-- in10 estimated obligations increases the fund11 balance, which is less taxes we have to12 raise from our citizens.13
So we need15 an accurate estimated obligations for16 Fiscal 2009, not just what was17 appropriated to you, because you're not18 going to spend that amount.19
Thank you.25 449 5/4/09 COMM. OF THE WHOLE - FISCAL '10 BUDGET1 We just found another half a2 million, Madam President.3 Okay. So perhaps4 Mr. Mescolotto could describe what the5 process was before you had the devices6 that are going to go out and take paper7 out of your process compared to what they8 are going to be once you have those9 devices operational.10
So, like12 walk me through a typical day with paper13 and without paper of everybody involved14 in the process.15
A typical day16 in one of our evaluators' lives, which is17 someone that visits the field, gathers18 information, would be all on paper.19 Observing characteristics of the20 property, observing condition, measuring21 sizes of buildings, observing whether it22 has central air-conditioning, and all the23 attributes and amenities that they can24 observe from the outside of a house or25 450 5/4/09 COMM. OF THE WHOLE - FISCAL '10 BUDGET1 any kind of a building, for that matter.2 It would all be written on3 paper, it would be sketched on paper if4 they could do that, and then brought back5 to the office and then would have to be6 transferred to forms that would go to our7 IT Department and would be entered.8
Sorry. So9 what do you mean -- when you say10 "transferred to forms," you mean they11 don't take the forms with them in the12 field?13
Some people14 do, others don't. Others feel more15 comfortable one way or the other. They16 can work faster. It's kind of like an17 individual --18
And there's21 people in the office that there to fill22 these forms out.23
Okay. So an24 assessor doesn't fill out the form, an25 451 5/4/09 COMM. OF THE WHOLE - FISCAL '10 BUDGET1 evaluator doesn't fill out the form;2 someone back in the office fills out the3 form based on the notes from the4 assessor.5
Okay. So9 what we have is somebody writing stuff10 down on paper in the field, bringing it11 back to the office, somebody writing it12 down again on paper back at the office, a13 different piece of paper.14
Then, after16 it's on that piece of paper, you have17 data-entry people who are putting that18 information into a computer.19
So you're25 452 5/4/09 COMM. OF THE WHOLE - FISCAL '10 BUDGET1 going from three steps to one step.2
So how come5 you are only losing eleven people?6 (Timer bell rings.)7
It seems10 like that there are more efficiencies11 than eleven people available once you12 eliminate -- once you go from three steps13 to one step in your process.14
You still need15 the evaluator, the trained evaluator, to16 do all those things. It's not like the17 three steps along the way are three18 separate people. We have one person that19 enters for the entire department.20
Right. There23 are different people, but at the end of24 the day, at the of the line when we get25 453 5/4/09 COMM. OF THE WHOLE - FISCAL '10 BUDGET1 to IT Department, there's one person that2 does all this entry work for entire3 department 'cause we have not been able4 to hire any backup, you know, in any5 recent memory.6 So that's really one job there7 who can -- we cannot eliminate that job8 because there are still things that are9 --10 (Indiscernible; parties talking11 over each other.)12
There's13 inefficiencies in the first two steps as14 well.15
But also,16 Councilman Green, the person that did, I17 think it's, the second step was the real18 property assistant. Those are what we19 formally call "School Board clerks," and20 those School Board clerks are the people21 who gathered the information from the22 evaluators in many instances --23 (Timer bell rings.)24
-- and then put it25 454 5/4/09 COMM. OF THE WHOLE - FISCAL '10 BUDGET1 into the format so that it could be sent2 on to IT. So that's the steps.3 So this allows the evaluator to4 do the job of evaluation. And then it5 further improves it and improves the6 quality in terms of the accuracy of the7 work, with the evaluator entering the8 information directly if we're able to9 reach the stage of using handheld10 devices, because that means if there's a11 mistake, it's the first mistake, as12 opposed to being several levels of13 mistakes.14
Right, but15 we've gone from three steps to one step,16 and you're saying there's no efficiencies17 in terms of personnel as a result of that18 change.19
I also didn't20 quite finish saying that there are also21 new skills that we're giving them to do22 that they did not do in the past such as23 the apex drawing and other data that24 we're gathering along the way. So we're25 455 5/4/09 COMM. OF THE WHOLE - FISCAL '10 BUDGET1 replacing some of those things with new,2 more modern parts to this.3 Now, if you're asking me how4 many people we can eliminate based on5 this one scenario that you're giving me,6 I don't have an answer to that question.7
