COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA PUBLIC HEARING AND PUBLIC MEETING BEFORE THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - - - Room 400, City Hall Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Thurs., February 10, 2000 3:15 p.m. - - - BILL NO. 000003 - An ordinance to adopt a Capital Program for the six years 2001 to 2006 exclusive. BILL NO. 000004 - An ordinance to adopt a Fiscal 2001 Capital Budget. BILL NO. 000005 - An ordinance to adopt an Operating Budget for Fiscal Year 2001. PRESENT: COUNCIL PRESIDENT ANNA C. VERNA, Chair COUNCILWOMAN JANNIE L. BLACKWELL COUNCILWOMAN BLONDELL REYNOLDS BROWN COUNCILMAN DARRELL L. CLARKE COUNCILMAN DAVID COHEN COUNCILMAN FRANK J. DICICCO COUNCILMAN W. WILSON GOODE, JR. COUNCILMAN JAMES F. KENNEY COUNCILWOMAN JOAN L. KRAJEWSKI COUNCILMAN W. THACHER LONGSTRETH COUNCILMAN RICHARD T. MARIANO COUNCILWOMAN DONNA REED MILLER COUNCILMAN MICHAEL A. NUTTER COUNCILMAN ANGEL L. ORTIZ COUNCILMAN FRANK RIZZO COUNCILWOMAN MARIAN B. TASCO - - - VINCENT VARALLO ASSOCIATES, INC. Registered Professional Reporters Eleven Penn Center, Suite 600 Philadelphia, PA 19103 (215) 561-2220 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, I N D E X Stephanie Franklin-Suber, Chief of Staff. . . 11 Executive Director, City Planning Commission 16 Jay Beratan, Deputy Director for Aviation . . 24 Philadelphia Airport Robert Dubow, Acting Budget Director. . . . . 31 William Hankowsky, President, PIDC. . . . . . 33 Gregory Grillone, Stadium Director. . . . . . 53 Richard Dean, Deputy Director, Program Office 85 Karen Talarico, Executive Director. . . . . . 173 Friends of the Free Library Bethann Johnson, President. . . . . . . . . . 175 Friends of Walnut West Library Dwight Rice, Vice President . . . . . . . . . 177 Friends of Widener Group Kent Miller, Executive Director . . . . . . . 238 Municipal Energy Office Office of Transportation Witness. . . . . . . 245 3 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, 5 P R O C E E D I N G S
I'm sorry to keep everyone waiting. We're simply waiting for some documents to be delivered to us, so if you'll please bear with us, we should start very shortly. Thank you. - - -
Again, I apologize for the delay. This is the Committee of the Whole, and I would ask Mr. McPherson to please read the titles of Bill No.'s 003, 004, and 005.
Bill No. 003, an ordinance to adopt a Capital Program for the six years 2001 to 2006, exclusive. Bill No. 004, an ordinance to adopt a Fiscal 2001 Capital Budget. Bill No. 005, an ordinance to adopt an Operating Budget for Fiscal Year 2001.
Councilwoman Blackwell, do you care to be recognized?
Yes, Madam President. I offer two amendments on behalf of the members of City Council, the first to Bill 4 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, 5 003, which --
Thank you, Madam President. Are we about to take action on the matters that are being raised by Councilwoman Blackwell? If we are, I believe we need to move into a public meeting --
Thank you, 5 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, 5 Madam President. I offer two amendments on behalf of the members of City Council, the first to Bill 4 003, to the Capital Program for Fiscal Years 2001 to 2006, and the second to Bill 004 to the Capital Budget for Fiscal Year 2001.
I believe everyone has copies of the amendments. (Duly seconded.)
The amendment has been offered. All those in favor of the adoption will signify by saying aye. Those opposed? The motion is carried. We will now hear from the Administration.
Madam Chair, is this a public meeting or a public hearing?
Well, then I believe Councilman Nutter had to be right and I respectfully disagree with Mr. Erekson.
