COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES URBAN AFFAIRS COMMITTEE PROGRESS REPORT ON PENNSYLVANIA LAND BANKS

Transcription

1 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES URBAN AFFAIRS COMMITTEE PROGRESS REPORT ON PENNSYLVANIA LAND BANKS HARRISBURG, PENNSYLVANIA ROOM 0, RYAN OFFICE BUILDING TUESDAY, NOVEMBER, 0 BEFORE: HONORABLE MARK K. KELLER, MAJORITY CHAIRMAN HONORABLE ALEXANDER T. CHARLTON HONORABLE BECKY CORBIN HONORABLE BARRY J. JOZWIAK HONORABLE HARRY LEWIS, JR. HONORABLE CHRISTOPHER B. QUINN HONORABLE ERIC M. ROE HONORABLE GREG ROTHMAN HONORABLE JAMES R. SANTORA HONORABLE MARTINA WHITE HONORABLE VANESSA BROWN HONORABLE CAROLYN COMITTA HONORABLE MADELEINE DEAN HONORABLE ISABELLA FITZGERALD HONORABLE CAROL HILL-EVANS HONORABLE BRIAN KIRKLAND HONORABLE CHRISTOPHER RABB Pennsylvania House of Representatives Commonwealth of Pennsylvania

2 COMMITTEE STAFF PRESENT: CHRISTINE GOLDBECK MAJORITY EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ASHLEY SHEAFFER RESEARCH ANALYST KORI WEIKLE LEGISLATIVE ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT JON CASTELLI MINORITY EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR 0 0 Ti ffany L. Ma st Ma st Re por ting ma streporting@g mai l. com ( ) -

3 0 0 NAME I N D E X TESTIFIERS * * * PAGE FRANK S. ALEXANDER CO-FOUNDER AND SENIOR ADVISOR SAM NUNN PROFESSOR OF LAW... HERBERT WETZEL EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR... ANDREW FRENCH EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR... GEORGE KELLY DIRECTOR... AN LEWIS EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR...0 PAT MACK DEPUTY DIRECTOR... WINNIE BRANTON PROGRAM MANAGER...0 RYAN KUCK EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR...0 AARON SUKENIK EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR... SUBMITTED WRITTEN TESTIMONY * * * (See submitted written testimony and handouts online.)

4 0 0 P R O C E E D I N G S * * * MAJORITY CHAIRMAN M. KELLER: Well, good morning, folks. Thank you so much for being here. I'm kind of a stickler for starting on time. I'm four minutes behind already. But anyhow, I want to say welcome to the members and testifiers and those of you that have come out today to the House Urban Affairs Committee Progress Report on Land Banks. I would like to take this time to also let the members introduce themselves, and we'll start to my far left. REPRESENTATIVE ROTHMAN: I'm Representative Greg Rothman, the District, Cumberland County. REPRESENTATIVE LEWIS: Representative Harry Lewis, Chester County, th District. REPRESENTATIVE C. HILL-EVANS: Representative Carol Hill-Evans, th District. REPRESENTATIVE FITZGERALD: Good morning. Representative Isabella Fitzgerald, 0rd District. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR CASTELLI: Jon

5 0 0 Castelli, Executive Director of the Democratic staff. MAJORITY CHAIRMAN M. KELLER: Of course, I'm Representative Mark Keller. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR GOLDBECK: I'm Christine Goldbeck, and I'm the Executive Director for the Committee on the Republican side. MS. SHEAFFER: I'm Ashley Sheaffer. I'm the Research Analyst for the Committee on the Republican side. REPRESENTATIVE QUINN: Representative Chris Quinn, th Legislative District. REPRESENTATIVE CHARLTON: Representative Alex Charlton, th Legislative District, arrived at :, Mr. Chairman. REPRESENTATIVE SANTORA: Jamie Santora, rd District, Delaware County. REPRESENTATIVE CORBIN: Becky Corbin, th District, Chester County. MAJORITY CHAIRMAN M. KELLER: Martina White. REPRESENTATIVE WHITE: Yes, Martina White, here. MAJORITY CHAIRMAN M. KELLER: Very good.