'Cause I9 don't. I mean, this is something that I10 think as we -- if you look at what's11 happening here, we're also, you know,12 have 125 positions we're talking about13 now. That is down from what we had when14 we are at 145. So, you know, there is15 some loss of personnel there, a16 significant loss to us.17 But we still need a certain18 amount of bodies to do this job according19 to the national standards groups that we20 abide by.21
Well, I want24 to take exception to that because every25 456 5/4/09 COMM. OF THE WHOLE - FISCAL '10 BUDGET1 surrounding county doesn't have clerks;2 they have only assessors and evaluators.3 So, I mean, you know, they're abiding by4 national standards.5
I'm referring6 to the Civil Service personnel and the7 people that are on the City's budget.8
Okay. My9 time has ended, but I will have more10 questions, Madam President.11
Thank12 you.13 The Chair recognizes Councilman14 Sanchez.15
Along16 those lines, how many of your employees17 are Civil Service and how many are18 exempt?19
Exempt employees?20 COUNCILWOMAN SANCHEZ:21 Non-Civil Service.22
One.25 457 5/4/09 COMM. OF THE WHOLE - FISCAL '10 BUDGET1
Oh, one. Enrico2 Foglia is exempt. We have 10 board3 members, and then of the other 138 that4 are there now, they're Civil Service5 employees.6
The ones11 on the School District payroll are not12 Civil Service --13
So out16 of your 138 positions, how many are Civil17 Service?18
It's 138. But you21 asked how many are exempt, and there's22 one exempt employee.23
Right,24 but of the ones at the School District,25 458 5/4/09 COMM. OF THE WHOLE - FISCAL '10 BUDGET1 are they Civil Service --2
-- or4 are they a part of the union? So how5 many of those --6
Okay.21 So can you provide to the Chair a22 breakdown of your employees so that we're23 clear between what is Civil Service,24 which we are required to do, versus25 459 5/4/09 COMM. OF THE WHOLE - FISCAL '10 BUDGET1 exempt and non-bargaining represented2 employees. If you could submit that,3 that would be great.4
One of7 the things, before we get to Full Value8 Project, is, you recently moved your9 offices to the Curtis Center. Why was10 that decision, and how much money did we11 save on that move?12
That decision was13 2007. I don't know how much money was14 saved on that move, but we moved at the15 time because the -- what is it, the16 Girard Trust? The owners of the building17 where we were located had given us a18 notice to move and had given everyone in19 the building notice to move. And they20 were planning to -- they had a three-year21 plan for the building.22 And then I think Mr. Levin23 worked on the committee with the move; he24 could further explain.25 460 5/4/09 COMM. OF THE WHOLE - FISCAL '10 BUDGET1
Councilwoman, that2 was not our decision. The decision was3 made by the Department of Public Property4 that actually pays the rent.5
We still6 pay your rent, the City. It's not7 reflected in your budget, 'cause I was8 looking for that, I was looking for your9 rental expenses, and it's not here.10
When we moved, we15 moved along with the IG and the16 Commission on Human Relations and the17 Fair Housing Commission. It was a total18 of about 78,000 square feet. That's --19 that space was found, and the leases were20 negotiated primarily by Commissioner21 Slaughterbeck.22
So23 because that cost is not reflected on24 here and it's in the Public Property25 461 5/4/09 COMM. OF THE WHOLE - FISCAL '10 BUDGET1 budget, do you know what the cost is of2 the rent that we're picking up for you3 through Public Property that's not4 reflected on your budget?5
We do not. We6 don't even know how that allocation of7 the 78,000 square feet is made amongst8 the four agencies.9
The13 Chair recognizes Councilman Green for a14 point of information.15
Thank you,16 Madam Chair.17 Just for my colleague and for18 the Members of the Board of the BRT and19 Executive Director who are here, you20 saved hundreds of thousands of dollars in21 storage cost as a consequence of OCRing22 lots of records that used to be stored in23 office space that is now electronic, as24 part of the move. One more example of25 462 5/4/09 COMM. OF THE WHOLE - FISCAL '10 BUDGET1 going paperless.2
And as part of5 that, Mr. Mescolotto can also explain, we6 imaged the records, and the long-range7 goal is to try to image all documents for8 the BRT.9
Yes. We've10 started up a unit that is going to be11 charged with scanning documents for the12 entire department. We're organizing13 that, we have the people in place. We're14 organizing the equipment and a few other15 things right now.16 Indexing of all of the records17 will be against the account number of the18 property and the address, so that all of19 those records -- paper records can go20 away, and anytime that you're looking for21 anything about an account, anything22 that's occurred, be it a memo, be it a --23 we started with all of the old property24 record cards, which took up over 50025 463 5/4/09 COMM. OF THE WHOLE - FISCAL '10 BUDGET1 filing cabinet space -- space for 5002 filing cabinets, and that was eliminated,3 a very true statement, when we moved to4 this new location.5 Hopefully, we get down, and as6 far as I'm concerned, down to where we7 have no filing cabinets going forward,8 because we can -- the City's made quite a9 big investment on the central imaging10 warehouse, and we intend to be active11 users of that investment.12
