who need to be settled with. As has been discussed here and elsewhere, RDA needs another relocation specialist, simply because the sheer volume of work that's coming down the pike. And so, once that person finishes with her Logan responsibilities, then she'll be asked to complete work City wide. Our hope is that next year Lack will apply for either or both, either a housing 319 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 assistance corporation or a neighborhood assistance corporation, and that through those two means might be able to sustain itself as a liaison between the administration and the community, as an entity that actually provides information, much needed information, to the Logan community.

Before that question, if I might, Councilwoman Tasco, we have asked about global remediation, doing a study with borings in five areas. One is Councilwoman Tasco's area; one is mine; one in Darrell's; one in Rick Mariano's; and one in another area: For $300,000 to do a pilot study. Now you're saying you're putting out an RFP for global technical information. What about this issue that we've been asking about since last spring?

The specific program that I'm talking about at Logan is actually being funded by TRF. TRF was brought in -- It's on their own dime. TRF has 320 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 volunteered to pull together this stuff and to actually fund --

Well, the Councilwoman told me she's had funding waiting a long time that the City didn't take advantage of.

One of the proposals that have come to us is this method by consolidating the land, you know, because we have this subsidence program in the areas of the Council Districts that have been sited. And this one... We have been -- brought this proposal to do borings and do some --

Is this with Reverend Shine's group?

Reverend Shine's group, to do a pilot effort, which could be helpful in addressing the subsidence issue in the City of Philadelphia.

Couple things. First of all, I'll speak. And I'll ask Mr. Wetzel 321 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 to speak. Reverend Shine approached the City to provide this particular service. The original proposal we determined to be way too expensive. In fact, it was something like to the tune of $110,000 per housing site or per parcel, to get a particular site ready for redevelopment. I understand from Councilwoman Blackwell that they've since revised that proposal, after we told them that it was too expensive. And towards that end, Mr. Wetzel informs me that we haven't seen the revised proposal. So if we could get a copy of that proposal, we'd be more than happy to take a look at it.

That's fine. We assume -- We brought it up for the last several meetings, but we'll make sure that you have a detailed proposal, if you don't have it. We're happy to do that because 322 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 they're talking only $300,000 for five sites.

Yeah. And just for clarification purposes, the program we're talking about in Logan is completely different from what we're talking about here because in Logan we're not talking about going in and doing borings and otherwise stabilizing what is now unstable land. What we're talking about in Logan is trying to determine the best way to develop what's there.

Okay. If the Councilwoman is satisfied with that, then I'm satisfied.

Well, you know, I think that not just for Logan, I mean, because there's surrounding areas; but, you know, to look at the prospect of a new way of stabilizing land is something that we ought to look at. In Washington, when they built the Reagan Building, they had to... I don't 323 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 know anything about this, so I just happened to see this building across the street. And I was told, oh, yeah. Let me tell you how they built this because it was -- Washington is on water, and how they had to go in and use this process to solidify the land under it and draw the water out. I don't know what. It sounds something like these guys wanted to do. So, for me, if they could do that and put a big stone building like this on that land, and we have houses sinking in Councilwoman Miller's District just across the boulevard, we have houses in Councilman Nutter's District sinking, it may be a way for to us identify a process to stabilize the land. That's what I...

Sure.

Whether we use it in Logan or not, Logan is a perfect place to test it because you don't have to move anybody out, and you can take a spot and do it, you know, not the whole process, 324 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 not the whole land. But I'm just thinking in terms of looking at a new way of doing business.

No. And we would certainly agree; you're right. There are those types of sites sinking all over the City. And to the extent that we can discover or someone has discovered a new and innovative way to otherwise subsidize or restabilize those areas, I mean, we'll be more than all for it. And so, Councilwoman, if you would get us a copy or have them get us a copy, we'll certainly take a look at it.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

I'm finished. Thank you. I have one last question, but I would defer to Councilman Cohen.

Thank you, Madam Chair. First I want to commend the Chair 325 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 for what I think has been one of the finest sessions I've ever attended in City Council, in which the legislative body seeks information and seeks to hold to account the administration with respect to its promises and with respect to its activities.

Thank you.

So I just wanted to state that. I've been very impressed, sitting here almost as an outsider over the last few hours.

Thank you.