6 0 0 Vanessa. Vanessa, do you want to just introduce yourself please. (UNIDENTIFIED PERSON NOT SPEAKING INTO MICROPHONE.) MAJORITY CHAIRMAN M. KELLER: All right. Well, thank you all for being here again. I appreciate it. If Chairman O'Brien is watching, he had a procedure done yesterday and was unable to make it with us today. Our thoughts are with you, Mike. And hopefully you have a quick recovery. Unfortunately, he couldn't be here with us, but he sends his regards. Also, I want to mention, in the audience with us is a past chairman of this Committee. I thank him for being here, former member Chris Ross. Chris, thanks so much for being here. Also, just coming in the room is Chris Rabb. Chris, thanks for coming. You know, just to throw this out here, being a non-session day, to have this many members come to a hearing is kind of unusual. I will say it that way. And I'm very pleased that

7 0 0 the interest is there for the members to come out and listen to what we have. You know, the Land Bank Law, Act of 0, is five years old and has been around the State in counties and communities large and small. It provides to be a successful way to fight blight and to restore properties and get them back into productive use and on the tax rolls. Today, we're going to hear from the experts, Professor Alexander, who helped Pennsylvania tailor its law and who spent a lot of time in our Commonwealth helping to educate this Committee and people around the State about how to start and operate land banks. We are honored, Professor, to have you here with us today. We also are going to hear from folks in the field who are putting the law to good use in their communities. Thanks to each of you for taking time out of your busy day to share your stories with us. And finally, because I'm a farmer, despite chairing the Urban Affairs Committee, I have a sincere interest in urban green space and

8 0 0 production use of such space in our cities for local food production, gardening and farm-to-table and other potentials that may be out there. So we are joined by Ryan Kuck of Greensgrow in Philadelphia and Aaron Sukenik of Hilltop Alliance in Pittsburgh, who are not operating land banks, but are able to shed light on how their organizations work, so that we might focus on the operations that theirs, in our large cities and communities, are doing. We want to thank you gentlemen for joining us. So let's get started. I see we have other members joining us right now. If you want to introduce yourselves, appreciate it. Barry. REPRESENTATIVE JOZWIAK: Barry Jozwiak, Berks County, th District. MAJORITY CHAIRMAN M. KELLER: All right. Let's get started. Mr. Alexander, if you would come to the table with your testimony, I certainly would appreciate it. The floor is yours. Thank you.

9 0 0 MR. ALEXANDER: Chairman Keller, members of the Committee, my name is Frank Alexander. I'm from Atlanta, Georgia. My day job is as a law professor in Atlanta. I'm honored to be here today. I'm honored to have the chance to come back to Harrisburg, to Pennsylvania. It was six or seven years ago that I was first invited here by Chairman Ross at that time and the House Urban Affairs Committee to begin working on what became the Pennsylvania Land Bank Bill. We spent about two and a half years in '0, '0, '0 working on that bill. The purpose of the Land Bank Bill for the State of Pennsylvania is as the Chair has suggested, to be able to focus on the vacant and abandoned properties that plague our neighborhoods and create strategies to take those properties and put them back into productive use. I'm here with you today to celebrate what you all have accomplished over the past five years. When you enacted this legislation in 0, you were part of a wave of States that did land banking legislation that year. New York, my own State of Georgia, Tennessee,

10 0 0 0 New York, Nebraska all enacted land bank legislation. You all now have local land banks up and operating and doing incredible things in their neighborhoods. My role today is really not so much to talk about what your land banks have done thus far, but instead, it's to point out the differences between a land bank and a redevelopment authority. SB, which is before you, really pushes that question. What is the difference between a land bank and an RDA or a redevelopment authority? Quite simply, these are different tools. A socket wrench is different than a table saw. Both are incredibly powerful tools and necessary tools, but you've got to know when to use a socket wrench and when to use the table saw. Land banks focus on the vacant and abandoned properties, the burnt structures, the ones that are imposing harms. Redevelopment authorities focus on brand-new projects. Land banks focus on properties which have no owners or at least no owners who are willing to step up to the table.