Okay.13 Let me get in one more question before14 the bell rings.15 Much talk has been done to16 those employees at the School District,17 that we have in the School District. If18 we were to eliminate for accounting19 purposes and correct that, what fee would20 you be charging for the School District21 for the services rendered that you feel22 that the School District should be23 paying?24
We'd need to do a25 464 5/4/09 COMM. OF THE WHOLE - FISCAL '10 BUDGET1 study within our department to actually2 do those calculations, the man-hour3 calculations that are involved.4
And you5 think you can get that to us before the6 School District comes before us?7
Okay,17 all right. If you would submit that to18 the Chair, that would be helpful.19 Thank you, Madam President.20
Thank21 you.22 The Chair recognizes23 Councilwoman Blackwell.24
Thank25 465 5/4/09 COMM. OF THE WHOLE - FISCAL '10 BUDGET1 you, Madam President.2 Good afternoon. When are you3 planning to certify these new assessments4 per the information we received from you5 last week?6
We are waiting for7 the validation process to be completed by8 the evaluators. Once that validation9 process has been completed, then we want10 an opportunity for the consultants who11 worked with us on the project to look at12 those numbers. Then we will know how13 soon we can certify.14
And I15 raise those issues because we are very16 upset with regard to figures that we see17 listed on the north side of Market and in18 communities like Mantua, communities like19 Belmont and Parkside, these are the areas20 that have been some of the poorest in the21 City. And Lex Street, before PHA22 rebuilt, we had the Lex Street massacres,23 some of the worst crime in the City. And24 we have focused so much time and energy25 466 5/4/09 COMM. OF THE WHOLE - FISCAL '10 BUDGET1 to try to rebuild a failing neighborhood.2 And thank God we've been trying to do3 that and have been successful on some4 levels.5 But to have them almost double?6 These are people who are fourth- and7 fifth-generation friends and neighbors8 who are unemployed, people who receive9 assistance, fourth- and fifth-generation.10 And we worked hard to bring this11 community around, but it appears that12 after they withstood all of the13 university expansion, they've managed to14 stay together, they've withstood all of15 the university expansion. Now because16 you can stand in Mantua and look over and17 see the Art Museum, or you live near the18 Zoo, it appears that they're being19 reassessed almost double.20 And that's a real, real, real21 problem for us. It's going to be a22 community issue unless we can find some23 way to reconsider this.24 And mantua and on the north25 467 5/4/09 COMM. OF THE WHOLE - FISCAL '10 BUDGET1 side, everybody hears about the black2 bottom, all of these areas, that's where3 you want to double it, and it's just not4 fair. People can't afford it.5 And it looks like, you know,6 the old word "gentrification" that7 they've withstood all of these years.8 Now we reassess and they run the risk of9 being gentrified.10 And I can't sit by and let that11 happen on my watch, not without doing12 everything we can to speak out against13 it, to complain against it, to tell14 people what their public recourse is, and15 to let you know that it's just not fair.16 You're going to put people out17 of the neighborhood we fought so hard to18 change, to redo. We almost have a19 thousand PHA homes there, we have Lucien20 E. Blackwell homes there, we have houses21 where people died. Now you see seniors22 coming out of them. We fought so hard to23 lose the very people that we fought hard24 to house.25 468 5/4/09 COMM. OF THE WHOLE - FISCAL '10 BUDGET1 And so, I certainly would hope2 that you will consider that and that you3 will let us know what our recourse is,4 and that you understand this is something5 that's just not fair.6
And, Councilwoman7 Blackwell, we understand that as a board.8 We're very not only sympathetic to it9 all, but we also understand it's very10 important for us to do or job. And that11 job is to assess the property accurately12 to make sure that we've established13 uniformity and equity in that assessment14 process.15 We recognize that a once we do16 that, then Council is able rely upon17 those values to set the tax rate, and18 we're out of it at that point because19 that tax rate is what then generates the20 tax revenue and determines how much each21 person pays.22 So from our perspective, that23 doubling does not have to occur. It24 depends upon where Council sets the25 469 5/4/09 COMM. OF THE WHOLE - FISCAL '10 BUDGET1 rates. That's why we understand it's2 very important for us to have the3 accuracy of assessment.4