Mr. Erekson? 6 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, 5
We have no power to act at a public hearing; we have power only to listen to testimony.
We will consult with our attorney. (President Verna consults with Mr. Erekson.)
Mr. Erekson informs me that we are in order in adopting the amendments at this time. We have done it in the past and he said that we can certainly do it now.
Madam President, I don't want to be impolite, but I have never, ever been at a public hearing, knowingly, when a motion of any sort was ever adopted. That's for a meeting purpose.
Councilman Cohen, there is no Charter requirement on this issue.
I expect, then, the requirement is steeped in the rules of the City Council and in our history. We have never -- as far as my knowledge, not even at a committee hearing do we ever adopt a resolution. 7 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, 5
We also move into a public meeting stance and then we go back again to a public hearing. I don't want anybody to be able to attack this legally at a later time, and I don't understand the ruling. And that's the reason I have to. . . I never remember ever adopting any past. . .
Councilman Nutter, I have seen that you've been looking through our rules. Do you see anything in there that would prohibit us from taking action at this time?
Madam Chair, I would certainly never want to compete with the likes of legal minds of either Tom Erekson or Councilman Cohen. At the same time, I believe that when I spoke earlier, it was more an instinctive reflex based on what our general practice has been and, I guess, quite honestly, what I thought I was taught at one point in time, that generally we do adopt amendments in the public meeting portion even though they may be 8 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, 5 offered in a public hearing. So -- and, again, I apologize for cutting across Councilwoman Blackwell when she was getting ready to get started. So it was merely what generally has been our normal practice. And I guess I assumed today, based on all of our discussions, that we were going to recess from a public hearing adopt into a public meeting, adopt the amendments in the public meeting, and then return to the public hearing portion and continue with the testimony. That was my general assumption about today's activities.
Well, I guess let me say two things, Madam President -- or Madam 9 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, 5 Chair. First, I mean certainly we do have good legal counsel here, and on the one hand, we could proceed with the counsel's advice; on the other hand, we could put forward what the intended amendments are. We will be in session next week in the course of Operating Budget, and whatever advertising opportunity there is for the public meeting, if Members want to proceed in that particular fashion, we can formally adopt them in that time period. I mean, I'm. . .
Before we could actually adopt? Could we take a short recess?
The amendments could be introduced as they are and we could go ahead with the hearing, and then next Thursday morning or any earlier or at a later time --
Let's take a 10 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, 5 five-minute recess, please.
-- We could have a brief meeting, but it would have to be advertised.
Let's take a five-minute recess, please. (Recess taken.) - - - (Proceedings resume.)
Thank you, Madam Chair. Madam Chair, at this time, I make a motion to suspend the rules of City Council so as to permit immediate consideration of the amendments that will be proposed for the Capital Budget. (Duly seconded.)
It has been second. All in favor of a suspension of the rules will vote aye. Those opposed? The ayes have it and the motion is 11 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, 5 carried. Jannie?
Madam President, this is my day. This is the third time, and I will read it verbatim. (Laughter.)
Madam President, I offer two amendments on behalf of the Members of City Council, the first to Bill 03, to amend the Capital Program for Fiscal Years 2001 to 2006; and the second to Bill 04, to the Capital Budget for Fiscal Year 2001. (Duly seconded.)
It has been moved and properly seconded. All those in favor will signify by saying aye. Those opposed? The ayes have it and the motion is carried. Miss Suber, I'm sorry you were kept waiting. I think we're now ready to hear your testimony.