11 0 0 Redevelopment authorities tend to focus on the new owner and shifting from a current owner to a new owner. Land banks acquire the properties that no one else wants. Redevelopment authorities assemble properties for new projects. Land banks acquire the properties that have been abandoned. Redevelopment authorities go acquire by purchase or eminent domain properties for new projects. Land banks never have the power of eminent domain. No land bank in the United States has eminent domain power. Redevelopment authorities always have eminent domain power. My concern with is that you're beginning to blend -- if it's enacted -- blend and confuse the mission and function of land banks and redevelopment authorities. You run the risk of confusing the role of a land bank and the role of a redevelopment authority. I'm concerned that you're going to run the risk of undercutting the integrity of land banks and undercutting the integrity of redevelopment authorities as they seek to do their missions. You're going to put at risk public confidence in

12 0 0 both entities if you blend the two entities. You don't grab a socket wrench when you need a table saw. And that's basically what this legislation is doing. But let me suggest there are simpler solutions. I am not speaking against redevelopment authorities or land bank authorities. I'm simply trying to praise the proper role of each institution. It is entirely possible for any jurisdiction that has a redevelopment authority under your URL in Pennsylvania, anyone of those jurisdictions can create a land bank authority. It is possible, and we do this in many States across the country, we will have both a redevelopment authority and a land bank authority as separate legal entities with separate boards of directors, sometimes with interlocking directors, sometimes with shared staff, to accomplish the different missions of the two organizations. You can use both tools here in Pennsylvania, a land bank authority and a redevelopment authority when appropriate. My concern is you start blending them together, you're going to weaken each one. Right now, you

13 0 0 have complete powers to do both. When we were working on the land bank legislation in '0, '0 and ', the goal was to create and empower local governments to have one more tool in the toolbox. Land banks are heavily grounded in the conception of neighborhood issues, full transparency, open meetings, open records, full accountability, as the motivation behind the mission of a land bank. Don't begin to water that down by blending the two. I'm afraid if you blend land banks into, legally, redevelopment authorities, you're going to really confuse the question of when to exercise eminent domain and when to go after property that nobody wants through tax foreclosure or code enforcement strategies. To push my analogy of socket wrenches and carpentry one step further, yes, there are times when you need to be able to use both the table saw, when you're framing in rough carpentry, framing the house. You're going to need that table saw, and you're going to need that socket wrench when you bolt it to the joists. But be clear as to the function of each

14 0 0 tool. Use them both when it's appropriate, rather than grafting one onto the other in the form of blending the powers in legislation. Mr. Chairman, I'm happy to take any questions from any member of the Committee about what was going on at the time we did the land bank legislation or questions about how we've implemented parallel land bank legislation throughout the country. I have shared or provided to Ms. Goldbeck and Mr. Castelli copies of the most recent edition of my book which describes your legislation, as well as the legislation of 0 other States in the past eight years. So I'm happy to take any questions about that, as well. MAJORITY CHAIRMAN M. KELLER: Thank you very much for your testimony. I apologize, Senator. I didn't catch you when you first came in here. I want to recognize Senator Stefano, who actually is the author of SB. I'm very pleased that you took time to come over and actually listen to our meeting today and maybe, you know, craft the legislation that you're working with even better.

15 0 0 So thank you so much for being here. Appreciate it. Also, who joined us while we were here, while we had started, Representative Comitta is with us, and also Representative Kirkland. Thank you so much for joining us. Questions? Are there any questions from any of the members? Seeing none. Okay. Thank you very much, Mr. Alexander. MR. ALEXANDER: Thank you. MAJORITY CHAIRMAN M. KELLER: Thank you so much for coming. Appreciate it. MR. ALEXANDER: Thank you again. MAJORITY CHAIRMAN M. KELLER: Our next testifier is Herbert Wetzel. He's the Executive Director of Housing and Community Development in Philadelphia Council, Office of the President. Herbert, the floor is yours. MR. WETZEL: It's a pleasure to follow a superstar today. I want to thank him for his work, both in Pennsylvania and in the nation. Frank, you really have a tremendous legacy.