We had5 this discussion, Madam President, I don't6 know, maybe a year ago. We talked about7 homesteading, we talked about six or8 seven ways that people can be exempted.9 There's no talk about any of that now.10 There's no talk outside of the 19 percent11 this year, 14 or 14-and-a-half percent12 the Year 11, along with this revaluation,13 there's no talk about those things.14 All I hear is that they want to15 double the taxes of the people who live16 on the north side of Market in my area,17 people who live in Mantua, and other18 neighborhoods like that. That's what we19 hear about.20 There's no big move afoot for21 any of the other. And it's just that22 people cannot afford it. It's not right,23 it's not fair, and I will not take that24 responsibility upon myself that I got to25 470 5/4/09 COMM. OF THE WHOLE - FISCAL '10 BUDGET1 make it all right.2 It is certainly a problem for3 all of us. I'm not the only one who has4 these neighborhoods; we all do. But I'm5 telling you that it's not fair and that6 it's not something that we can sit idly7 by and let happen.8
And, Councilwoman,9 as I said, that's why the Board10 recognizes the importance of having11 accuracy of assessment in this process12 and setting those values at actual value13 --14 (Timer bell rings.)15
-- so that a16 determination can be made of what the17 fair rate should be so that it can18 generate the revenue that the City needs.19 But we recognize that that's not our20 issue.21 But in addition to doing the22 accuracy -- accurate setting of the23 market values, what we are also waiting24 for is, we know about the homestead25 471 5/4/09 COMM. OF THE WHOLE - FISCAL '10 BUDGET1 legislation that was passed through2 Council, the ordinance that passed3 Council last year. And in that, there's4 a mandate that that would be another5 program that would be managed and6 administered by the Board of Revision of7 Taxes.8 So we're awaiting for --9 there's no dollar figure in that, and we10 recognize that there's a need for11 enabling legislation, but we're waiting12 for that information so that we can also13 put that as part of our to-do list in14 terms of preparing the proper paperwork15 so that we can administer that program16 appropriately.17 And any other programs and18 buffers that Council puts in place, if19 they choose to have the Board of Revision20 of Taxes administer it on the valuation21 side, we're waiting for that information22 as well so we can include that as part of23 the things that we do in managing the24 valuation and market values and25 472 5/4/09 COMM. OF THE WHOLE - FISCAL '10 BUDGET1 assessment values in the City of2 Philadelphia.3
Madam4 President, we're at the beginning of this5 discussion only, and that nothing happens6 without full and open disclosure across7 the board.8 Thank you.9
Thank10 you.11 The Chair recognizes Councilman12 Clarke.13
Real quick18 I'm going to try to get two questions in.19 Probably won't make it.20 , could you walk me21 through this Abatement and Exemptions. I22 just want to make sure that I'm reading23 this correctly.24 On the bottom, where it says25 473 5/4/09 COMM. OF THE WHOLE - FISCAL '10 BUDGET1 "the statutorily exempted properties,"2 and you have a $12 billion decrease of3 $62 billion from Tax Year -- I'm sorry,4 of 62 million from tax year '07. Is that5 the cumulative amount?6
Yes. Those7 two figures are -- the statutorily-exempt8 properties are churches, charities,9 schools, things like that. We're10 separating them from the abated11 properties, first of all.12
And we did15 have a decrease in that area due to a16 number of different parcels around the17 City, including ones up by LaSalle, where18 they converted them to properties that19 are now taxable by building the shopping20 center and so forth.21 And through the auditing of22 these properties by our staff, we've had23 a net decrease of $62 million in those24 valuations during this timeframe.25 474 5/4/09 COMM. OF THE WHOLE - FISCAL '10 BUDGET1 As far as the abatement2 properties, they do go back on the tax3 rolls --4
-- and6 generate, you know, revenue.7 As far as the abated8 properties, we have had a substantial9 increase putting on, as you could see,10 it's $870 million from Tax Year 2007.11
Right. These17 are the abated properties, the new18 construction, the renovations, the many19 condominiums that came on during this20 period of time, and it was a net increase21 of --22
So we're23 experiencing -- unlike the general view,24 at least in those two particular years,25 475 5/4/09 COMM. OF THE WHOLE - FISCAL '10 BUDGET1 we experienced an increase in numbers,2 not necessarily units, but it could have3 been more expensive units that got4 abated?5
They're all6 over the City. Many of them are in7 Center City, but there are abated8 properties that came onboard all over the9 City, all different kinds -- it could be10 business properties, it could be11 condominiums, it could be single-family12 houses; many, many different types. We13 can give you detail on that if you want.14
All right,15 okay. If I had more than five minutes, I16 would ask for it.17 Okay. So in spite of the18 downturn in the national economy, at19 least in '08, we didn't see any evidence20 of it locally.21
There were22 many projects were winding down at that23 point.24
So in the25 476 5/4/09 COMM. OF THE WHOLE - FISCAL '10 BUDGET1 next year, on the next page, in 2009, I'm2 assuming this reflects -- does this3 reflect these numbers up to date in terms4 of abatements?5