Good afternoon, 12 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, 5 President Verna and Members of City Council. I am Stephanie Franklin-Suber, Chief of Staff for the City of Philadelphia. With me are: Rob Dubow, our Budget Director; Barbara Kaplan, Executive Director of the City Planning Commission; and Richard Dean, Deputy Director of the Program Office. Thank you for this opportunity to present testimony in support of the proposed Capital Budget and Capital Program, as amended by City Council. The Mayor has publicly apologized to City Council for any misperception or confusion with regard to the Capital Program and the Capital Budget. There was no proposed Capital Budget other than the one that the Mayor submitted to City Council. There was, however, a draft $167 million budget that the staff of the City Planning Commission shared with its Commission members. That draft included funding for some projects in Fiscal Year 2001 that the program submitted to City Council be deferred for funding to Fiscal Year 2002. I would like to take this opportunity 13 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, 5 to publicly apologize to City Council. As Chief of Staff, it is my responsibility to ensure that there is coordination between the Mayor's Office, the Capital Program Office, the Budget Office, and the Planning Commission in connection with the Capital Program and the Capital Budgets submitted to Council City Council. In the future, the Administration will have a closer working relationship, and we will ensure that we avoid this kind of situation. The Capital Program that has been amended is smaller than the programs that we're used to seeing. We've been forced to postpone some projects that we may have tried to fund in Fiscal Year 2001, and the simple explanation is that we are fast approaching our debt limit under the State Constitution, and because we're approaching that debt limit, we will have to reduce the amount that we can borrow to fund the capital projects. The proposed Capital Program, as amended, will be financed with general obligation debt, and it now totals, as amended: $157.4 million in FY 2001; 14 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, 5 $129.7 million for Fiscal Year 2002; $73.77 million annually for Fiscal Year 2003, Fiscal Year 2004; $72.77 million in Fiscal Year 2005. It then drops to $26.1 million in Fiscal Year 2006, the final year of the program. The first two years of the program are still relatively consistent, even as amended with previous Capital Budgets. They averaged about $139.5 million through the years Fiscal Year 1993 through Fiscal Year 2000, but the later years of the program are substantially reduced because of our debt limit. While the program projects a reduction in capital funding, the City intends to pursue strategies that will allow it to maintain a reasonably sized Capital Program while not incurring excessive levels of debt. Moreover, the funding levels included in the Capital Program, as amended, are sufficient to maintain the investments made over the past eight years and to implement important new projects. Again, the Administration is pleased to support City Council's amendments to the FY 2001 15 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, 5 Capital Budget and the FY 2001 through 2006 Capital Program. At this point, we would be happy to answer any questions you may have of the Administration, and Ms. Kaplan will present more detailed testimony. Representatives of all City agencies with Capital Budgets are also here to answer any questions you may have on specific projects.
Thank you, Madam President. Madam Chair, as we're probably going to be here for a little while, we had had a discussion not too long ago, and there is a two-page sheet -- not the longer piece that use 16 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, 5 for the amendments to the Capital Budget and the Capital Program. Is it possible to have a sizeable number of copies of those available for members of the general public or other Councilmembers so that people can see what was restored by the amendments?
Anyone who is interested, we do have copies available. Thank you. Miss Kaplan, good afternoon.
Good afternoon, Council President Verna and Members of Council. I'm Barbara Kaplan, the Executive Director of the City Planning Commission. Unfortunately, much of my testimony, I think, has been -- kind of been precluded by the amendments that have been offered this afternoon, which add $17 million to the budget year, so that the overview that I was going to present for the Six-Year Program and even for the summary of the 17 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, 5 budget year is no longer accurate. But I would be pleased to answer any questions Members of Council have about the overall budget. And I also wanted to point out that while most of the attention this year, as has been true in past years, has focused on the amount of City tax-supported funding that we have available, this is a budget that is many times greater than the amount of City tax-supported funding because we do have federal funds involved here, particularly for the Airport. We have some state monies available, we have federal funds and state funds for SEPTA projects, for Streets Department projects. We also have self-sustaining funds at the Airport and for the Water Department. So those other sources of funds greatly expand and enhance the capacity of the City to provide for all of our infrastructure needs. So I'd be pleased to answer questions in general and about any of the projects or departments that people have questions about.
