Well, we never did it absolutely free; we always charged them a portion of the assessment and --
When did we stop charging them a portion of the assessment; do you know that?
Well, I think we still have the law on the books, but the problem is, is that we have so little money to provide to do that, that as a practical matter --
Well, and that's where I'm going with the first line of questioning.
-- the developer could be sitting here waiting for five years to get his half of the street for months.
And that's my line of questioning. If we're putting it into public housing development --
And I'm not suggesting it's the wrong thing to do, shouldn't that be part of the overall budget request so that we can get some private development going and give them some relief to get for-sale housing done in the City of Philadelphia and get the rentals and real-estate taxes and the other things out of there?
Well, a lot of -- I mean, with the development that we do have, the developers are paying for it themselves rather than --
Well, I know, but they're far and few in between because, you know, they're in the business of making money.
And I understand 96 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, --
And I'm not interrogating and I'm not being critical.
Well, I don't disagree with you, either. I think that's certainly an issue, you know, that ought to be up for discussion in terms of, you know, particularly we're concerned about population loss, we have a census coming up.
You know, the concern about, you know, what incentives we can try to provide in order to encourage the non-subsidized families to, you know, to be retained in the City. I think it's certainly an issue, and we've certainly done a lot of work looking at this and I think it's certainly an issue that bears more discussion. I think the policy of the City in 97 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, recent years has been such that we have not allocated dollars that way.
Right. And I 5 think that answers -- that's the answer I was looking for. It's basically a policy decision. In addition to some of the requirements from the Hope VI grants and other things. Thank you. No further questions, Madam Chair.
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Tasco.
Thank you very much. Good afternoon. I'm looking at the Capital Program and I see a number of dollars going to PIDC and to the Defense Conversion Fund and to the Defense Conversion Development Fund, and the dollars seem to be fairly substantial. And when I get to the Neighborhood Industrial Improvements Section, I see $100,000. Now, how many projects can you do with $100,000? 98 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, If our focus is going to be on neighborhood economic development, how does -- does some of that PIDC money go into the neighborhood, or is it only designed to focus on larger projects downtown?
I think I got the beginning of the question, Councilwoman. You referenced the number of 100,000. I just missed where that number was.
Oh, I'm sorry, you're looking at he the neighborhood districts.
I'm sorry. And that's the portion of your question I missed.
We only have $100,000 in that category, which, over the four years, five years, will total just $400,000. And 99 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, if you look at the other categories, such as the Defense Conversion Development Fund and the -- if you look at the Library Reuse Plan or all of the other areas in the Department of Commerce, those dollars seem to be quite substantial, but the neighborhood site dollars are fairly low. And if you only have $100,000 a year beginning in 2002, I mean, what do you plan to do? I mean, how can you do anything with those few dollars?
Right. I think I can answer half your question, but not both halves 'cause I'm not sure I'm totally conversant on the neighborhood commercial corridors. We don't implement that program.
Oh, the industrial district one? Oh, I'm sorry, 40, okay. Yeah, let me try to be responsive, Councilwoman. First, I think I can accurately say that none of the PIDC line items in the Capital Budget relate to anything in Center City. We -- meaning PIDC -- don't use City capital dollars in 100 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, Center City. The various projects that we have here are throughout the City. So, for example, Meeting House Road, which is maybe the one you mentioned, deals specifically with extending a road, the result of which will be that we have transactions in our pipeline for two companies to develop brand-new buildings who will situate on that road once it's built, and I think one building's about 400 thousand square feet and another building's about 200,000 square feet. So these are kind of -- and they're blue-collar kind of jobs. I mean, that's the kind of projects that they're supporting. The Defense Conversion dollars relate to utilization at the Naval Business Center or at the Defense Personnel Supply Center. So if, for example, we had (unintelligible), this year we're going to be acquiring that 80-acre site in South Philadelphia. The Industrial Corridor Program really relates to an effort we have underway, and I would generally characterize it as a pilot program or as a demonstration program in the Port Richmond 101 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, 2 section of Kensington, Philadelphia. We were 3 lucky enough about two years ago to receive from 4 the Pew Charitable Trusts a grant that we applied 5 for to do a program that we called "the Urban Industry Initiative," which is focused at small manufacturers, people that might have ten or fifteen employees, you know, a tool shop or a small fabrication operation, a sector that we have not been able to provide the kind of technical assistance in response to just because of lack of capacity. So we utilized the Pew money to put a staff in place and kind of intensely go after about 300 small manufacturers in that corridor of lower northwest Philadelphia, or some people might call them "the River Wards." And that program has had a fair amount of success. We were, in fact, in calendar 1999, able to get the Pew Charitable Trusts to give us another grant to continue the program. We were also able to obtain a grant from the First Union Foundation. So we have -- this represents site improvements in that corridor based on working with the industries in the neighborhood to kind of 102 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, 2 improve -- in some cases, it's access or street 3 lighting to make those areas work better, but it's 4 a small component against a bigger budget that 5 doesn't jump into capital. But I would be happy to provide with you information about that program. So it's an overall effort that's actually, over the years, been kind of multi-million dollars but actually using -- I take some pride in this -- sort of using limited City resources and really significantly leveraging those with foundation and state and other resources.