It would be6 more or less end of 2009 -- 2008,7 certified for 2009, yes.8
So from9 this, can you have an estimate as to what10 the forecast may be in terms of the11 amount of abatements for Calendar '09?12
We could give16 you a current -- a very current version17 of this report if you want, which is18 current to, like, you know, the last19 month. And we could maybe divine from20 that a growth rate, if you will.21
And compare23 that to the previous years.24 I think you're going to see25 477 5/4/09 COMM. OF THE WHOLE - FISCAL '10 BUDGET1 this coming year not as much growth, but2 still some growth. We're still seeing3 building permits coming in to us for new4 construction. And I would be5 hard-pressed to think that we would still6 be getting them had we not had the7 abatement programs.8
Okay. The9 reason I ask that is 'cause, as you know,10 I'm pushing this reduction in the11 abatement amount, and I continue to12 see -- we did a little brief analysis,13 obviously, without the resources that you14 had. But we continually show that if we15 went to 80 percent as opposed to 10016 percent, the General Fund would17 experience between 2 and $3 million a18 year, and 80 percent is still a19 relatively high abatement.20
Oh, 80 percent25 478 5/4/09 COMM. OF THE WHOLE - FISCAL '10 BUDGET1 of the value.2
Yeah. We'd5 certainly be glad to work cooperatively6 with you on that.7
Okay, yes.8 It's between 2 and 3. We looked at it9 from a conservative side.10 The issue about appraisers;11 there are appraisers that are on your12 staff?13
Yeah, all16 evaluators. There was this request with17 the Redevelopment Authority in particular18 that, for whatever reason, the19 Redevelopment Authority always contracts20 out for appraisers, so every time there21 is some activity, which is quite22 frequently, with the Redevelopment23 Authority, we have to go out and contract24 with it and appraise it, and it takes a25 479 5/4/09 COMM. OF THE WHOLE - FISCAL '10 BUDGET1 lot of time to get those appraisals back;2 therefore, it takes a lot of time for us3 to get a number or a value so we can then4 complete a transaction.5 Is there anything in the law6 that says -- that you know of in State7 law or any law that governs appraisals8 that would not allow you to have on staff9 appraisers that can be a part of a10 condemnation or a land sales process?11
I just14 never understood why we don't have an15 appraiser on staff.16
I don't know17 what the actual requirements are there18 'cause I've never looked into it.19
They may21 require a State license and certified22 appraiser. Not all of our people are23 State-licensed and -certified.24 (Timer bell rings.)25 480 5/4/09 COMM. OF THE WHOLE - FISCAL '10 BUDGET1
Right. But,4 Councilman Clarke, are you referring to5 the Redevelopment Authority?6
Councilman, the14 Redevelopment Authority does have a staff15 appraiser; they've had it forever as long16 as I can remember. Val Pasquarelli is17 their staff appraiser, but they do18 contract out when they condemn19 properties.20
I actually21 know that. I'm glad that you said it22 'cause I don't want to give the23 impression that I was picking on the24 Redevelopment Authority, but I guess I25 481 5/4/09 COMM. OF THE WHOLE - FISCAL '10 BUDGET1 just don't understand -- I thought maybe2 it was something that was required from3 some external appraiser as opposed to an4 internal appraiser, some state reg or5 something, 'cause I just didn't6 understand if you have an appraiser on7 staff, why do you contract out? And that8 traditionally lengthens the whole9 acquisition and the disposition process10 for weeks and months sometimes at a time11 because you have to get these outside12 appraisers, and it seems like it would be13 more productive to just use your person14 through the appraisers to get the deal15 done.16
I don't know17 specifically. It may have to do with the18 fact that much of what they acquire19 includes federal funding. There may be a20 requirement that they be independent21 appraisers; I don't know.22
I do not.25 482 5/4/09 COMM. OF THE WHOLE - FISCAL '10 BUDGET1
All right.2 That may be one other thing that I would3 ask for you to work with me on, 'cause I4 really have an issue about the5 productivity of that particular dormant.6 All right. Thank you, Madam7 President.8 COUNCIL PRESIDENT VERNA:9 You're welcome.10
The13 Chair recognizes Councilman Rizzo for a14 point of information.15
Just a quick16 one here.17 There are different types of18 deferrals, right? There's the total19 deferral other than the land, but if a20 person reconstructs, there's tax21 deferrals there. How many categories are22 there of deferrals?23 And also, when does the first24 deferral start to expire; and if you25 483 5/4/09 COMM. OF THE WHOLE - FISCAL '10 BUDGET1 collate it, what the tax will be?2
Abatements,3 yes. We have four abatement programs4 right now. There's an abatement for new5 construction of residential properties,6 renovation of residential properties. We7 have a 961 abatements that -- and the8 1130 abatement, which is for -- it's for9 commercial properties in either new10 construction or substantial renovation.11 And the Act 205, 175 State, what we call12 the builders or developers abatement. So13 there's four programs right now.14 And what your question after15 that was...?16