Thank you. I had a question regarding the Airport. What are the parcels of land that the Airport is 18 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, 5 planning to acquire during FY 2001? Will the contemplated acquisitions be through condemnation or through negotiated sales? What are they proposing to do there?
Well, there was a bill, I think, that was introduced in Council that contemplated the acquisition of land for the Airport -- all the land that was still within control of the Redevelopment Authority in the vicinity of the Airport. That bill contemplated acquiring all of that land by condemnation for use of the Airport. And that bill -- I don't whether it did not proceed in the last session of Council. I know when that bill was received at the Planning Commission, the view of the Commission was that since the Airport was undertaking a master plan study for the future of the Airport, that it was premature to move ahead with any acquisition until that study, if not complete, was a lot further along so that we would have a much firmer idea of exactly what was needed and how each parcel of land might be used. There was a particular concern on the 19 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, 5 part of some of the Eastwick residents wanting to support the Airport but some of these parcels of lands are within 500 feet of existing single- family residences, so there was a certain about exactly what activity would happen on each parcel of land.
No, the City Council did not receive an ordinance, and I was just wondering how we would acquire the land, whether it would be through condemnation or whether it would be through negotiated sales, but I guess that's a conversation for another day.
Okay, I notice it's line number 8 on . On , OHCD, Line 74, why is the Administration proposing to use City capital dollars in support of PHA projects? Has the City done this in the past? And if so, where?
We have been doing this for the past -- well, for quite some time. I can't remember exactly how long, but probably 15 years at least. We have been using City capital 20 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, 5 dollars in support of OHCD -- various OHCD housing developments. For example, if rental housing is developed in a particular area, we use City capital dollars to provide the site improvements, whether it's curbside, whether it's trees, lights, or sometimes new streets. And that --
That -- well, I'm getting to that. That -- that has -- we have done that in order to make the OHCD dollars go further. In more recent years, as the Housing Authority has been able to receive grants for the public housing modernization and what they call the Hope VI Program that's made it possible to tear down the high-rise towers convert to public housing, we have been using City capital dollars to provide the new streets and the infrastructure that makes that conversion possible. We did it up in North Philadelphia for the conversion of Raymond Rosen after the towers were torn down. That one large plot had to be subdivided and new city streets put in, and we also developed new housing on surrounding streets, and that was done with City capital dollars. 21 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, 5 And we had previously allocated dollars in last year's budget and, I believe, the budget the year before, for Schuykill Falls as well for that purpose.
Thank you. , line 92, what are the planned improvements at the --
, line 92. Can you tell me what the planned improvements at 63rd and Lindbergh Boulevard sites are for?
This is a property that was purchased recently. I'm not even sure if the final papers have been signed. The bill went through in the last session of Council. For some time now, there's been a desire to move some Fleet operations and Streets Department operations from Seventh and Pattison in order to expand the Food Distribution Center and also to remove the last of the Streets Department operations from Front and Spring Garden, the former incinerator site, to other locations -- well, one, to expand the Food Distribution Center and the property at Front and Spring Garden. 22 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, 5 Because it's on the waterfront, people felt there was a better use for it. And we've been looking for a site -- the Capital Program Office has been looking for a site probably three years to be able to accommodate these operations. And this is a property that was purchased -- as I said, it's a pretty new facility. My understanding is that it's about two or three years old and will require relatively little in the way of modification to fit it out for the functions of the City. This money will be used to make whatever improvements are necessary to make it usable for the City functions.
Well, compared to the cost of buying land, building a whole facility from scratch, it --
I would appreciate your sending me a breakdown on this, 23 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, 5 please.
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman Cohen.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Miss Kaplan, recently, the press talked about a $225 million air strip at the Airport that -- the article reported -- indicated that that air strip was not going to be very useful and that currently was not being useful. Do you remember the article? It was just a few days ago.
