Councilman Nutter, that calls for a legal conclusion, and so Mr. Grillone is not qualified to answer that question.
No, I think -- not to have a big argument about it, but he is the manager of the stadium.
And he must have some opinion about the condition of the stadium that the teams played in last year and the teams intend to plan in this year. Does he have any particular opinion about the condition of Veterans Stadium?
You are asking him to give you an opinion based on language in the lease that is subject to legal dispute now. What 128 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, constitutes suitability --
They have not yet filed suit against us. Have they threatened to file suit against us? Yes.
Well, Madam Chief of Staff, in your previous capacity, you know that people every day think about filing suit against the City of Philadelphia. Is Veterans Stadium suitable for football players to play games and baseball players to play games? Do we -- and if not --
And I express that 129 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, opinion as former City Solicitor.
Well, then you're 4 going to force me to ask for the current City 5 Solicitor to come over, which I will not.
Well, I do think you have the appropriate person because when I was City Solicitor, I do recall reading that section 9 and I'm familiar with the leases and I'm also familiar with the extent of the disagreement and the history and all of the issues involved.
Oh, I understand. And people can disagree about whatever they want to disagree about. We have a lease, it requires the teams to play in Philadelphia until 2011.
We have a requirement to keep the place in good and suitable state and condition.
I hope you're 130 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, not going to ask that --
I want to ask for 4 clarification, because we have the former City 5 Solicitor and we have had -- this is not the first time that this issue has come up before the Councilpeople, Councilpersons who are here. In meetings with Ed Rendell, the former mayor, as late as December, we were assured by Mr. Rendell at that point that this was an ironclad contract, that we didn't have to worry about the Eagles or the Phillies not playing here. And as of recently, we have been informed that we do have a contract that is formidable, to say the least. And the issue is and the rationale, the basis of why $40 million is in the Capital Budget. And before this Council approves a Capital Budget that is going to go forward out of this committee --
-- there has to be a point in which that rationale and that $40 million is presented. The Phillies are going to play. So 131 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, obviously, spring training in April, the Phillies will be there. We will not have spent any of that $40 million before then. So if the stadium is not suitable to be played, then the Phillies are not going to open the season in April at Vets Stadium. The Phillies will be there, opening day is set, I'll be there, and I think most of us will be there. So the question that Mr. Nutter asked is, is it suitable for the opening of the season? I think the answer is yes. It's a "yes" or "no" answer. Or if it is not, then we have to employ a whole lot of money to make it suitable for the Phillies.
All right. Councilman Rizzo, I believe you did yield to Councilman Nutter.
Okay. 132 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, 2
Just to quote a executive of the Recreation Department, Veterans Stadium about two years ago was referred to -- and everybody knows when we shop for a used car what a cream puff is. It was referred to as "a 30-year-old cream puff." Anybody ever hear that description? No? Okay. But I would be interested in those documents that you have, the amendments to the lease, 'cause I'm very concerned that that lease that we presently have is not being interpreted as the way it is written because we're confusing it and I think I hear maintenance versus renovations, and I don't know if maintenance and renovations include crystal chandeliers, but it sounds like that lease really needs to be interpreted so that we know exactly where we're heading.
You're welcome. Okay, for the second go-around, the Chair recognizes Councilman Ortiz. 133 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, 2
Have there been any engineering reports done to rationalize the $40 million, or was it a conversation in which the Eagles said 150, and we said 80, and that was it?
I believe, in response to questions raised earlier, I pointed out that engineering studies have been done by the City, engineering studies have been done by the teams. And the engineering studies done by the teams form the basis for the list of repairs initially presented to the Administration by the Eagles. We did not accept that list of repairs and that dollar amount, which was $150 million, because we have different engineering studies. And so we reached a conceptual agreement and a process which requires the repairs be identified, agreed to by both teams and the City, and presented to City Council in connection with any proposed amendment to the lease so that everyone knows what the repairs are.
Councilwoman Tasco asked you a question before that I believe you didn't answer. She was following up a question 134 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, that Councilman Kenney asked.