16 0 0 Chairman Keller -- and if you're watching, Democratic Chairman O'Brien -- and members of the House Urban Affairs Committee, my name is Herbert Wetzel, and I currently serve as the Director of Housing and Community Development for Philadelphia City Council. Prior to holding this position, I was Executive Director of the Philadelphia Redevelopment Authority. I'm one of the original members of the Philadelphia Land Bank. I currently serve on the Philadelphia Housing Trust Fund Advisory Board, and I'm vice chairman of the Philadelphia Housing Authority's Board of Commissioners. Before I get into my testimony, though, I want to acknowledge and publicly thank Representative John Taylor. Is Representative John Taylor here today? No. Well, I want to go personally thank him, and we're going to miss him in Philadelphia. He has really shepherded a package of blight-fighting tools that have served us well, housing trust funds, conservatorship and of course land banks. These are all effective

17 0 0 tools for local governments and neighborhood groups that can use them to fight blight, provide affordable housing and rebuild their communities. I want to take you back in time. My experience acquiring properties from various public entities in Philadelphia goes back to the mid-0s, which explains all the gray in my beard and the lack of hair on my the Philadelphia Germantown section formed a community development corporation to acquire vacant abandoned houses and to rehabilitate and sell them in the first few years of operation, in, we acquired and rehabilitated vacant, abandoned homes. Over the years, our skills and abilities grew to the point that we began to undertake larger and more complex and sophisticated projects. It is then that we began to experience firsthand the immensely frustrating problem of assembling sites for larger scale projects. I'm going to give you an example. There was a large assemblage of land at the corner of Germantown Avenue and Wister Street in

18 0 0 the Germantown section of Philadelphia, but unfortunately, they were owned by no less than three different public entities. Part was owned by the City of Philadelphia, the Department of Public Property. Part was owned by a Philadelphia Housing Development Corporation, a quasi-government agency, and another part by the City's Redevelopment Authority. The site was large enough to accommodate a small strip shopping center, which would bring needed goods and services and jobs to our community. We received preliminary approval from all three public entities to proceed and develop plans and financing for the project with a commitment from each that they would transfer the land once the project was financially feasible. We proceeded and were able to design the center, secure Rite Aid as an anchor tenant and put all our financing together. But we had a drop-dead date for construction start, both from our financing entities and from Rite Aid. That's when our nightmare began. We had to deal with three separate

19 0 0 public entities, each with its own set of requirements and bureaucratic processes to dispose of the properties. There was no coordination among these entities and no sense of urgency. With only a few days remaining to take title to the land -- and this you'll find interesting -- we actually had to call our State Representative at the time, David P. Richardson, to intervene with the Mayor of the City of Philadelphia. And finally, with the Mayor's intervention, we were able to secure title and close and build the project, but it was a world full of frustration, costly delays and countless lost opportunities, a world in which there was public ownership and private vacant tax delinquent lots, not in any single entity that could offer them to communities or developers. So today I want to start with the good news. We are working diligently to transfer to the land bank all surplus properties owned by the City of Philadelphia, all properties owned by the Philadelphia Housing Development Corporation, and thanks to an amendment that we requested and that was included in the land bank

20 0 0 0 legislation, all surplus property owned by the Redevelopment Authority that was acquired prior to the effective date of the land bank legislation. The goal is to consolidate all surplus publicly owned land into the land bank, which will then serve as the city's land disposition agency with a single set of policies and procedures, a one-stop shop, so important. Now to the not so good. To date, the city has transferred,0 parcels, from PHDC, parcels from the Redevelopment Authority. So the land bank inventory now is an,0 parcels. Now, this may sound like a straightforward task, but it is not. In fact, it has been an arduous task to clear title to these properties. And you would think, if they were in public ownership, there wouldn't be title problems, but some of those were acquired 0 and 0 years ago. And during the intervening years, things have been recorded against them. It might be accidental or on purpose, but we had to go through every one of those properties and clear title to each one of them.