The second17 question was: When do the first18 abatements end? And have you started to19 calculate what the revenue will be when20 those abatements end?21
The answer is,22 the first substantial abatements of23 ten-year abatements that we're talking24 about started to come off for 2009.25 484 5/4/09 COMM. OF THE WHOLE - FISCAL '10 BUDGET1 There was I don't know -- Mike, we had2 about what, 300-and-some came off this3 past year? Yeah, for certified 2009,4 went back on the tax rolls.5 They were some of the earliest6 abatements when properties that were7 converted from office buildings into8 apartments into condos. So they started9 for this past year.10 I can give you a report, if you11 want, that details for the next ten12 years, what comes off each year, how13 much, what type of abatement. We do have14 that, and I can supply it for you.15
Right. That report19 is read by valuation, so it contains the20 assessment and market value figures. It21 doesn't contain the tax figures.22
Yeah, we don't have25 485 5/4/09 COMM. OF THE WHOLE - FISCAL '10 BUDGET1 those.2 (Timer bell rings.)3
-- 'cause we4 don't know what the rates are going to be5 boing forward.6
Thank you.7 Thank you, Madam President.8 COUNCIL PRESIDENT VERNA:9 You're welcome.10 The Chair recognizes Councilman11 Jones.12
Thank you,13 Madam President.14 Going back more to Councilwoman15 Blackwell's concerns about the16 disparities that often are unintended,17 I'll say consequences of your18 reassessments and appraisals.19 Why is it that some20 neighborhoods have been reassessed more21 than others and some -- as I'm getting22 complaints about it four times versus23 others that may not have been touched in24 ten years?25 486 5/4/09 COMM. OF THE WHOLE - FISCAL '10 BUDGET1
Madam2 President, point of information.3 I never do a point of4 information, let the record show. But5 Councilman Jones' question goes to my6 very opening question, wherein your7 answer was a B+. Help me reconcile the8 reality you just stated with the grades9 you just gave yourself.10 Thank you, Madam President.11
And my issue12 is: In light of the fact that I've had13 year after year folks say that they are14 getting reassessed and their values are15 going up and up, and then there are other16 blocks that get quiet passes and aren't17 touched and aren't reassessed. And that18 adds to the disparity in some of the --19 you used words like "reliable" and20 "accurate," reliable and accurate.21 But it also needs to be22 consistent and uniform, because if people23 doubt that process and doubt that24 fundamental fairness, and if you do a25 487 5/4/09 COMM. OF THE WHOLE - FISCAL '10 BUDGET1 wink and know somebody, it can be a pass2 on your block, that's not the kind of3 confidence that we want in light of the4 tough decisions that we may have to make.5 And I need a answer to why some6 blocks get a pass.7
Right. And8 Councilman Jones and Councilwoman Brown9 also, the B+ was in reference to the10 Actual Value Project, how we're moving11 along with that project to the future.12 But in answer to your question13 in terms of the disparity, I'll allow our14 Acting Director to give you a full15 answer, but the Board's position is16 that's the reason that we need to go to17 actual value. And that's why we need it18 a full assessment of the City at actual19 value, what a willing buyer, willing20 seller would pay, what the income that21 would be driven on an open market for22 property.23 And that's why we needed to do24 it at the actual value level to provide25 488 5/4/09 COMM. OF THE WHOLE - FISCAL '10 BUDGET1 for uniformity, which not only is fair2 but is the constitutional mandate.3 And, unfortunately, the fact4 that we had to have this type of a5 program and spend so much time and effort6 trying to achieve the uniformity, equity,7 and transparency and assessment and the8 fairness bespeaks the problem that you9 speak of.10 And I'll have Mr. Mescolotto --11
I know how12 that bell thing works here. I want to13 get on the record this question, which is14 also when a -- let's do a hypothetical.15 Someone comes into a neighborhood that is16 on the upswing, and many of us have them,17 Councilwoman Blackwell, all of us in our18 districts have neighborhoods that are19 considered "on the upswing."20 And a person comes in, a21 pioneer comes in, and mingles and buys a22 property among long-term residents. And23 then, all of a sudden, the sale value24 jumps up, let's say, to a quarter of a25 489 5/4/09 COMM. OF THE WHOLE - FISCAL '10 BUDGET1 million. It impacts everyone that's on2 the block.3 So for the existing residents,4 the idea of a better city and a beautiful5 city doesn't necessarily have the same6 weight on them because they now see an7 increase in their assessments and wonder8 why because someone else moved in their9 block.10 So I'm telling you, we have to11 figure this kind of system out.12