And the question 5 was, how are you going to spend $40 million in one year? Since we have here a total of $64 million spent over an 8-year period or starting in '93, actually --
Councilman Ortiz, I answered the question. One of the issues that is currently being negotiated is the nature of the repairs and the timetable for the repairs. The Eagles and the Phillies have a construction schedule, and in the event we introduce legislation and we have a public hearing on the proposed amendments, the nature of the improvements and the timetable, they will present the construction plan, the timetable, and how all of the repairs will be done. They have a construction schedule and they are quite confident that the repairs can be done. But all of that is being negotiated as we speak, so I am not trying to not respond to your question. Those are still issues that are being negotiated. And there will be -- in the 135 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, event legislation is introduced, there will be a public hearing, and we will provide you with all of that information, including the specifics of the timetable, what repairs will be made, and how they will be made.
I have a copy of a report and I wonder if you're acquainted with it. It was done by the engineering firm of Ewing, Cole, Cherry, Brott. And they -- after they did their analysis of Vets Stadium, they say that at most -- and they put three priorities, they put three categories up. The first priority is conditions considered, which I believe would hold to what Mr. Nutter was talking about in terms of the contract. First priority is conditions considered to be safety hazards to the users, teams, or the general public and that should be repaired. The second priority, conditions that are not yet safety hazards, but if not addressed, may become hazard. These are three questions that perhaps should be answered before we set numbers of millions of dollars that we are going commit from 136 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, the people's purse. And the third priority, conditions that should be addressed but are not threats to lives, safety, or the building operations. They answered those three questions. And over a four-year period -- actually, a five-year period, after a five-year period, they estimated that the total cost in terms of repairs to meet those three conditions was $23 million.
Okay. That's a huge disparity, a huge disparity in terms of expenditures, and that's over a five-year period. Now here we want to spend $80 million in a 2-year period, without answering those three main questions to the satisfaction of this Council because we have to approve this.
Councilman Ortiz, as I've said previously, before Council votes on the budget, you will have the responses to the questions, you will the information that you have requested. We will put it into context. That report was prepared in a certain context, and we'd 137 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, be happy to get into all of that information. We're not trying to hide anything. I'd be happy to share the information with you, but I am not prepared to do that today, and we do not have a final agreement with the Eagles and the Phillies. So it may very well be that all of this at some point becomes moot.
So, Miss Suber, what you are saying, if I understand what you're saying is, if in fact we do not have that information at the time we vote for the budget, are you going to ask that we delete the monies?
We have not yet reached an agreement so, therefore, we have not introduced legislation. We plan on introducing legislation.
Aren't you putting the cart before the horse? Don't you believe that -- how could you enter into an agreement that this Council may not agree with? Are we party to the agreement or are we not party to the 138 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, agreement? Don't we have to approve the agreement before you agree to it?
You don't have to 5 approve all of the conceptual agreement. The short answer is no. There's legislation that relates to the conceptual agreement, and we've talked about that in the various briefings we've had for City Council. We are still in the process of negotiating all of those details. The documents have not been finalized, and it could very well be that we're in a position to introduce that legislation next week.
It might be less than that because it is a cap, those numbers are a cap. What was agreed to was not a flat 40 million; it was up to 40 million, up to 80 million. So it could very well be during the course of negotiations that it's less than that.
Thank you. 139 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, Councilwoman Miller?
This question is for the Capital Projects Office. You know, as a Councilperson that did secure state funding for a project two years ago, and in the Five-Year Plan you talk about the reduction of the duration of project implementation, I've had several discussions with Recreation, I've had several discussions with PIDC regarding the lack of speed in this project. And I have a couple questions. But what I would like someone to do is explain -- re-explain that whole process of securing the State funds when you also have City dollars for a project. I see in a book, you're talking that you reduce the time from design to construction to 538 days, and it's been more than 730 days, and we -- I don't even know whether we actually have the application back from the State and the funds here in the City of Philadelphia. So if you could -- 'cause I know other Councilpeople have secured State funding too for 140 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, some of the City projects, but there seems to be a big tie-up.
