Committee Hearing, November 19, 2003

Among other cities. We operate in cities. 5

And are any of 6 those markets, from your estimation, 7 saturated? Or were any of those markets 8 saturated when you came? 9

I will tell you that 10 we made the case in both Baltimore and Boston 11 that there was still additional room for theater venues and, in fact, have contributed to the development of a new theater in each of those markets. In Chicago, when we came into the market, the theaters were already in existence. The most recent two had been added when the City introduced TIF legislation that funded a huge portion of both the Palace and the Ford Theaters in Chicago. I would tell you now that it will be a long time before there is a large theater that gets added to the Chicago inventory. But there are nine that are there now.

Now, Clear 107 11/19/03 - WHOLE - BILL 030663 Channel has a Live Entertainment Division; is that correct?

Yes.

And do you -- I don't want to use an inappropriate term -- either own or control talent for the live entertainment venues that you determine to some extent either how they're booked or where they're booked? How does that work?

I can really only speak from the theatrical standpoint. The largest segment of the entertainment division of Clear Channel is music, concerts and amphitheaters. In this market, Clear Channel operates the -- I guess it's Tweeter Center now, the amphitheater in Camden, and the Tower Theater here and I believe the TLA, the former Electric Factory Company is now a Clear Channel Entertainment subsidiary. But I have little involvement with them. I can't really speak to how they do their talent and talent buying. In the theatrical business, the touring productions that come through 108 11/19/03 - WHOLE - BILL 030663 Philadelphia and tour around the country are generally produced in New York by a wide range of producers, one of which is frequently Clear Channel or an investor amongst those productions. But to say that we control the entertainment and the product, that is definitely an exaggeration; that's not true.

Well, let me just ask a practical question. To the extent that you -- I mean, I don't know what the percentage might be, but if it's a significant number, in all likelihood if there is a Clear Channel talent under contract, is it more or less likely that you would book that talent into the entertainment venue that you are co-owner of versus some other venue?

Again, from a theatrical standpoint, there are no shows that I can think of where we have the controlling ability to make a decision like that that is counter to the best interest of the show.

Well, I wouldn't think you would do anything that's counter or not in the best interest of the show. I mean, 109 11/19/03 - WHOLE - BILL 030663 you might legitimately believe that your co-owned facility is the best place for the show to be.

If that's the case, then -- but the question I thought I heard you ask was whether or not we would put shows into a Clear Channel controlled venue without considerations. And we just do not do that.

Okay.

Point of information, Madam President.

The Chair recognizes Councilman Rizzo for a point of information.

If you've already addressed this, I apologize. Twenty-four hundred seats, not the venue for rock concerts, obviously. Is there going to be anything sprung on us -- you talk about Broadway shows. Two months after it opens, we start seeing concerts that empty out at two o'clock in the morning. Could you put on the record what you plan to do and not do there?

If you're familiar 110 11/19/03 - WHOLE - BILL 030663 with the programming at the Merriam which is of Avenue of the Arts, it is a wide range of diverse programming. It is performing arts, it is touring theater, it is music, it is comedy, it is local business meeting uses, corporate events. It's a wide range of activity, and we would envision a similar mix at Boyd if it were to be renovated and reopened. Preponderantly, touring Broadway, performing arts, the type of attraction that can use the expanded stage and the 2400 seat capacity. We would hope to do film premiers. We would hope to have an active film program because of the recent history of the Boyd as the Sam Eric. But I would tell you that music would be a small -- not nonexistent, but a small component of the programming. And the concerts that you're talking about wouldn't happen in this type venue.

My last question is, is this facility going to be able to be rented by a particular --

Anybody who wants to.

That's my 111 11/19/03 - WHOLE - BILL 030663 concern.

Anybody, the City, the local community. We are not -- it's not an exclusive Clear Channel venue, it's not something that we're going to restrict and say, "You can't come here if you're not a Clear Channel show."

But my question is -- maybe you didn't want to say that. My question is that if a particular rock group wants to rent the facility and have a rock concert that empties at two o'clock in the morning into the community, could my rock band -- I think one of the other Councilmembers mentioned this earlier to me. Could that occur there?

Our management and operation of our facilities, we are very careful to gear our programming to the community that we serve. In this particular case, the Boyd is in a residential community. We would be very careful to make sure that the attractions and the audiences that they brought in would be appropriate for that area. 112 11/19/03 - WHOLE - BILL 030663

You could legally turn a customer away that you felt was not appropriate?