Last year, we had a half million dollars in that same neighborhood industrial districts line, and the whole program was really inspired by the work that PIDC began with the Pew Grant. There's also in this year's program -- line 42, on -- $800,000 specifically for -- in the Port Richmond industrial area for parking lot development. This 103 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, is to answer requests from 50 businesses in that area that identified that as their main need to support continued industrial expansion in that area. And that also came out of the contact work that was done by PIDC.
So the items listed in this program are items that are attached to programs that are going forward.
Okay. Let's just go back. There may be an error and I'm -- and during this last day or so in trying to recapture it.
You had, beginning in the year 2002, a million dollars. And at the end of the time, it would be $4 million.
On the amended sheet that we received -- 104 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, 2
No, versus nothing. It's now 5 million? I'm only checking. It could be a typo.
Yeah, I see what you're saying. It was deferred, we requested it would be -- and so I think we should have taken off the ending year if we slid it forward. I think you're right. Good catch.
Now, is the first year going to be $1,450,000? 105 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, 2
Right. And then it should -- at the end, it should add back to the number that was in here as the total.
Yeah, so like the last year should be 550 to get you back to 4. You're right.
The other thing -- and it's not my district, but I'll ask the same question. Same thing on , under the Byberry Reuse Plan.
I'm just checking to see if that was a typo. Again, added under that, it was in Year 2, now you move it back to Year 1.
And then you still have Year 2. So now from 2 million, it goes from 2.5 million.
I'm sorry, I -- 106 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, 2
I apologize. At least 4 I haven't had the opportunity to see these red 5 sheets. I think you're right again. It should still add at the end of 2 million.
Yeah. I mean, we had like an hour to put back this into the computer.
And one other one 107 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, that I had brought to Councilman DiCicco's attention. It's , Item 28. It went back to Year 1 but it adds up to more than the 950, on 5 . That's just subject to check. I mean, you know, whatever negotiations you did find, but in case it was an error because you added 1.4 million and I think I --
Yeah, you're correct. It should be corrected to add up to the same net total at the end.
I just have one other question of the Chief of Staff. The question may have been answered, but I did not hear it.
Thank you. (Ms. Franklin-Suber returns to the witness table.)
Miss Suber, did you answer the question that I believe Councilman Kenney asked relative to our ability to move the 40 million out of the Capital Budget and you borrowed the money through another authority, as 108 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, we have done in other situations?
I believe I did 4 answer that question. I -- my response was that 5 we are seeking capital authorization, authorization to use capital dollars, because at this point, we have not explored all of the possibilities. It is quite possible that in the event we get to this scenario -- I mean all of this is worst-case scenario. In the event there are no 12 new stadiums and we then need to make repairs to Veterans Stadium, it may very well be possible that we can use some portion of the proceeds from the vehicle rental tax. That's number one. Number two, there are available PICA dollars. The Budget Office is working with PICA to identify the funds that are unspent but also available. Some of the funds are unspent, but they are earmarked for particular projects. It is also possible that we would be able to use another authority, whether it's PAID or PMA, but we have that general issue in connection with the Capital Program as we go into the out-years because of our debt limit capacity. 109 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, So it's not simply in connection with these renovations. There may be a whole series of other projects because we will, you know, have less borrowing capacity in the out-years of the program. We're going to have to look at it from a broader policy perspective in terms of which authorities we may be able to rely on to help us fund different kinds of projects. So all of that is a possibility.
We have about $288 million left. At the end of Fiscal 2000, we'll be at, I think 288.2 million.
What determines the debt limit? And is that the trigger -- whatever triggers the debt limit, does that change?
It's based on a calculation. I think it's 10 years -- it's 13.5 percent of the 10-year average assessed value of property in the City adjusted for the amount of debt that's outstanding. So what can make it change is if we pay off debt or if our assessed 110 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, values go up or down.
Has there been any 4 history of the assessed value going up? 5
Yes, yes. And actually, they are starting to go up a little. So when we look at how much will be available over the course of this Capital Program, we assumed assessment growth and we assumed that we're paying off debt.
Would the assessment growth be triggered by the increase in the number of new construction, a large amount of new can construction?
A fair amount of new construction of new hotels and things of that nature? So is it likely that we would reach at any point our debt limit where we couldn't borrow?