And I think hearings like this do the City a great deal of credit. I wanted to express one opinion, more than a question, on the needs of the Affordable Housing Trust Fund. Seems to me if there's any way of taking some money from NTI and going through whatever legal field is necessary to deal with the problems of affordable housing. 326 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 When I came in, I made some kind of pointed remark that where the developers that we're talking about, the room would be crowded with Council members, with interest being shown in every phase, things would be described as time sensitive. But whenever it deals with human rights, suddenly there's all the time in the world, and any money contribution is carefully strained and reduced. It seems to me there could be nothing more urgent than the need of affordable housing for those of our citizens that are most vulnerable, those that are handicapped in some way, those special people that the Lord apparently anointed to do a great deal of extra suffering. And it seems to me that when we borrow $300 million for NTI and talk about transforming neighborhoods, one important neighborhood to transfer above all else would be a neighborhood composed of special people that need to have special needs; and 327 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 instead of doling out carefully a dollar here and a dollar there, we would go out of our way to make life more useful and more fruitful for the people that are so vulnerable. Incidentally, vulnerable people have achieved great things in the United States. They've made great contributions. They've put others to shame often. But I'm talking not of the skills and the abilities which everybody admits -- everybody who knows of them admits -- but of the humanitarian thing. It seems to me government has a real responsibility of dealing with those that are most vulnerable. And here we spend so much time talking about economic development and saying how urgent it is to concentrate on that, and we forget there are citizens here who need assistance of government. If they don't get it from government, they're going to get it from nobody. And I would like to see, and I 328 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 pledge to support the efforts of the coalition to get their $20 million clean and free, instead of getting a million and a half. (Applause and cheers.)

I just don't understand why we have to debate it and say, well, you know, we can't afford that money now. We have a fiscal problem. We always have fiscal problems when it comes to the needs of poor people or working people or handicapped people, or minorities or women. There you've got to worry about every single penny, to make sure you don't spend too much. But when it comes to developers, the approach seems to be, don't you need more money? We'll be glad to give it to you. So I'm hoping that the example that the Chair has set today in showing the Council's concern about the welfare of the people who need help the most is continued in the Council. And I pledge my extreme support. 329 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 And I look forward to the day... You know, I'm at an age when I can't look forward to too many years. But I would like, before I pass on from this earth, to have a feeling that this government has done everything it could to take care of those that need help. And that's what government is for. And I pledge to work in that direction unceasingly until we attain it. Thank you very much. (Applause and cheers.)

Thank you, Councilman. Thank you very much. We have questions from Councilman Nutter and Councilwoman Brown.

Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. Miss Smith, just a couple hundred -- I mean, a couple questions. (Laughter.)

It's late in the day. , just kind of to start. 330 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04

I'm sorry, Councilman. Of which?

29.

29 of the...

I'm sorry.

I'm sorry. Program statement and budget, FY '05 for NTI. Can you tell me -- I have to admit to you I didn't realize. We have five different side yard programs?

Yes. There are different side yard programs that run. And actually, I think Herb Wetzel might be able to go into more detail. There's programs that -- PHDC has a side yard program for a property that it has in its real estate. The Redevelopment Authority has a side yard program for property that was in its ownership. In addition, there's what's known as the City's Surplus, VPRC properties. Under Ordinance Number 1202-a, 331 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 properties can be disposed of as part of what's known as the small vacant lot abatement program. And there maybe one other that I'm missing right now.

Is that the small vacant lot abatement?

That's the one that was authorized by 1202-a.

Okay. So, I have four so far.

Yeah. I may be missing one or maybe --

Okay.

I'm sorry.

So... Okay. So it's at least four or possibly five.

Mm-hmm.

Is that where we are?

Yes.

Okay. Now, I know it was raised earlier, but I at least want to put on the record this issue with regard to the $15 million in additional 332 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 acquisition funding. Is it my understanding that this $15 million is to come from an annual grant fund from the state which is a $5 million per year grant?

Yes. The City has historically received about $5 million in the Department of Community Education -- In DCED per year. Historically we use that for Basic System Repair Program. And we're proposing that we take that $5 million allocation that we've gotten and put that to fund additional acquisitions.

Okay. What I did not understand about that is, since you're looking at FY '05, '06 and '07, how would you propose to use two years of future funding to support an acquisition program in FY '05?