Yes. The criteria that we typically use is that we're going to operate a first class performing arts facility. And I can give you comparables. We have references from the City of Boston, from the City of Baltimore, from the City of San Antonio, Texas. I could give you a long list of people that --

I think you understand by now where I'm coming from here.

I absolutely understand. And without talking about the restrictive policies, it's a common sense. We have a big investment in a historic building that's going to be restored. We don't want to bring the type of entertainment that's going to attract an audience that is not going to respect the physical facility or the neighborhood in which it exists. We have noise restrictions, that we abide by, so that the neighborhood isn't going 113 11/19/03 - WHOLE - BILL 030663 to be adversely affected by noise emanating from the theater. We have very strict security policies so that the patrons don't become a nuisance in the neighborhood. I talked to somebody from the William Penn House earlier who's concerned about parking. And I can guarantee you that our security will enforce the parking restrictions in the neighborhood.

I just wanted to cover that particular area for the record.

We can go into more detail as we get into what the specific concerns are. I'm happy to do that.

Thank you.

The Chair again recognizes Councilman Nutter.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Mr. Anderson, I think my last question for you is I was looking at the study on . And the first paragraph says, "Would a renovated Boyd contribute to the expanding arts and entertainment market in the 114 11/19/03 - WHOLE - BILL 030663 region, or would it simply draw its audiences from patrons of existing venues in Philadelphia, notably those located on the nearby Avenue of the Arts? "No one can answer this question with certainty because predicting the exact future customer base for a restored theater or any new venue is impossible." With that in mind, can you just comment on why you seem to express with such certainty that this would not have the kind of effect that there's been a fair amount of discussion about? And this comes from your report.

I have two ways to address that for you. The first, again, from my experience, most of which is in the operation of restored movie palaces, historic venues. And Councilwoman Tasco's comment goes right to that point. The restoration and adaptive reuse of these historic palaces strikes a chord in most of the communities in which we operate them far beyond just a piece of real estate or just a show on the stage. 115 11/19/03 - WHOLE - BILL 030663 They have an emotional attachment to the constituents based on things like "I had my first date there" or "I did this there."

Yeah, you got her with that one.

So there is no 8 question that the addition of a restored movie palace like the Boyd attracts audiences that might otherwise not come to performing arts at all. Secondly, it goes back to the comparison of a number of venues in the size of the market. When you look at the decisions in front of you, please look not at what happens today, not what happened yesterday, and not even what's going to happen tomorrow, but we're looking at 3, 4, 10 years down the road. This market is growing. The entertainment segment is growing. The Boyd is the last of these decorative movie places in the downtown area. And it is absolutely going to fill a need that if it doesn't exist today to the greatest extent possible is sure to exist in the very near future. 116 11/19/03 - WHOLE - BILL 030663

Okay. My last question for you, seriously, is given the level of discussion that we've had here and some of the things that have been talked about earlier, have you completely ruled out the prospect of putting additional funds into this project?

No. I think as Leslie said, we are very early in the development process at this point. We have concept drawings only. We haven't done any -- we've done fairly cursory investigation of the physical structure. We've had a lot of experience at it and we have a great architect and we've got Turner Construction having looked at it. So there is enough comfort that the costs are going to be within the range that we're talking about it. But there is certainly -- every project that I've ever been in has a number that's higher than what you think it's going to be at the end. And our commitment to the Goldenberg Group, Clear Channel's commitment is that we will fund additional costs should the development 117 11/19/03 - WHOLE - BILL 030663 construction end up being more than is currently envisioned. I believe it's going to. I believe that the investment from Clear Channel will end up being more than the $11 million. I believe it will be several million more than that. I don't know what it's going to be. I hope it's not anymore than that, because we start to bump up against what I can do. We are willing to commit to those cost overruns which is a very significant commitment.

I understand and I appreciate that. I guess the point of my question was not so much to deal with the cost overrun issue was make the assumption -- I'm sure you're hoping the same -- that the project costs will actually stay about the same. What I was talking about was if they are the same, have you ruled out the prospect of additional funding by Clear Channel for the gap?

I guess I would tell you that if it costs another million dollars that I would go back to my company and see if 118 11/19/03 - WHOLE - BILL 030663 I could get that done, but I have not had very much success doing that in the past. We really were very careful -- and Leslie and I have talked about this a long time. When we first came to them, we said "This is going to cost $30 million and we can only justify 10. You've got to somehow find a way to come up with the other 20." The tax credit investment on Clear Channel's part is another significant piece of it because you only get that back as you generate the tax liability.