Oh, yeah. We -- actually looking over the course of this program, by the time we get to 2006, we project that we will be down to only about $26 million, $27 million in capacity left. 111 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, 2
Based on a combination of 5 assessed value and the outstanding debt that we have.
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman Rizzo.
Thank you, Madam President. I'd like to get back to the questions on Veterans Stadium so I don't know if the stadium manager or Chief of Staff will be able to respond. We throw the words "repair" and "renovations" around when we talk about Veterans Stadium very loosely. I would like to know when we first signed this lease with the Phillies and the Eagles.
The original lease was signed in 1966. It was subsequently amended.
Several times for the Phillies, the Eagles. I think one was in 112 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, 1985, one was in 1986. We can give you all of that detailed information and copies of all of the leases and their amendments.
The document that we presently have is obviously a legal document to the Year 2011; is that right?
That's correct. That's the original 1966 lease with all of the subsequent amendments.
In brief, could you just describe what that legal document requires the City of Philadelphia to do for the Phillies and the Eagles in the area of this $40 million? I'd like to know, are we bound to spend $40 million, a possible $80 million, based on that legal document, that lease?
Let me answer your question this way, Councilman Rizzo.
The Eagles and the Phillies would take that position.
The Eagles and the 113 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, Phillies would take that position. Because we are not necessarily in agreement with the teams on what the City's obligations are and the extent of those obligations with regard to renovations and repair at Vets Stadium, I am -- I am -- I am not going to say to you that. . . The City has an obligation to make certain repairs and renovations to Vets Stadium, and there is -- there is disagreement between the City and the teams as to what the obligations are. And so instead of getting into a dispute, we have agreed conceptually with the teams that renovations need to be made, that we will sit down and we will agree on what those renovations are. And so that everyone understands the commitment, we would amend the lease to specify the improvements that are going to be made. And so City Council would then get a complete public hearing on what exactly those improvements and renovations would entail.
I understand that there's some concern about what would be said here today which could possibly be used against the City -- this is my thought. 114 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, But I'm asking you this question. Your interpretation -- and if you feel as though this is something that we need to discuss off the record, we can do that. In your interpretation, and if you can answer this, I'd appreciate it, based on the document, the legal document that you have right now, do you feel as though you have to spend 80 -- possibly $80 million to meet that contractual agreement?
Councilman Rizzo, I'd be happy to sit down and talk to you about what we believe our obligations are under the lease and submit any information to you and have a discussion with you privately. We've reached voluntarily a conceptual agreement with the Eagles and the Phillies, and we've reached agreement on a dollar amount.
Councilman 115 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, Cohen?
It isn't a satisfactory answer to say to Councilman, in my judgment, "I'll send you the material," because I would like to see that material when Councilman Rizzo gets it, and I would like to have it presented at a hearing so that we can examine it and question you right then and there.
The purpose of a hearing like this is so that in addition to each of us asking our own questions, we can benefit from hearing the questions raised by other Councilmembers.
Please permit me to finish. 116 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, The purpose of a hearing -- I'm very interested in the whole series of questions that Councilman Rizzo is asking, and I do not appreciate having those questions shunted aside so that when an answer is given, if ever, that I won't hear them. I want to hear them, they help my thinking, his questions, everybody's questions in Council. So that it isn't enough to say -- and the reason I raise it is you've been doing that all afternoon, shutting off areas of questioning by the method of saying "I'll send you that information, I do not have it here, I'll give it to you later." That information belongs at a public hearing, stated publicly, so that all the members of the Council can learn from the information that's being presented. We ought not to have a series of separate private conferences. So I'm just urging you to understand that when you answer Councilman Rizzo's or any Councilmember's questions, you're helping all of us get a full understanding of the facts. That's all. And I don't mean it in any 117 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, 2 disrespectful way. I'm just saying that the 3 concept of a public hearing is to enable all of us 4 to hear and learn from each other, accept what we 5 believe and discard what we don't believe, but we ought to be entitled to hear it all.
Thank you. Excuse me, I just wanted to make that procedural point.