21 0 0 So we've got about,000 more to go. And those will all go to the land bank. Now, the not so good news is, next month will be our fourth anniversary. And to date, using the special powers granted under the General Assembly's land bank legislation, the land bank has acquired, other than by transfer, properties. We have over 0,00 vacant tax delinquent parcels in Philadelphia. And this represents a little over one property per month. In the infamous words of the former Eagles head coach Andy Reid, we've gotta do a better job. How can we do a better job? Moving forward requires the adoption of a policy framework that maximizes the benefit of creating the land bank as a tool for rebuilding neighborhoods as the primary emphasis and acknowledges the collection of past taxes as a secondary. Absent such a framework, we will miss many opportunities to assemble larger parcels for redevelopment, to develop small parcels for workforce housing and establish shared revenue opportunities shared by the City and the land bank for those properties that the

22 0 0 land bank can sell at fair market value. Right now, short term revenue collections reign supreme over long term benefits of putting properties into the land bank. And that's a mistake in my view. As you know, the lack of sufficient workforce housing, at least in Philadelphia, is a growing crisis. The land bank could and should be part of the solution. But by prioritizing the short-term revenue collection over land bank acquisitions, we're missing opportunities to assemble larger parcels consisting of vacant tax delinquent properties, publicly owned properties and smaller properties in gentrifying neighborhoods, parcels that could be used to develop workforce housing in neighborhoods where houses now are selling for $00,000 and $00,000. I'll give you an example. The Francisville neighborhood, which is north of City Hall, in the year 000, the median sale price was $0,000. In 0, the median sale price is $0,000. That's how dramatic a shift is happening in many of the neighborhoods in the City of Philadelphia. One of the things that we

23 0 0 want to do with the vacant land in those neighborhoods, and we have done, is we've provided them for nominal consideration to developers and capped the sale price at $0,000 and capped the income to 0 percent of the area median income. So we're using high value parcels in those neighborhoods that are in the public inventory to create housing opportunities for people like police and fire and teachers and others. I'm going to skip something here. I've given you an example of an assemblage. Christine, was that shared with people or not? EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR GOLDBECK: The map is in the packet, but the question I have is, is the link that you sent me now live that it could be shared with members? MR. WETZEL: Yes. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR GOLDBECK: Okay. Because I will share that so they can see how you assemble from the public/private as long as it's live now. But the map is in there, Herb. MR. WETZEL: I will just take a minute

24 0 0 to -- if you have this map, what we've done is we've used GIS technology to map the entire public inventory and all vacant tax delinquent lots. And as you can see, this is at th and Folsom. There's already a significant amount of public ownership between the Housing Authority and the City of Philadelphia or the Redevelopment Authority or PHDC and the land bank. If you turn it over on the other side, if all of these properties were put in the land bank, if you flip it over, you'll see the size of the assemblage that would be possible. What we don't want to do is miss the opportunity of acquiring properties that are already -- that are adjacent to already existing public ownership. And in that particular arena, we have, vacant tax delinquent parcels that are adjacent to existing publicly owned parcels. It just makes good common sense to put them in the land bank and offer those parcels combined parcels to developers, which would be more attractive. And in the case as the Chairman mentioned, there may be opportunities for urban

25 0 0 agriculture on this land. I want to touch on two other things. One is that the reason that land banks are superior to tax foreclosure and why they yield more benefits to local government in the long term. I want to quote from an article in the Detroit Free Press. When Grand Rapids area land bank sells a piece of property, the new owners take out building permits percent more often than those who buy properties at a traditional tax foreclosure auction. That suggests parcels handled by the land bank are more often being put to some sort of productive use than those sold at auction. Also, the rate of blighted properties cropping up on -- blighted buildings cropping up on properties handled by the land bank has decreased by 0 percent compared to those sold at tax auction. In 0, the Center for Community Progress issued a report Catch and Release. It was a long term study of tax foreclosure conveyance in Flint, Michigan between 00 and 0. The study found that percent of the properties that were foreclosed on by the