Let me ask Mr. Cuorato a couple technical questions and I'll be finished.

He's not here.

And I know Sam is up there and Leslie there is there as well. Well, I can find some other stuff. Will this be operated as a for-profit or a non-profit venture? After we get through all the affiliates and whose connected to who, whoever is in charge, is this a for-profit entity or a non-profit entity. 119 11/19/03 - WHOLE - BILL 030663

It's a for-profit owner of the property which will be master leased to a non-profit entity that currently runs the Merriam Theater. And a long-time management agreement will be entered into with Theater Management Group.

Okay. So what's the answer?

The ultimate tenant would be a non-profit entity, and the management of the actual facility will be by a management agreement.

That's with a for-profit entity?

Correct.

So we have the for-profit managing the non-profit?

Correct.

Now, what happens if the Commonwealth funding is not approved?

If the Commonwealth does not -- are you talking in reference to the redevelopment assistant grant? 120 11/19/03 - WHOLE - BILL 030663

Yes.

Councilman, I'm sorry. Your question was if the Commonwealth does not --

Are the state funds presently available?

Three's a request in as part of the Redevelopment Assistance Capital Program. This project is on a list of projects that the City would like to see funded from that program. This project is a priority for the City for funding from that program, but the funding has not been approved at the state level.

How many other projects are on that list?

Dozens, Councilman.

What's the total dollar amount?

It's probably several hundred million dollars.

And is the City anticipating that it's going to receive all the funding for all those projects? 121 11/19/03 - WHOLE - BILL 030663

No. 3

So there would be a certain amount and then some will happen and some will get cut?

That's correct.

Now, do they need a bill in Harrisburg to do this or is there a need to raise the cap?

It's part of the whole state budget process. As the state budget process gets resolved, this Redevelopment Assistance Capital Program should be resolved as well.

Okay. So let's go back. I mean, we all want to think positive here, but I always like to ask the other side of the question. For whatever reason, if the state funding is not available, what happens?

I don't believe we have a project, not in this form. And again, that's why we're here. That's why we're on the schedule we are. We'd like to try to put this piece in place and then make an earnest 122 11/19/03 - WHOLE - BILL 030663 appeal to the State that they basically would be in a position to make this project happen.

Because we would have taken some action?

Yes.

Okay. Let's go back to the whole market value question. Now, when I asked earlier what the sale price was, the answer was $3.8 million. Was that just for one of the pieces, or are there a variety of parcels involved? And what was the total cost of acquisition?

That would be relevant to the entire parcel, including 1908 through 1918.

What?

I'm sorry.

The $3.8 million was for everything?

Yes, it was.

And when Mr. Cuorato spoke earlier, and I guess it's from the Project Plan, if you paid 3.8, why is the market value at 2.5? 123 11/19/03 - WHOLE - BILL 030663

Again, the 2.5 relates to what the Board of Revision of Taxes currently values the property in the district at.

After the purchase?

As of today. So as of today, that's right, it's after the purchase of the theater, yes.

Why would the current market value be less than what you just recently paid for it?

Actually, the value of the property has decreased because at the time of the --

Increased or decreased?

I'm sorry. The property value has decreased because at the time of the evaluation of the 3.8 million we had a long-term tenant, United Artists valued into that property. Fair market value. It was a sale lease back with United Artists. They were the original owners at the time of 124 11/19/03 - WHOLE - BILL 030663 the purchase. They immediately entered into a year lease which factored into the value of 4 the property at that time. Because the 5 property is not currently used or occupied, 6 its value has decreased. 7

I guess what I'm 8 trying to understand is somewhere in the 9 Project Plan there was a schedule that had the 10 land cost at six and a half million dollars. 11 Why is that? 12

That is correct. 13 That particular value is also incorporating 14 the acquisition cost of the parking lot that 15 we would need to acquire to be able to do the 16 necessary stage expansion to accommodate the 17 type of programming that we had proposed. 18

When you 19 received your value from the BRT, did you 20 request a value or did you just call them up and give them the addresses and that's what they told you? Or how did you get that number?

The BRT has a very handy website. So we did obtain the value for 125 11/19/03 - WHOLE - BILL 030663 the theater itself from the website and then the remaining parcels that comprised the district, we sat down and prorated those amounts based on discussions with the City Revenue Department because they constitute portions of existing parcels.

Is the BRT aware that you just recently bought the property at more than they have it valued at?

I'm not sure I could speak to the procedures of the BRT, but I believe they do get notice of all sales.