Well, let me just say that 5 the Capital Program Office doesn't implement the projects either for PIDC or the Recreation Department. If you have a specific project, maybe we could have the appropriate person from one of those departments answer the question.
Well, yes, I'd like that, but the capital project says that it has reduced the duration of project implementation, which kind of tells me that someone from your office is monitoring the implementation of these projects. And if that's not so, then I could be corrected.
Richard Dean is here from the Capital Projects Office, but what I'm saying is, that office doesn't have a responsibility for Recreation.
No, for Recreation Department projects or for PIDC projects. Those projects are carried out by the Recreation 141 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, Department or different departments. It depends which PIDC project it is, who carries it out. So if you have a specific project in mind, we could get the right person here to answer the question.
Well, this project is the project you talked about earlier -- I couldn't think of the name -- the Lonnie Young Recreation Center.
It's a 2.7 million project, we've secured funding for that two years ago, and we are still -- it's just going out to design bid. I just need to be real clear again on the project 'cause I have a couple other projects that other State representatives will be involved in and State Senator bringing money in, and we have a level of expectation, and maybe it's unrealistic, maybe my level is unrealistic, but we really need to know how this works.
There's someone from Recreation here and he's coming up to the table now. 142 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, (Recreation Department witness comes forward.)
Good evening. My name is 5 Eric Iffrig, with the Recreation Department.
The question is about Lonnie Young, and the project is -- the application is in to the State. The contract with the State is under review by the Law Department and Risk Management.
Well, I know it's in the State right now, but why did it take two years to get to the State? Isn't it PIDC that -- you fill the application out and send it to PIDC; is that not correct?
No. Actually, PIDC is the agent for the City in filing the application.
I can't speak for all projects. We've had two so far -- well, actually one. Eventually, a second contract (unintelligible). 143 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, 2
Well, I guess the bottom line to my question is that in the Five-Year Plan, the Capital Projects Office specifically addresses the issue of the reduction of time to implement. Why would these types of projects not fall under the strategy of doing these projects in an expedient manner? Two years seems to be a long time to me 'cause the other question becomes, Well, who's going to pay for the cost overruns? 'cause we're just in the design stage and we have other projects coming up. So I just need information around this whole process. And I know it's Recreation and PIDC.
Right. We supply the information for the application for the grant. The grant award is made before the application is even made. Now, the Recreation Department -- and I am not that familiar with the process, with the State Redevelopment Assisted Grants. We follow the lead of PIDC and try supply the information that they need. 144 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, I can't speak to why it's taken that long at all. We've tried to supply what it is that we believe that we're supposed to in order to move the project forward. To implement the project, we have to have the funding in place, and that means a contract. And we expect that that's imminent.
We expect that the contract -- and, therefore, the improved funding -- is imminent.
We have a follow-up question from Councilwoman Tasco, but Councilwoman Miller, it's still your turn.
I'd just like to piggyback on that question. I guess the question is, if we are notified by our state legislator that they are applying for funding -- and I have Dorothy Emanuel -- for funds for a project, when they notify the City, who picks up the banner to apply for these funds from the State to get them in the hopper? 145 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, 2
Councilwoman, I believe these questions are directed at what's known as "the State Redevelopment Capital Assistance Program." This is a program run by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. The only projects that are eligible to apply are projects where the Commonwealth invites the invitation -- invites the application. In other words, though you may be in the State Capital Budget, you cannot apply until the State decides they're going to fund you, and then they invite an application to be sent. We send those applications in very rapidly because what we try to do is get the money under contract.