And that's why it's13 so desperate, the need for the buffering14 programs, for the Homestead Act, for15 ordinances that specifically address16 gentrification for -- I was so happy that17 Council increased the Tax Reach Program,18 the dollar-amount, raised the19 dollar-amount to allow people to qualify20 for the Tax Reach Program, because so21 often, it's the seniors that we see on22 appeal who come in and oftentimes tell23 us, That's value. I don't have a problem24 with the value; I simply can't afford to25 490 5/4/09 COMM. OF THE WHOLE - FISCAL '10 BUDGET1 pay the tax increase.2 So that's why we recognize the3 importance of providing you with the4 uniform information for the entire City5 to assure that the assessments are6 accurate, to assure that there's equity7 and fairness, so that all of those8 programs can be taken into consideration9 when and applied either on the value side10 or on the tax side to making sure that we11 don't force those dedicated citizens of12 the City who labored hard and in those13 neighborhoods -- and I lived in those14 neighborhoods and I've worked in housing15 areas in those neighborhoods to build16 low-income housing.17 (Timer bell rings.)18
But I had to watch19 the low-income housing that I helped to20 provide for people gave time to, at no21 cost. Then I had to watch that increase22 the value of the homes in the areas where23 speculators come in, and now the property24 values are up so high, what happens to25 491 5/4/09 COMM. OF THE WHOLE - FISCAL '10 BUDGET1 those people who stayed since the 1960s,2 since the riots, since the time that it3 was hard to live in that section of4 Philadelphia. What happens to them.5 So that's something that we are6 sensitive to.7
Just as you8 answered the original question, just note9 that there's a stereotypical view of what10 that neighborhood is. And I'm telling11 you --12
And I'm15 telling you, from Market Street in my16 lower-income neighborhoods, in certain17 parts, to my more affluent neighborhoods18 I'm getting the same concern, because19 when they bought in a certain20 neighborhood, middle-level area, they21 bought it at $95,000, and now it's worth,22 you know, people are buying 'em for 20023 and $250,000, and they are on fixed24 income, retirement income, pension25 492 5/4/09 COMM. OF THE WHOLE - FISCAL '10 BUDGET1 income. And now they're finding2 themselves between a rock and a hard3 place.4 So, you know, we have to5 provide, as Councilwoman Blackwell said,6 some buffers and, more importantly, some7 uniformity answers, so that when people8 receive that tax bill in the mail, that9 reassessment in the mail, there is a10 degree of confidence behind it.11
And that's why our12 assessments must be accurate, uniform,13 fair, and equitable. And I would even14 say in response that, we recognize that15 there was not a boon just in one section16 of Philadelphia; it was all over the17 City, to the extent that you have places18 that were North Philadelphia that are now19 Northern Liberties, places that were West20 Philadelphia that are now University21 City. If you're looking for a movie22 theater, you have sometimes have to look23 to see what section of the City is it24 located now. The street hasn't changed,25 493 5/4/09 COMM. OF THE WHOLE - FISCAL '10 BUDGET1 the location hasn't changed, but what2 they're calling it is changed.3 And that's a reflection of when4 the market values increase. Then the5 line moves in terms of how the higher-end6 properties are defined or how the7 middle-income properties are defined. So8 we recognize that, and it happens all9 over the City.10 The abatement program was one11 of the reasons that we believe you saw12 such a demand in the construction area to13 build not only new residential homes, but14 new commercial properties, new condos.15 And what that provided on one hand for16 Council to bring the people back to the17 City of Philadelphia, both in business18 and both as residents, and put them on19 the tax roll is a good thing. But by the20 same token, we have to remember, whenever21 we improve any neighborhood, then the22 property values are increased, and we23 have to find a way -- and I don't say we24 can, because we're you just the Board of25 494 5/4/09 COMM. OF THE WHOLE - FISCAL '10 BUDGET1 Revision of Taxes; we're only supposed to2 value and assess.3 But we have to work and provide4 whatever information we can to you that's5 accurate and assists you in any other6 ways with information that we have, that7 might not be directly related to the8 assessments, so that you can do the job9 that you need to do to protect those10 long-term citizens about whom you speak.11
Councilman, there12 was, in effect, a proposed constitutional13 amendment that would have protected folks14 in gentrified neighborhoods, exactly the15 concern that Councilwoman Blackwell has16 expressed for many, many years, as17 articulated for many, many years, whereby18 that individual, the increase in the19 real-estate taxes from a certain point20 would be deferred until either that21 individual who owned the property passed22 and then paid as part of the estate taxes23 or the property was sold. At that point,24 the tax would be made up.25 495 5/4/09 COMM. OF THE WHOLE - FISCAL '10 BUDGET1 We, nor you, nor anyone wants2 to tax folks out of their own homes, and3 we find that second and third and fourth4 generation in many neighborhoods, and5 especially in University City.6 So that was a constitutional7 amendment, and it might be something that8 needs to be looked into. Once again,9 it's a logical, intelligent answer to a10 very severe problem.11