One of the requirements for a TIF is a letter signed by the Finance Director out of Section 21-1403(1) of the Philadelphia Code. Do you have such a letter?

We do.

Is it part of the Project Plan, as required?

Under that bill, there are certifications and statements required to be incorporated into the Project Plan. Those are incorporated in. As a matter of process, 126 11/19/03 - WHOLE - BILL 030663 I believe the bill requires that the Finance Director deliver a letter, and they have.

Where is the letter?

I have it right here. It's addressed to Council President Verna and Members of City Council.

I'm only asking because I've not seen the letter. The requirement is that the letter be attached to the plan. I have two plans that I received over the past two weeks, I don't have anything from the Finance Director. Has the Project Plan also been sent over to PICA?

Yes, it has.

Any response from them?

Not to my knowledge.

On , it's listed as , of the execute summary, Part 1, Proposed Improvements, it says, "The district shall not include air rights above 15 feet over a portion of the site labeled and 127 11/19/03 - WHOLE - BILL 030663 loading and support space on the Proposed Plan. Tax revenues from any future development of the excluded space shall not be included in the district and shall not be pledged to the TIF fund." Who owns the air rights?

As part of this project, as I indicated, we have to acquire a portion of the parking lot that is located at 1924-26 Chestnut Street and also a portion of 109-115 South 20th Street. The current owners of the parking lots will retain air rights over those particular parcels.

What do you estimate their value to be?

At grade and air rights?

No, just air rights.

I don't know if I can actually break that value out.

Then what number do you have?

It's physically not 128 11/19/03 - WHOLE - BILL 030663 included in the district, so we wouldn't have a value of those rights.

And no one's tried to determine their value?

No. 7

Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you, Madam President.

You're welcome. The Chair recognizes Councilman Goode.

Thank you, Madam President. Mr. Cuorato or Mr. Rhoads, can you tell me again for the record what is the project financial gap?

The financial gap is $17.5 million.

What percentage of the project is that? Is it over 50 percent?

That is just over 50 percent, Councilman, yes.

What is the 129 11/19/03 - WHOLE - BILL 030663 amount of public subsidy?

$17.5 million.

I don't know who can answer this question. How many businesses did PIDC fund last year with that level of financial gap and public subsidy?

I'm sorry, Councilman, I don't think I'd be able to answer off the top of my head.

Could it possibly be zero?

It could be. I'm trying to do the same thing Mr. Rhoads did which is just determine whether or not we've had any major projects.

I'm referring to businesses. Can you imagine a business going into PIDC or PCDC for public financing with a need for public subsidy over 50 percent and with a gap over 50 percent? Typically not or never?

I don't think I can ever say never, no. But typically not. 130 11/19/03 - WHOLE - BILL 030663

There's not one recollection of a business ever coming in -- not a project, but business, ever coming in requesting public financing where the need for public subsidy is over 50 percent and the gap in the project is over 50 percent?

The types of projects that require -- and I agree with you, that would be a substantial subsidy. And those are, obviously, driven by the economics of the project, so the places where we see that kind of level would be, for example, community-based type projects that --

I'm asking about businesses.

Those are businesses.

In most cases they are non-profit enterprises and the projects, unless their structured as joint businesses, are not necessarily businesses. My real question is, you would tell most people that come into your agency for business development financing if they were requesting that level of subsidy and had that 131 11/19/03 - WHOLE - BILL 030663 type of gap that there was not a market for their project.

Again, if you're talking about, for example, the typical industrial type of deal or manufacturing type of deal that comes into PIDC, I think you're correct, you would not see this kind of subsidy, that's correct.

But you are confident that from this study, which I'm not sure why you would be confident from this study, that there is a market for this venue?

Yes.

And there is a market that can be maintained for this venue?

At this level of investment, yes.

And there is a market that can be maintained for this venue, even if other venues are developed?

I can't speculate into the future about if other markets are developed.

So if another 132 11/19/03 - WHOLE - BILL 030663 venue were to be developed a few years from now, it's possible that there's no longer going to be the same market for this particular venue?

Let me revise my answer. We are confident that this could -- I mean, obviously, we have some interested parties are entering into agreement in which --

Sir, I can't hear you. Can you pull the mike a little closer?

I'm sorry. There are two parties entering into some agreements here to operate a theater here and they're confident that they can make that work.

Regardless of how many additional venues are created?