No. We're saying each year, that what our proposal is is that we're -- aren't able to fund the whole $15 million FY '05, but that we would pledge 333 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 and dedicate and fund the $5 million as it comes each year from the state for acquisition. So there will be another $5 million in '06 and $5 million in '07. And that's how we reflected it in the budget when we talked about it.

Okay. I guess maybe what may have confused me about this is, I thought earlier this year there was a discussion about an additional $15 million being made available. This issue came up, I thought, during the course of the amendment to the FY '04 current year NTI program and budget. And I thought, I guess, when I heard about this $15 million, that it was the same as the earlier discussion about $15 million. So I assumed that it was $15 million hard cash for FY '05.

When -- When... In that letter that Councilwoman Blackwell referred to from Miss Wilkerson, we said the administration was willing to investigate 334 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 how we can identify additional $15 million to support for acquisition. When we ran the numbers and saw the impact, that if we were to try to fund it all out of bond proceeds, we'd also began to explore with the state the idea of us applying for and receiving their dollars to support acquisition going forward, to support -- to honor that commitment. That's how we're proposing to honor it.

Okay. With regard to demolition, based on the schedule that you're showing on in the same book, it appears that we will have spent through FY '05 $125 million in demolition.

Yes.

On demolition, rather.

Yes. That's what -- Based on the current budget, we are looking to -- re-budgeting about $46 million for residential in FY '05. That -- And that would bring us to a total of $125 million out of bond proceeds. 335 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04

And that will represent how many actual properties?

Our estimate is about 1600 under the targeted program, and then about another... budgeting for about another 200 as part of the City-Wide emergency curb-side work. So we're looking at 1800 is the estimated number for FY '05.

I was talking about for the whole program. The $125 million total will represent how many properties?

Oh, that would represent, based on the current average in costs that we've incurred to date, that would represent about... Just a second. That represents... Not including emergency curb side, that will represent about 3500, and is part of the targeted program. And then, I would say another close to 1200 as part of the emergency curb side for FY '03 to '04 and projected for '05.

So 4700? 336 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04

Yeah, 1200 and... Yes.

All right. Well, when I did the math just on the 125, and your current estimate is $22,000 per property, I mean that came out to 5681. But you're telling me that it's 4700.

Right. But we also included in the budget number are the costs for what we call the OCIP program, the costs for things like the asbestos monitoring, for the targeted program.

I thought that was within the $22,000.

No, no, no, no, no. The represents the actual cost of the 17 actual... We actually put that sheet in 18 the program thing. 19 The 2200 [sic] represents the actual 20 demolition costs and post treatments. And 21 then over and above that are things like 22 the asbestos monitoring, stuccoing for the last three years or two years plus next year, program management OCIP. And that brings you to a total of 125. 337 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04

Well, it's testing my memory a little bit, but I seem to recall back in either '01, '02 when we started with the NTI program, wasn't the original goal, in terms of demolition, about 14,000 properties?

That was our projected goal. And it was... Yeah, at the time we unveiled it, the program in 2001. What we're looking at are the, you know, based on the current costs for the last couple of years, we're looking at a lower number.

Looking at a what?

A lower number than what our projected goal. I mean, we did state a goal. And that goal was, you know, derived at what we thought we could accomplish over a five-year period with the resources. We also had higher resources budgeted for demolition. Initially I think it was closer to $140 million. But as we 338 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 increased acquisition and also used some monies last year for other activities it, in fact, dropped to $117 million, and we're up to 125 now.

All right. So this represents about a third or so of the original goal.

Yes.

Okay. It was either last year or the year before -- It was probably the year before; and we've talked about this -- Council set aside a million dollars for use in a pilot program for retaining walls, and a study to deal with alleys, driveways, curbs and sidewalks. At an earlier hearing during operating budget testimony, I think with the Streets Department, we asked -- a number of us, myself, and Councilwoman Tasco and others... Obviously, the Retaining Wall Pilot Program has started, and we're now in at least a Phase II of that, for which we're appreciative. 339 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 There was never, though, a report issued, with regard to the other issues. And the commitment, at least at the time, and the way even the amendment to the... It was either -- I guess it was the FY '03 budget done in FY '02. The way it was written clearly indicated that there would be a pilot program and some use of dollars for that, and then a report.

Mm-hmm.