So we will get a specific letter directed to us. Generally, in 146 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, some cases, it comes through the Governor, signed by the governor; in other cases, from the Secretary of the Budget Office, Robert Bittenbender (ph.), and then we prepare the application and submit it. Generally, what often happens in these projects is that -- and the State has very proscribed rules for this program. There is a handbook, there is a whole set of rules and regulations. In most instances, a project cannot meet all of the requirement at that point in time. For example, they may not have all of their matching funds in place, they may not have the project in full construction documents, they may not have a final cost estimate, etc., etc. Often what happens then is that the Commonwealth will enter into a contract and create a set of special conditions saying, You can't -- Okay, we'll put the money under contract but you can't get the money until you have met the conditions. The program is administered where it is a reimbursement, so actually, you actually advance 147 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, 2 the dollars. They only pay for actual hard 3 construction, so all of the soft costs -- design 4 is the major soft cost -- must be absorbed either 5 by the City if it's, for example, a recreation project, or by an organization if it's a nonprofit group. So there's a fair amount of effort that has to go underway before you can actually get a check out of the State and make that happen. I don't -- I'd be happy to find out the specifics of the one Councilwoman Miller's raising in terms of exactly where it is mechanically, but that's the process. And I believe that one is under contract between us and the State, but there were special conditions, and I think the Recreation Department's being doing the design such that we can --
When all the conditions are met, what is the holdup with the application? We had the approval from the Governor, we worked out what needed to be worked out a little over two years ago, and we're still 148 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, waiting and the people in the neighborhood are still waiting for this particular project to even start. We haven't even broken ground.
I mean -- so that's why I would appreciate it if you would get back to me.
With detailed information as to why this is taking so long.
Okay. Thank you, Madam Chair. Oh, one other question. Who will pay for cost overruns due to the delay of this project? I know it was 2.7 million two years ago, and now that it's two years later, I'm sure the cost have increased. Who carries that, the City? I don't have to take it out of my capital money, do I?
We'll try not to ask you for it, Councilwoman, at this point. 149 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, 2
We'll try not to ask you 4 for it, Councilwoman. At this point, our expected 5 budget for this project is 2.8, plus the cost of design which, again, is a soft cost outside the direct grant reimbursable, and we expect to carry that. We believe that we can manage the job within the available budget. And, also, it's not just the last two years it's been that this project is not happening; it's been more than fifteen years that it's been --
It's been twenty years exactly that this project been talked about.
And then we finally get the money. You know, first there was no money. Then we got the money and still, two years later, we're still trying to get this thing started.
Well, this is the last piece of it. We are going to get the money. We do have to have the contract -- that's the fiscal 150 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, control with the City, that we do have to have the contract in place and with the State. And we're almost there with that. And, again, we're moving forward with the design program.
All right, thank you. I'll look forward to the information too thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Council President Verna, I request permission to be excused for a short period of time. I will make myself available if there are any other questions that are appropriate for me, but I do have an urgent matter to attend to.
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman Goode.
Oh, they are for her? Well, do you mind if I go on to the next Councilperson? 151 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, 2
Does anybody 4 who is on the list to be heard have any questions 5 of Miss Suber or do you have questions of the other members of the Administration?
Thank you, Madam Chair. I must say, I must find out how to hone my procedural skills.
My light's been on for three hours, and every once in a while, I see it goes out.
Well, this board had been like a Christmas tree, and I'm trying to take everybody as their lights go on, Councilman. Councilman Clarke?
Yes, as I was getting ready to say, I must hone my procedural skills and find out a way to talk without waiting for your light to be acknowledged, Councilwoman, 152 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, I've been waiting for quite long time. (Laughter.)
Well, there's a defect in my light apparently 'cause it goes off without any notice and then i goes back on again.
Thank you, Madam President. I wanted to go back to an earlier question, Miss Kaplan and Mr. Iffrig, and I might need the acting Commissioner of Recreation 'cause it's kind of specific to your response. (Recreation Department witness comes forward.)
Miss Kaplan, earlier when I had asked the question about the centers, the athletic rec centers and the pools and the whole scenario, you mentioned that it's kind of at the request of the Recreation Department to determine if we should be, quote/unquote, one of the big-ticket items and not out of our $1.2 million Councilmatic budget. 153 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, I'd like to get a sense from the people who make that decision on how they make that decision to in fact ask the Planning Commission that that's what they'd like to see. Can you all speak to that? Is it a policy decision or is there a guideline associated with the need? I mean, can you kind of give me a sense of how that happens?