Councilman, this is the business world. This is development as we see it day in and day out. We can't -- I mean, this applies not only to this project and future performing arts venues, this applies across the board in business. There's no way we can accurately predict if there's 133 11/19/03 - WHOLE - BILL 030663 going to be more businesses that are coming in and what effect they're going to have on existing businesses in three or four years. We hope to get more businesses coming into the City.

That is actually my point exactly. Is your level of confidence in the market for this venue comparable to your confidence in the market for hotel development in the '90s? Because in the '90s, there were those who would criticize PIDC for building too many hotels, for actually offering Tax Increment Financing to too many hotels, for actually ruining any sort of sanity to the hotel development market because everybody wanted a TIF, everyone got a TIF, and you couldn't never tell what the real hotel market was or was not going to be with or without 9/11.

Councilman, I would suggest to you that -- I mean, we can certainly have a discussion about the hotel industry and what happened in the '90s and what we hope will happen in ensuing years if 134 11/19/03 - WHOLE - BILL 030663 the Convention Center is expanded, and I'd be happy to do that. But I just want to come back to the point that you made about we are absolutely confident that the market is there for this venue at this time, that this project will be successful. We think Philadelphia is certainly strong enough to support another performing arts venue. And just to get back to your earlier point, I know you made reference a couple of times to comparisons that the public may have funded with typical business deals. And I would suggest to you respectfully, Councilman, this is not a typical project. I mean we are acknowledging that this is a higher than usual subsidy that's necessary, but it's due to the nature of this project, the fact that it's renovating a historic building --

That's why I then also compared it to the hotel development that's being done. And aren't some of those hotels now being converted?

One that I'm aware of, yes, Councilman. 135 11/19/03 - WHOLE - BILL 030663

And you don't anticipate that more will have to be converted because the market cannot sustain that many hotels.

I don't know if anymore will be converted. And, in fact, if we can move ahead with expansion of this Convention Center, I think the hotel industry will get back on its feet very quickly.

I guess the last question responds to -- what you said in response to my question is the business environment does change. There may be more venues that come into play here. They may or may not be public/private partnerships. They will obviously affect what you think the particular market is for this venue right now. Why a multi-year TIF?

I'm sorry, Councilman.

Why a multi-year TIF, multi-year forgiveness of taxes if you don't know what the market is going to be? Because Mr. Anderson says the market is ripe, is no where near saturation, which 136 11/19/03 - WHOLE - BILL 030663 means that from the building of this venue, however it's built, with whatever financing it's built with, Philadelphia is going to continue to grow in terms of art and culture, in terms of these type of venues, because the market is no where near saturation. So the point is, why use a TIF for this project, not being able to look that far out if we're that far from saturation?

I think the answer is you have a set of project costs, $33 million, that the private parties here have determined what sort of return and reasonable investment that warrants, and that has left the gap that we discussed earlier. We have talked about two pieces to fill that gap from the public sector, the TIF and the State.

The short of it, they put up as much money as they're going put up?

That's right. So the TIF is required out over the 20 years to provide that piece of --

They have simply 137 11/19/03 - WHOLE - BILL 030663 put up as much money as they're going to put up.

Correct.

Even though the market is no where near saturated in terms of these types of venues, and this is possibly a very hot place to create these types of venues, according to Mr. Anderson?

They put it up, I think, in recognition of where they think the market will go over that term.

But they've put up as much as they're going to put up?

Correct.

Thank you. Thank you, Madam President.

The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Miller.

Thank you, Madam President. Mr. Cuorato, good afternoon. How are you?

Good afternoon, Councilwoman. Fine, thank you. 138 11/19/03 - WHOLE - BILL 030663

In your remarks, you made reference to an equal opportunity plan and said you had it and you would distribute it, and I'd like to get a copy of that. I'm sure all Members would. You have it with you today?

We do, Councilwoman. We have it right here.

On the last page, the addendum to the Project Plan, it talks about the potential of 60 full-time jobs and that you'd use actually a number of entities to employ people, low and moderate income youth. And then it also states about the contracting opportunities, goods, services and equipment. Can you tell me what would be a contracting opportunity? Just give us some examples.

I'm going to ask Ms. Smallwood to answer that, Councilwoman.

Fine.

I apologize. Could you repeat the question?

The equal 139 11/19/03 - WHOLE - BILL 030663 opportunity plan described in the Project Plan, it's Page No. 10. And it talks about 60 full-time jobs that will be eligible for income eligible youth only. What would those income guidelines be, and why is there an emphasis on income eligibility for jobs in a theater?