26 0 0 Genesee County Treasurer and sold at public auction were foreclosed again by the Genesee County Treasurer in no more than seven years. I have attached a short list of properties from the City of Philadelphia's tax delinquency list. These are vacant lots that were acquired by these entities, including one that's got an interesting name, LOL LLC. There's also a Philly Cheese steak LLC that's not on this list. But as an example here, this was just a cursory review of our tax delinquent list. These were all bought by these entities at sheriff's sale between 0 and 0. And they're all tax delinquent again. If these had been put in the land bank, they would only be conveyed to persons or entities with the means to develop them but also the requirement that they develop them. So I want to conclude by saying that there's tremendous research on land banks around the country, and I think that research in the data proves that land bank dispositions are the only way that we can have some guarantee that ownership is transferred to a responsible buyer

27 0 0 with the means to develop the property. And land banks have proven to be superior to tax lien auctions in putting properties back on the tax rolls and keeping them there. I want to thank you for the opportunity to testify about the Philadelphia Land Bank story. Most of all, I thank you for giving us this law, this crucial tool, to fight blight created by vacant tax delinquent properties throughout our Commonwealth. Thank you. MAJORITY CHAIRMAN M. KELLER: Well, thank you, Mr. Wetzel. Are there members with questions? Jamie. REPRESENTATIVE SANTORA: Thanks for testifying here today. When you get to the final point where you're going to choose either a new developer or a new landowner, how is that done? I'm assuming it's a competitive process. Is it more than just financials? What goes into that, and who is involved? MR. WETZEL: Yeah, the land bank is -- and I'll go back to the Workforce Housing

28 0 0 Program that I mentioned. The land bank issues an RFP and developers submit their proposals. And what they're looking for is the quality of the units that are going to be developed, the number of bedrooms. I mean, a lot of developers want to build just all one bedrooms right now. We want this to be family housing, for example. And we make it clear, but that doesn't mean that all developers follow that. But then what we do is review their past history. You know, we want to make sure that they're tax compliant in the City of Philadelphia, that there are not any outstanding obligations that they have to the city. And then we're going to review their financial and their past history of development. You know, if they built homes in the last year, that gives us some sense, you know, of their ability. And then, the last piece of it is, what is going to be the sales price? Now, we put a cap, but some people have been able to do design work and things and actually come in and say, I can sell for $0,000. And if it's a good quality unit, that makes it even more affordable to folks in the

29 0 0 workforce. So, yes, it is a competitive RFP with a set of criteria. REPRESENTATIVE SANTORA: Okay. Do you find yourself with the same developers coming in over and over, is it a variety, or is it depending on the neighborhood, et cetera? MR. WETZEL: I think it depends on the neighborhood. What's really interesting is sometimes we'll do six or eight lots, so we have seen a lot of smaller developers. And it's getting, you know, if we had 00 lots all the time, the smaller developers would shy away from competing. So we decided to do these in smaller lots, six or eight lots, 0 at the most. So we've opened up the door to a lot of smaller developers coming in. And yes, some of them want to work in south Philadelphia, some of them want to work in west Philadelphia and they won't bid on things in other parts of the city, but it's really opened up an opportunity for smaller developers. REPRESENTATIVE SANTORA: Great. My last question, you've seen the buy-in to the program.