That seemed like a kind of a large sum of money to sort of -- say, after many years of planning and many years of building, wasn't going to be useful and that they had sort of just discovered it. Do you have any comment with respect to that? Do we know anything about it?
Who approved it, who was -- 24 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, 5
I think it would probably be more appropriate to have somebody from the Airport speak to that point. I believe somebody is here from the Airport.
I would appreciate that, Madam President. (Airport representative comes forward.)
Good afternoon. Please identify yourself for the record.
Good afternoon. My name is Jay Beratan. I'm the Deputy Director for Aviation at the Airport for Facilities. And in response to Councilman's question, this runway, which was a $221 million project, was planned approximately ten years ago for small aircraft, propeller-driven aircraft. The state of the art has changed in the last years to a type of aircraft called "RJ," which is a regional jet. However, the article wasn't totally factual. The runway is still very useful; it's being used today as we speak. The savings, although projected to be about 30 percent in 25 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, 5 delays, may be closer to 15 or 20 percent at this time. It's still a huge savings, and the runway will more than pay for itself in the next five years.
Which -- whose money is the money that paid for the runway?
The $221 million is made up of various funds. We had federal grants, state grants, revenue bonds, Airport revenue bonds, as well as facility charges, passenger facility charges, which is that $3 tax that's paid on tickets as you buy tickets.
No. All the bonds are aviation bonds that are paid off by the airlines. There's no City tax dollars involved in it.
Does that mean there are no City tax dollars involved in those Airport bonds at all?
That is correct. They're Airport revenue bonds paid off by the airlines and revenue at the Airport.
What is the City's 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, involvement with the bonds?
The City sells these 4 Airport revenue bonds, which are guaranteed by the 5 airlines.
I do not believe there is a guarantee by the City, just by the airlines.
So if there is a blunder and it turns out to have been largely a waste or substantially a waste, the loss would be the airlines' and not the City's?
That is correct, although I don't believe it will turn out to be a waste.
One other question. Miss Kaplan, what happened to the budget? For example, is there -- the Planning Commission prepares a draft of the budget, is that what happens?
The Planning Commission -- you know, there's a staff as well as the 27 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, Commission. And the staff meets with every department that makes a Capital Budget request, usually during the end of November, the beginning of December. We meet with your commission typically about three times on the subject of the Capital Budget, and these are public meetings the first meeting usually happens in the -- it's a -- at a regular Planning Commission meeting, as part of the agenda, we would as soon, as we get the budget request in November, give the Commission a copy of all the projects as requested, without any changes having been made by the staff, and we would review every project with the Commission at a public meeting.
That was done this year. Then we met with every department that made a budget request for at least an hour, and we reviewed their request to understand what they would do with the money if they -- if it were appropriated, how this year's projects related to their ongoing activities, what their goals were 28 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, for over the six years of the program in as much as they're able to project that. And then after that, we would typically, in December, meet with -- at the Planning Commission meeting usually toward mid to late December and review with the Commission the draft that the staff would have prepared, which is sort of our first crack at the budget, and discuss that with the Commission at a public meeting. We held up doing that this year because of the, you know, impending change of administration, feeling that a new mayor might want to take a look at that program. And so we didn't -- we didn't discuss it publicly with the Commission in December, and we did not circulate it to all the City departments for comment, which we also did with the first draft. When we found out that we were going to have -- that the budget address initially was proposed as early as January 20th, we scheduled the Planning Commission meeting for a week before that, which was January 13th, and, you know, we're still hoping to have an opportunity to review that with the Mayor. 29 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, 2 We did get the word to -- that the 3 Commission -- that the budget message was delayed 4 till the 25th and that we should not vote on the 5 program on the 13th. But we did, on the 13th, review the whole program with the Commission 'cause it had not yet seen any first draft as they were used to having seen a first -- would have been used to seeing a first draft in December. So that's what we did on the 13th, and that was a program that had $167 million in it. We -- in between the 13th and the 18th, when the Commission did vote on the program, the Mayor did have an opportunity to review the program and indicated to the staff that he was concerned about the debt limit and wanted to be conservative and wanted to remove $27 million and defer it to the second year. So that -- and that was the budget that the Commission voted on.