Can I respond? Councilman Cohen, you are absolutely correct, but the other purpose of a public hearing is to make sure that you get accurate information. And as you know, there are very many times during a public hearing where a Member of Council asks a very specific question; if we do not have the information readily available, we will provide it to you. And also, this is absolutely the same information I've provided to you. And what I'm referring to -- so there's no misunderstanding -- was the binder that included every copy of the original leases, plus the amendments. Those are the documents which govern the City's obligations 118 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, under the Vets Stadium leases with both the Eagles and the Phillies. I have already provided that information to you. And what I was saying was that I would be happy to provide that information to Councilman Cohen as well as any other Member of Council. To the extent that there is a disagreement between the City and the various teams as to our obligations and whether or not we've fulfilled them, I think I have a responsibility to make sure that I don't say anything on the public record that could then later be used to expose the City or jeopardize the City in terms of any potential legal action. The conceptual agreement was a voluntary arrangement, the parties came together in good faith, and we agreed to -- since there was disagreement over the nature and the scope of the improvement and the City's obligations and the team's obligations, we came together in a spirit of cooperation, reached agreement -- not on the number -- and are in the process now of discussing the specific improvements. So, therefore, I don't have a lot of 119 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, 2 the information that you're requesting because 3 negotiations are still underway. We have not 4 submitted legislation to Council. When we submit 5 -- if we are able to resolve outstanding issues and we then introduce legislation to Council, there will be a public hearing as well on all of those issues, whether it's the specific improvements, the timetable, what -- you know, any other questions that you would like to answer at that time. So to the extent I'm not being responsive, it's because I do not have the information to share with you today, but you will have it.
I'm sorry, Councilman Rizzo is still asking questions.
You're telling me 120 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, that you have a lease for Veterans Stadium between the Eagles and the Phillies, and that lease is so poorly done that you cannot tell me today the answers to the questions? Let me get right to it. I've been cautioned -- and I'm going to say this publicly -- by the lawyers that if I ask you some specific questions and you answer them, it could jeopardize a possible lawsuit that the Phillies or Eagles could place against the City. Is that a fair question?
I think it's a fair statement. I've said there's disagreement.
So then you'd prefer to continue this conversation in private, off the record?
Fair enough. Pardon me? (Councilmembers address each other off mike.)
No, I was asked by the lawyers publicly private not to go into this area because if, in fact -- and I'm just honoring 121 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, that request -- that if she admitted something that would be damaging to the City of Philadelphia, it would be hurtful in a court of law.
You're welcome. I have taken down a note, which is not exact, on the statement you made earlier in response to another Councilmember -- and it's a paraphrase and you can correct me if I don't get it all correctly, which I know you will that -- you wanted to keep the teams playing until 2011 at Veterans Stadium. Do you remember making a statement somewhat close to that? 122 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, 2
Yes. I believe I was speaking in the context of in the event there are no new stadiums. If there are no new stadiums, we would want to keep both of the teams in Philadelphia at Vets Stadium under the terms and conditions of the existing leases.
So by the lease, at least, they have an obligation to play in Philadelphia until 2011; is that correct?
Okay. Now, in the Eagles lease, in Article 9, Section 901, on of their lease, after the (1), (2), and (3), there's a section that reads in this manner: 123 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, "Subject as aforesaid, insofar as the (unintelligible) premises, and the parking lot are concerned, Landlord shall, subject to other provisions of this lease, at all times, while this lease continues in effect, at Landlord's risk and expense, keep the same in good and suitable state and condition for the uses intended to be made of the same, making all such repairs to restorations and replacements of the structures, other improvements, and equipment thereof and therein, as may be required from time to time." Do you recall ever reading that particular section of the Eagles lease?
Thank you. The gentleman who is responsible for Veterans Stadium, I only got your first name. It's Greg?
Greg Grillone. 124 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, 2
Okay, I'm sorry. 4 You and I had some discussion earlier 5 about various repairs and renovations and other projects at Veterans Stadium. You recall --
Just quickly, did both teams play full seasons at Veterans Stadium last year?
They played all their games, their home games at Vets Stadium last year?
All right. And we've put a fair amount of capital dollars in Veterans Stadium at least over the past right years, right?
We've made major 125 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, renovations to major systems at Veterans Stadium; is that correct?
It might depend on how he answers the next question. (Laughter.)
Madam Chair, notwithstanding whatever happens after he answers this next question -- (Laughter.)
-- we should at least acknowledge that his honesty is greatly appreciated. Mr. Grillone, I've read into the record a part of the lease that talks about the team staying in Philadelphia. Is it your opinion that the stadium is in good and suitable state and condition for the uses intended to be made of the stadium? You are the manager of the stadium, right? 126 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, 2
Wait a minute. That same question is very difficult. You better listen. Ask the question again.
As the manager of the stadium, you've testified that there has been upwards of $65 million in various improvements -- the seats, the lights, various systems, the sound system, Fanovision, Astroturf, concrete, and various other improvements to Veterans Stadium just in the past eight years. The lease requirement for both teams is that, at the landlord's risk and expense, keep the same in good and suitable state and condition for the uses intended to be made of the same. Now, is it correct that the teams played their seasons in Philadelphia last year at Veterans Stadium?
To your knowledge, do the teams intend to play their seasons at 127 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, Veterans Stadium this year?
Is the stadium in 5 good and suitable state and condition for the uses intended of Veterans Stadium?