The other things to consider are, again, the City's financial state, the ability to fund the Capital Budget. We have done some other jobs. We are in a position almost to --
I'm sorry. We are almost in position with C.B. Moore already, thanks to some of the recent funding. So --
May I ask the witness to speak up? 154 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, 2
Okay. We'll work with City Council on trying to develop these projects. I know we had done a preliminary study for this. As far as working in the budget, we expect, you know, to work with the Administration and with City Council on putting the necessary projects in the budget.
Yeah, but my question was: In the past, we had to put our entire allocation for that fiscal year to do a swimming pool, and I don't want that to have to happen again.
And the question was, how do we get above our baseline 1 million and 1.2 to get into the Capital Budget when it's a $2 million project? I mean, how does that happen, what triggers that specifically?
That I really couldn't say, but we have done projects by funding them incrementally over a series of years. 155 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, 2
Obviously, if there are projects that we want to include in the Capital Budget and they would eat up your whole allocation, we will work with you, you know, to work that out.
So if in the event that we decide we need to do a major upgrade of athletics or replace athletic, then we'll figure out a way to get what's needed and not necessarily --
Well, I don't think he knows -- (Unintelligible, parties talking over each other.)
It's not necessarily entirely eating up your whole allocation.
I said it in a long way, but yes. 156 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, 2
Okay, thank you. Mr. Iffrig, I guess this could be for you. The Robinhood Dell, could you tell me how much money is currently in the budget?
Currently, we have, up to the FY 2000 budget, 550,000 available.
It is in design for a major project for a major drainage renovation project replacement throughout the seating area, stage area, emergency lighting, and new electrical service. And if the bids come well, we hope to do replacement seating.
Okay. And the funding over the three -- and the reason I ask you 157 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, this is, let me tell you. I got this book from the Friends of the Dell, and some anonymous recreation staffers called for a $4 million upgrade of the facility, and I'm just trying to get a sense for how this has been responded to and what your, you know --
I've seen that pamphlet before. I don't know if it's the $4 million version, but the critical needs identified in that booklet are the ones that the Recreation Department recognizes and is designing improvement contracts to remedy.
It will be right around the budget. We're not sure whether or not, for instance, we'll be able to afford the seating replacement in this immediate program, but the items that I mentioned -- the seating area, drainage, stage replacement, emergency audience lighting, and new power service -- will be covered within it.
So do you think that the 500,000 will be able to appropriately 158 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, respond to this in terms of the most critical issues?
It's very close, it's very 5 close. We don't have the very final estimates to be very sure of it.
Okay. Was there an official response to this? And I'm assuming that you got it.
Not an official response. I believe I got it the same way you did, which is, it was just passed on.
Okay. Would it be possible if you could give an official response? Because some of the issues on here seem somewhat critical, and if you were to take them all into account, it would probably be more than the $500,000, and I was just interested to see, seeing that there's no additional dollars put into the budget for the Dell in out-years, I'd like to get a sense for how we can adequately respond to the 159 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, people that submitted this document.
Okay. The only problem is, I'm not sure if that's the same version I got.
Let me pass this to him, please so he can see it. I want to make sure you have the right document.
And we do know, yes, who the Friends are they and how to respond to them.
The Chair recognizes Councilman Cohen. 160 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, 2
Thank you, Madam President. Miss Kaplan, first, with respect to Robin Hood Dell, was that in the budget originally for this coming year, for 2001?
Does anybody know any reason why it was not put back? 'Cause it surely --
Maybe we 161 2/10/00 WHOLE - PUB. MEETING - 003, 4, could find out why it was put in and for what purpose?
I think our theory was that 5 the existing funds were enough to cover the needs at the Dell.
And when was that your theory? When you say that was your theory, it wasn't your theory when it originally went into the budget?
Well, it was in January, when we looked to having to cut it to 140.