30 0 0 0 You talk about the success. What are the hurdles that you've had to overcome? What are the issues? MR. WETZEL: There are two separate issues for us. One is the old public inventory and transferring that to the land bank and getting clear title. We thought, like, we would snap our fingers and it would happen, but it's amazing what can creep into the record of a property, you know, if the last time you acquired it was 0, or 0 years ago. So we had to spend a lot of time going through because we want the land bank to have clear title to the properties. The other part is, using the new power to acquire properties. There's a tug of war between our revenue department and our community development folks. And revenue looks at some of these neighborhoods and says, well, that was -- I can give you an example. There's a Point Breeze neighborhood in Philadelphia. When I was running the Redevelopment Authority, we acquired vacant lots in that neighborhood for $,000 each in around

31 Those same lots would sell for $00,000 to $0,000 today. So our revenue department looks at it and says, oh, this is simple; we'll just auction it off. The other side, our community development arm, looks at that and says, if we put this in the land bank and offer it for workforce housing, we'll create some economic or perhaps some level of economic diversity in a neighborhood now where houses are going for $00,000-plus. So that's a tug of war that's going on. As I testified, I'm in favor of putting it in the land bank. Our revenue department is in favor of collecting the cash as quickly as possible. And I understand and respect that. REPRESENTATIVE SANTORA: Again, thank you. And I have some of those same concerns because what I see is areas that are developing and they're pushing people out. MR. WETZEL: Yeah. REPRESENTATIVE SANTORA: They can't afford to live there anymore. And they're having trouble finding places they can go within the area that they know best. And it is

32 0 0 concerning. MR. WETZEL: And I think that's where it's a unique tool because Frank testified that this is land nobody wants. Some of this land every developer that works in that neighborhood wants. The problem is, though, then that will be another $00,000 home. That's one less opportunity for someone who is police and fire and others to own a home in that neighborhood. MAJORITY CHAIRMAN M. KELLER: Representative Comitta. REPRESENTATIVE COMITTA: Thank you. Thanks for your testimony, Mr. Wetzel. You ask the question, how can we do a better job; and you answer it by saying, moving forward requires the adoption of a policy framework that maximizes the benefit of creating the land bank as a tool for rebuilding neighborhoods, as the primary emphasis, and acknowledges that the collection of past taxes is secondary to this mission. And so my question is, does that policy framework come from the City of Philadelphia in this case? Does it come from the legislature

33 0 0 amending the land bank legislation? How does that work? MR. WETZEL: Yeah, it could be a combination. We're working with the -- I'm working with the Mayor's chief policy person. And I will give you an example of how you can actually do both, collect taxes and build the land bank. I know two lots in a section of north Philadelphia that is rapidly redeveloping, south of Temple University, that were tax delinquent 0 some years. They were adjacent to each other. The back taxes were $,000 collectively on both of them. We had wanted to put them in the land bank and then market them at fair market value. And revenue said, no, we need the money now. And so they sold for $,000. Revenue got its $,000, but $,000 now will sit with our sheriff because the last time one lot sold was ; and the last time the other lot sold was. The houses were demolished 0 years ago. There's no owner coming forward to collect that money. So if the land bank had sold it for

34 0 0 $,000, they could have given Revenue $,000 and put $,000 in the land bank to help offset the operating costs because we have to budget for the operating costs of the land bank. So it makes sense that the wealth in that kind of property, where there's no owner ever coming forward -- and in the end, the sheriff has to actually transfer it to the Commonwealth and it will sit here for I don't know how many years, but that's a way to satisfy both goals. And that's what we're trying to push for. I don't know if I answered your question. REPRESENTATIVE COMITTA: But would you say it's primarily a local governing issue? MR. WETZEL: It is local -- it's a local governance issue. REPRESENTATIVE COMITTA: Not an issue of the General Assembly? MR. WETZEL: That is correct. The law provides us with the power we need. We just have to figure out how to exercise it right. Thank you. REPRESENTATIVE COMITTA: Thank you.

35 0 0 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR GOLDBECK: (Microphone not turned on.) Do you want to explain that a little bit? It just came before -- it just got referred to the Committee last week or the week before. MR. WETZEL: Yeah HB 00 will authorize Philadelphia City Council to transfer liens to the land bank for a period of two years to accelerate putting properties in the land bank. And there's a two-year window there because it's believed that once we get it operational, that we wouldn't need that power anymore. So HB 00 would help us. But the answer to your question is, it is a local problem. MAJORITY CHAIRMAN M. KELLER: Representative Rabb. REPRESENTATIVE RABB: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And it's Rabb -- MAJORITY CHAIRMAN M. KELLER: Rabb, okay. REPRESENTATIVE RABB: -- like rabbit. MAJORITY CHAIRMAN M. KELLER: Okay. REPRESENTATIVE RABB: I get that a lot.