The first meeting where the Commission discussed the budget. At that 30 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, point what they did was review all of the requests from all of the departments as received, without any changes.
No, there was no draft until we met with all the departments, which was -- the staff did produce a draft by mid-December, but we did not circulate it either to other departments or to the Commission until a -- until the first week in January.
The first time it was something that you could have call a draft based upon your experience in the Planning Commission, how large was that budget? What did the total of all the items --
Now, at that time, did it include basically the same items that later appeared, with the $27 million missing? Were they basically the same items? Was, for example, the Veterans Stadium in this year's budget for $40 million?
No, the Veterans Stadium was not in the budget until January. I'm sorry, the -- the budget that we had in December did not have Veterans Stadium, so it was $127 million. That was the first draft, and that was not circulated to anybody, except the Finance Department.
The first budget -- the one that you're considering a draft, the 167 million, that did include the Veterans Stadium money.
Now, when did the Veterans Stadium first appear in the budget?
All right, thank you. I'm sure there will be other questions about the $40 stadium, but that's all I have at this time on that.
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman Ortiz.
Ms. Kaplan, in terms of the Defense Conversion Fund, there are three items in the Capital Budget. How much federal monies are in that fund, and what is the process of that -- the expenditures that will take place from that fund? How will they take place?
I think it's probably better to have Bill Hankowsky talk about that, 33 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, from PIDC. He's here, and can give you a detailed breakdown about the federal money and the City money and what we use the federal money for as opposed to why we need additional City dollars. (Bill Hankowsky comes forward.)
Good afternoon. Bill 8 Hankowsky, President of the Philadelphia Industrial Development Corporation. Councilman Ortiz, we pursue various types of funding for Defense Conversion. There are certain funds available at the federal level. You're correct in asking that question. Basically they are in two places within the federal government. One is the Department of Defense, in an office known as "the Office of Economic Adjustment." That office provides planning grants to help communities plan for the conversion of a former military installation into some other use. Those grants are only permitted over -- basically they're staged over a five-year period from the point when the closure is announced. We are now in a cycle on our closed facilities -- being the Navy hospital, the Navy 34 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, Yard and Base, and what most of us call "the Old Quarter Masters," the Defense Personnel Supply Center. We're at the end of that cycle. So we --
I'd be happy to get you that. I don't know it off the top of my. They basically start you kind of low and let you build it up, then they step you down. So we're at a point now where those dollars, which we use, for example, to do studies and environmental analysis and that kind of, you know, traffic study, planning of that caliber. And that's all you can use it for is planning; you can't use it physically, you can't fix a building with that money. And basically, that money is significantly lower than it had been in previous years. The second source available at the federal level --
Excuse me. Do you have a detailed paper and report in how that money was spent?
Sure, yep. And it's -- we have it because it's annually audited. You know, we're required annually to provide an audit to the federal government.
And do you have the breakdown of federal and City monies that were expended along that line?
Yeah, we can do that. The second pot that's available at the federal level is from the Federal Economic Development Administration, and they receive an allocation from Congress, so they have a pot that's set aside for Defense Conversion. So communities that have closed facilities can apply to that pot for projects 36 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, specific to -- and in that case, it is usable for physical work, to make something happen. We have aggressively applied -- and, again, I could provide you with a list of EDA grants and --
I'll tell you, I want to know how much money has come into the City from the federal government.
The contracts planning, design, construction, down the line, legal, whatever.
I would like to find out for the record once again what has been the minority participation.
And that minority 37 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, participation broken down --
Mm-hmm. I'd be pleased to that. We have that information, sure.
But you don't know off the top of your head right now how much money is coming in from the federal government?