The way it was explained to us about a month or so ago was that the pilot program started, costs escalated, they used all the money or virtually all the money for the retaining wall program, and did not do the study. The problem with that, of course is, Council puts forward money with certain expectations. You can't just not do one of the things.

Well, what we did instead of paying for a study, is that based on work with the Streets Department, 340 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 and information that we were able to gather through a series of telephone conversations on best practices and other research we did, we did more of an in-house type of a study. And what we've done is, we've put that together. It's not final. But a draft of that study is that review of resources and strategies is -- I included in the gray folder. We thought it was a priority to make sure that we fully fund, you know, the costs of the retaining walls, since those were in eminently dangerous conditions, and began to look at, you know, internally using our own staff capacity about possible approaches to the issue of curbs and sidewalks. Again, we're still confronted with the cost issue. Other jurisdictions tend to -- if they do have resources, they tend to use dedicated resources like motor vehicle or fuel taxes or special assessments to fund 341 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 that type of activity. One of the things that we would like to work with Council on is how we might be able to use existing resources, through a variety of, you know, like grant and loan programs, working with homeowners, to organize a way to, if they make the repairs, that they can tap some existing resources. I mean, those are the kind of ideas and suggestions that we've come up with.

All right. And you're saying now that you're trying to respond to this particular provision with a document, repairing private infrastructure, options for maintaining curbs, sidewalks and driveways. Is that...

Yes, because we went ahead and just dedicated the dollars to the retaining wall repair.

All right. Well, I'd like to have an opportunity to go through that. And I won't --

It is a draft document, 342 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 and we would appreciate --

Okay.

-- comments and thoughts back.

Yeah. Probably figured I was going to do that anyway, right.

Yes.

Okay. I guess one of my last questions with regard to the NTI budget is, it appears... Well, that's actually not the last question; but, you know, I do that from time to time. It appears that FY '05 seems to mark a turning point in the program. Through FY '05 you will have approximately 12 and a half million dollars left of the $275 million which was... from the original budgets was 295, and then down to 275 spread out over five years. At year three of the program you will have at least either spent or allocated all but $12 million. 343 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 What happens in years four and five of the five-year program? And aren't you actually starting -- Aren't you running out of bond money? Don't you have to do another offering?

I'll take the second part first. Yes, I believe our total expenditures and under... is reaching -- I think we're about a hundred million dollars, approximately, that we have drawn down from the trustee, and for various commitments to date. It is the administration's hope and intention that we'll issue the second and final traunch [sic] which will represent about $133 million, depending on market conditions, by the end of this calendar year, to really begin working on that over the summer and in the early fall. With respect to other resources, again, what we've done is that we're at a point with the acquisition pipeline, that we did want to commit additional dollars to affordable rental development and some 344 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 other key programs out of the bond proceeds, including: Capitalizing the trust fund; sustaining, you know, a commitment to retaining walls, and the like. With respect to the demolition dollars because those are the dollars that help pay the debt service on this initiative, we would be looking to go back to the... allocating funds out of the General Fund to support demolition activities in FY '06 and '07. And the Budget Director under one of the budgets that I guess Council has before it in part of the five-year plan is including about $8 million in '06 and '07.

So we're going to fund... I mean, in essence are you saying that we're going back to the way we used to fund demolition prior to NTI, which is putting the money --

In terms of the source of --

-- back in the L 345 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 & I's budget?

Well, all this money -- all the demolition money flows through the L & I budget. This will be $8 million in General Fund, as opposed to bond proceeds.

Well, that's what I mean.

Yeah. Mm-hmm.

Okay. And with regard to the demolition, I know has all the percentages. Can you direct me to a page that shows, by Councilmanic District, how the $46 million gets divided up?

On page -- The next page, the following page, 23, that's where we put ranges, based on the projected number of demolitions by Council District, based on vacancy. And reason why we put ranges, this is, again, a budget number. You know, things can --

Right.

-- go up and down, but 346 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 that's where we break that out.

Right. Well, let me make sure I'm understanding that statement. When you say things go up and down, I mean, you've got $46 million on this page, you've got ten Districts, and the respective dollar amounts per District.

Mm-hmm.

What do you mean when you say the numbers can go up and down?

Well, again, what we put in the budget, we said the approximate number of demolitions that we would hope to accomplish with, let's say, $6.2 million. So we put the range of 260 to 280.

Okay.