We've had conversations with the City of Philadelphia in reference to the EEO plan, and they have given us certain criterion and direction as to what goals should be achieved, of which we have distributed to any of those partners that are involved in this project and we have all fundamentally agreed that we will reach these goals. In regards to the actual, I think, youth, that is part of one of disadvantaged groups that are trying to be targeted for employment.

I'll come back to the employment in a second. Does your plan entail here -- because there's nothing on this back page in this paragraph that talks about contracting 140 11/19/03 - WHOLE - BILL 030663 opportunities for minority contractors in the renovation of the theater. Have you set percentage goals? Would that be in this plan?

It actually is set forth in the EEO plan that's being distributed now.

And who would be responsible for implementing that plan and monitoring it, et cetera?

I know that the City of Philadelphia's Equal Opportunity Office is intimately involved. I know that MBEC would be involved. And they've also recommended and we have agreed that there will be an actual entity still yet to be determined who will be constantly monitoring that.

From your business?

Actually, no. There will be an independent agency that will be brought on board to monitor that level of participation.

That your company will bring to the table, or that this 141 11/19/03 - WHOLE - BILL 030663 partnership will bring to the table. I guess I'm trying to get to what responsibility will the partnership, whatever the entity will end up being called, have with the implementation of this plan.

There are meetings that are required during construction. They will be on a monthly basis. And there are reportings that have to be done to the President of City Council as well as to the MBEC office. And again, there will be an independent auditing agency that will be recommended by the City who will oversee the numbers of participation in the project.

I understand. We always have these entities that oversee, but it doesn't mean that the issue of minority participation is implemented and properly accounted for from the business owner. And that's what I'll call you, the business owner. Who from your part --

I would be that person who's responsible for that. We also have individuals that work in our construction 142 11/19/03 - WHOLE - BILL 030663 and architectural division of the company, they would be intimately and intricately involved with that as well.

So you're not going to demolish the building, you're just going to renovate it.

That is our objective and desire. But, obviously, all of the funding needs to come together for us to be able to reach that goal.

I understand that. But just in the event it does, then you'll have a list of trades that will be needed, et cetera?

Absolutely. The City has provided us with a comprehensive list of those companies that their certifications are intact and are in good standing. And we obviously will be contacting them and putting out bids and making sure that they respond.

Do you know what the percentages are? Of course, I haven't had a chance to read the plan.

In regards to the 143 11/19/03 - WHOLE - BILL 030663 construction workforce, 40 percent minority, percent female. Work hour goals for skilled minority and female persons, 30 percent. Work hour goal for semi-skilled minority and female persons, 70 percent. Apprentices and pre-apprentice craft persons, percent minority, percent female. Construction 9 management, 50 percent minority. 10 Architectural engineering and design, 29 percent minority, 10 percent women, percent disabled. Subcontractors, 35 percent minority, 10 percent women, 1 percent disabled. All other professionals, we will make all good faith efforts to be able to fill with percentages and good faith efforts. The definition of the same has been attached as an addendum to our EEO plan and in regards to operations, that good faith effort will be put forth as well.

And I guess at some point, you'll have a list and describe what the contracting opportunities are, goods, services and equipment?

Absolutely. As the 144 11/19/03 - WHOLE - BILL 030663 program is able to progress, we're able to secure the funding that we need to proceed, those things will become more particular, more specific, as time goes on.

Thank you. Thank you, Madam President.

Are there any other questions from Members of the Committee of these witnesses? (No response.)

Mr. Cuorato, you will stay?

Yes.

Thank you.

Madam President, if I may, I'm sorry. One last point, and it's a technical point. We did distribute an amendment to the ordinance and a revised Project Plan. I believe that was distributed. We had them on the witness table here, and I believe it was distributed to Council. The amendment to the ordinance --

When did you have the amendments? 145 11/19/03 - WHOLE - BILL 030663

The beginning of the hearing.

I don't have a copy of it. I don't know that Members have copies. Do the Members have copies of the amendment? And incidentally, Mr. Cuorato, the statement of review of estimates signed by Janice Davis, the first time I saw it -- well, it's dated November 18th and addressed to me and Members of Council. We just got a copy of this because Councilman Nutter was questioning that, but it was never delivered to us. We got it as a photostatic copy of what Mr. Cuorato had. It's not that we had ever received it prior to the hearing.

I apologize, Madam President. We thought Finance was sending it to you as well, and apparently they just sent it to us and expected us to distribute it.

It's addressed to us, but we never received it.

I believe they just 146 11/19/03 - WHOLE - BILL 030663 sent it to us. And I apologize.