I could try to do it but then I'll probably find out I mis --
But, I mean, we have a $5 million EDA grant this year, and in fact, it's a match in the capital -- there's match requirements for the EDA money. So that is one place why we do access the Capital Budget, to do the match requirement, to go get those dollars. 38 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, But I'd be happy to provide you all that data, we have it all.
Thank you. 5 Now, Miss Kaplan, I want to follow up on a question the President gave you in terms of PHA, and why is City money from our budget going towards PHA for their capital construction when, during the last few years, if the reports that I read in the newspapers are correct, between the Administration of Cisneros (ph) and Cuomo, we have gotten huge amounts of the money for the repairs, the maintenance, and the new building of PHA housing.
But those grants don't pay for the infrastructure costs. So, for example, when we tore down the towers at Raymond Rosen and then we took the land that was the large plot of land where the towers had been and the desire was to put regular city streets through there so that that wasn't kind of an island and it became a part of the regular city street pattern, we had to pay for those streets with City dollars. That wasn't a cost that was eligible from PHA -- from the grant that PHA got. 39 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, 2
So our money is not going towards their capital budget?
Our money's not going to 5 the housing; it's going to infrastructure and what we call "site improvements" -- curbs, sidewalks, trees, lights. A lot of the big --
Well, when they build new housing in those sites, don't they have to build sidewalks?
The money doesn't cover all of those costs, so we have been using City capital dollars to supplement those costs that are eligible and to pay for those things that are not eligible at all, like brand-new city streets.
Well, what is the process, what do they do? Do they write a request or do they submit a proposal to the City?
They submit that request through the Office of Housing, through John Kromer's office. John Kromer's office is one of the City departments that typically makes a request for capital funds, and they include a request from the Housing Authority -- they include 40 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, the Housing Authority's needs in their requests to us. They're -- we by no means fund everything they ask for, just as we don't fund a lot of things that the other departments ask for, but they ask us for many times the amount of money that we're able to provide in the Capital Program.
So that becomes part of the CDBG budget that we revise every year?
It's the City support for the Community Development Program, but it is our dollars that we're using to supplement the federal dollars, either the regular CDBG Grant dollars or the Housing Authority grant, or sometimes we have Community Development Corporations that get their own funding through one program or another, but that program covers the cost of rehabilitation of housing or new housing but doesn't pay for site improvement, and we have come along and paid for those site improvements as well.
SEPTA seems to be having a lot of problems with its infrastructure. What is your proposal -- and they paid out $8 million in legal penalties in terms of the 41 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, lawsuit that they had with the children and so on. Is that money -- where's that money coming from? And is the City going to have to carry the cost of that penalty, or are we going to deduct -- are we going to deduct from the SEPTA budget because of their negligence?
I -- I -- I can't answer that question. I can tell you that it's not included in the Capital Program, but I can't tell you, you know, about, you know, how that money would be paid, you know, out of their Operating Budget. We do have people here from SEPTA. Perhaps they can answer that question.
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman Clarke.
Since we're close 42 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, to dealing with public housing, I had one quick question about public housing, on the site improvements, and I don't know if you can answer this or not. It's my understanding that there was a request for some infrastructure dollars for Richard Allen, and I don't see it in the budget. Can you tell me why it was not a part of that process?
Because we -- we didn't have enough money to cover everything that the Housing Authority wanted, and these were their highest priorities.
Now, it is possible, and one of the things that happens with the Office of Housing and with the Housing Authority is that a lot of these projects are complicated, they take a long time, as I know you are aware 'cause you've been involved in a number of them. So sometimes a project does not move as quickly to construction or as quickly to completion as, I think, a lot of us would have anticipated. 43 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, So very often, you know, the money in this line item, if something else is ready to go and is complete and needs, you know, new curbs, sidewalks, and trees, there is old funding that could be used -- you know there's money from past years in this line item that could be used for that purpose.