I appreciate12 that sentiment because some people -- you13 know, all progress isn't forward for all14 people. All progress isn't forward for15 all people. And one person's "Oh, isn't16 this a beautiful neighborhood" is "Oh, I17 used to live here."18 And I'm very concerned about19 that destabilizing factor and20 particularly at the hands of the tax man.21
Mm-hmm. And we22 have to work as a city, work together,23 and help you in whatever you have to do24 to lobby Harrisburg, because a lot of the25 496 5/4/09 COMM. OF THE WHOLE - FISCAL '10 BUDGET1 things that need to be done require2 enabling legislation, and they have to3 become sensitive to working with the City4 of Philadelphia so that we can grow this5 city for all people at all economic6 levels.7
Thank10 you.11 The Chair recognizes12 Councilwoman Brown.13
Well put,14 Councilman Jones.15 So to the passion expressed by16 Councilwoman Blackwell, and looking to17 the future, with the new tools you're18 putting in place, have you talked to,19 talked through, thought through how we20 educate citizens so that there is clearly21 a distinction between a tax hike versus22 the actual value? Have you had a chance23 yet to go to a strategic implementation24 plan so that we help civilians what it is25 497 5/4/09 COMM. OF THE WHOLE - FISCAL '10 BUDGET1 and what it is not?2
Preliminarily,3 there was an attempt to do that. And,4 unfortunately, what we needed, we5 realized, in trying to do that process6 were actual numbers, because what people7 want to know is, How does it affect me8 specifically?9
So we realized that11 before we go out again, we really need to12 complete the process and then be prepared13 to go out wherever we're needed, to14 discuss with people and explain to people15 and to open our offices, most16 importantly, so that taxpayers can come17 in. And, as we said, we've created the18 Citizen Service Center several years ago,19 with the intent of being able to serve20 people en mass who needed specific21 information because they did not22 understand what would happen and what has23 happened to them with the Actual Value24 Project.25 498 5/4/09 COMM. OF THE WHOLE - FISCAL '10 BUDGET1
I might6 argue that there needs to be a parallel7 track of activity because those who are8 being assessed, they will talk and share9 with others.10
And does13 that feed inaccurate, misinformed14 citizens who become heightened and15 scared, quite frankly, because of what16 they're hearing, and not knowing still17 what their own circumstance will be.18
Right. And we do19 plan to go out because we also recognize20 the importance of explaining to citizens21 their rights as well, because their22 rights are the right to appeal any23 valuation and assessment that's placed on24 their property and to provide us with25 499 5/4/09 COMM. OF THE WHOLE - FISCAL '10 BUDGET1 information. We know that it is2 necessary to come out.3 There's no charge for an appeal4 to explain to people the process, how5 very simple it is to file the appeal, the6 kind of information that they should7 prepare to submit to us, and how to go8 about the process, that how we value9 properties, and that if there are10 particular disabilities with their11 properties, if there's a change in their12 properties. You're talking about13 gentrification.14 There are four remaining15 properties that we may not be able to see16 because we don't see the interiors on the17 block from a whole entire block that has18 been gentrified, and those properties19 have all been improved greatly, and we20 don't know that because we don't see the21 interior, and possibly all of the facades22 remain the same.23 So that's something we know24 that we recognize we must do in terms of25 500 5/4/09 COMM. OF THE WHOLE - FISCAL '10 BUDGET1 education of the public. And going2 further than educating the public, but3 providing them with services that we are4 to provide and being prepared to handle5 any appeals that come forward.6
My only7 final comment would be that what you and8 what we have before us is a huge9 undertaking.10
The last12 time was 18 years? According to the13 information I've read.14 So I'm not confident that you,15 as an agency, can handle in huge elephant16 alone, that it may indeed take a17 really -- the same way we approached the18 merging of Fairmount Park and the Rec19 Department. We had to be very, very20 strategic and share that with citizens21 around the City and have community22 forums. The reach of that is this way23 and this way.24
And so, I2 would just encourage you to consider an3 extremely well thought out strategic4 public relations, information-driven5 plan, where citizens at every reach of6 the ladder know that it's coming, it's7 real, what we're giving you is accurate8 and current, period.9 (Timer bell rings.)10