And that number can vary, depending on the number of party wall treatments, things of that nature.

I understand. But the goal of that -- you're taking the first one -- if you only end up doing, you 347 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 know, 261 and there's money left over, would you say it's out of the $6.2, does it stay in that District?

Yes.

Okay. And if for some reason you only end up doing 250 because costs go up, if they were to continue to go up, and you blow through 6.2, basically that's end of the line.

Yeah. It's a ceiling. We're trying --

Right. All right.

Yes.

So, you at least -- I mean, so, just so we're clear because, you know, we had a little glitch in the system last year, whatever the figures are here, that's what they are. MS. smith: Yes. That's the ceiling.

And you move through the dollars however you move through them, and the market forces are 348 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 whatever the cost is. You knock down as many as you can knock down, as have been identified.

Mm-hmm. COUNCIMLAN NUTTER: But you at least keep what you have.

Yes.

Okay. All right. Let's talk about the $15 million. And I know that there's all kinds of conversations going on with regard to the source, and all that. But let's for the moment suspend reality and say that we actually resolved that issue. How will you allocate the $15 million for acquisition?

Okay. I don't know if Mr. Hanna wants to talk about the RFP processes that we've contemplated to use to allocate the 15 million.

Only to say that what is contemplated is an RFP process. That would go part and parcel with a couple of other 349 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 RFPs that we typically issue in a given fiscal year.

So it's all going to be by RFP?

That was our proposal. Councilwoman Blackwell has expressed --

That was a little earlier in the day.

Councilwoman Blackwell was expressing dissatisfaction with that proposed process.

Right.

So we may need to go back and revise that.

So you might be re-thinking that. I think that might be a good idea. Let's talk about how you're going to deal with kind of the issue.

I'm sorry. ?

Yeah, . You have... This is for these acquisition zones and large scale development. First, you have a budget of $37 350 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 million. You have... If I'm reading this right, you've approved activities for acquisitions for $39 million. So you start with a deficit out of the box. Second, there are a couple of these -- or I guess technically that would be a few of these that have nothing. So I guess there's two questions, one, how you're going to deal with the $2 million deficit; and second, what happens if in one of those Districts where you have the little dash something comes up and there's a need for funding?

Let me explain the -- the -- the... You really need to take the last two boxes or rectangles together. That middle rectangle speaks to the allocation of acquisition dollars per District.

Right.

And those acquisition dollars, delegated by District, was based upon the level of blight in the individual District. That's why District One, for 351 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 instance, got more money than did District Ten. There is -- There's -- There were more --

Right. Well, this is the... I mean, this was the baseline --

Right.

-- funding concept.

But I'm getting -- I'm getting --

Some people got a million and a half; some people got two and a half; and then the larger ones got... Right. And I'm fine with that.

But I'm getting to the bottom -- the bottom -- the bottom box. The bottom box is what we call acquisitions. In other words, these were large-scale development projects over which the individual Council people had very little, if any... I shouldn't say say. But these were, for instance, in 352 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 District Five, there were a number of projects that provided for grants from HUD, for instance, the home ownership zone for Cecil B. Moore. We made -- The administration made the decision that a given District's individual allotment should not be affected by these otherwise large-scale developments. And so, we kind of dropped them below the line, and basically called them the Mayor's large acquisition zones.

Mm-hmm.

To get to the question as to whether -- why there is a $2 million or how we'll deal with the $2 million shortfall there, recall, as Pat said a little bit earlier, the recycling agreement has now been signed, sealed and delivered. The recycling agreement provides that as we sell property for fair market value, those monies would be recycled and be made available for further acquisitions. Those monies would go into this pot, and that's how we're hoping to -- that's 353 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 how we expect to overcome the now $2 million shortfall. That, in addition to the fact that the --

Well, how much do you anticipate coming back in the next year or how much has come back?

In the next year? I can think of at least one specific deal, that in Brewerytown, that would yield somewhere around $750,000. But we don't have to worry about it necessarily next year because typically these acquisitions take a number of years -- may take a number of years to accomplish.

Let me understand that this. For the seven Districts that are listed here, and the respective dollar amounts, are you saying that there are identified projects that funding has already been allocated to --

Which box --

-- for all 354 Bill 040594 - 6/1/04 these?

Which box are we talking about?

Bottom box. These are all live projects --

Yes.