36 0 0 Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you, Mr. Wetzel. The property that you referred to on Germantown and Wister is right down the street from my district. I know the area. You mentioned at least twice in your testimony about using these reclaimed properties through a land bank for select communities, folks who don't make a lot of money, but whose value in society and neighborhoods, in particular, are high, our firefighters -- MR. WETZEL: Yes. REPRESENTATIVE RABB: -- our police officers, our teachers, et cetera. And I see the value in that. Are there any other communities or stakeholders that properties from land banks can benefit in ways that you've seen? MR. WETZEL: Yeah. I think one of the fascinating phenomenons that happened in our city as under Mayor Street's Neighborhood Transformation Initiative, thousands of derelict buildings were demolished in creating lots of open land in the City of Philadelphia. And even though they remained in private ownership,

37 0 0 neighborhoods created gardens on them, for example. And there are some beautiful neighborhood gardens that are currently on private land. Sometimes that has been auctioned off at sheriff's sale and the developer comes in and tells the gardeners, I'm the owner now; you're going to have to leave. So one of the things that we're doing is looking at all of the neighborhood gardens that are on privately owned tax delinquent land and putting a priority on getting them into the land bank. The other thing we're using the land bank for, along with our other public inventory, is for affordable housing below the workforce level, using low income housing tax credits to build affordable housing to folks at 0 percent or 0 percent of area median income. The workforce housing is generally -- it's pretty amazing, but even at today's interest rate, a $00,000 mortgage is about $ a month. That's less than the rent of a lot of two bedroom properties in the City of Philadelphia. So by using the land -- and understand, there is a subsidy. We're giving the land to developer in exchange for capping

38 0 0 the sale price. If they had to pay us $00,000 or $0,000, they wouldn't be able to sell for $00,000 or $0,000. REPRESENTATIVE RABB: Right. MR. WETZEL: So we're trying to look at a broad spectrum, open space, community gardens and affordable housing and workforce housing. REPRESENTATIVE RABB: And have you had any examples of community land trusts coming in? MR. WETZEL: There is an effort in the eastern part of north Philadelphia to try to develop a community land trust. They've received a foundation grant, but I think it's at the very early stages. REPRESENTATIVE RABB: Thank you. MR. WETZEL: You're welcome. MAJORITY CHAIRMAN M. KELLER: Representative Brown. REPRESENTATIVE BROWN: Thank you. And it's great to see you here in Harrisburg. MR. WETZEL: Good to see you. REPRESENTATIVE BROWN: Yes. So, actually, you kind of answered my question, talking about community gardens because near and dear to my heart was the garden that was

39 0 0 tendered by Winnie Harris, and she's one of our community leaders who lost her life to a tragic incident. The community is thriving to save the garden. I would like to know if you are involved in that process at all, if that garden has been entered into the land bank and if there's any way to preserve that space for Winnie. MR. WETZEL: I'm not directly involved, but if I can get the address from you, I'm willing to follow up when I get back and report back to you. REPRESENTATIVE BROWN: Okay. It's on Holly Street, but I will send it to you directly. MR. WETZEL: Is it -- I think it's two -- I remember Holly Street. Is it two lots together? REPRESENTATIVE BROWN: Yes, it's two beautiful lots -- MR. WETZEL: Yeah. REPRESENTATIVE BROWN: -- that are sitting there. And if anyone doesn't know, Winnie Harris was a beautiful community leader

40 0 0 0 and stakeholder, who worked for our tree tenders non-profit who went throughout the City of Philadelphia planting trees and making spaces beautiful. And she was, unfortunately, the wrong victim and slain by gun violence in her home. So we would really like to preserve that lot, those two lots, for her. MR. WETZEL: And I think that's the classic example of neighbors looking at this and figuring there's nobody who has ownership, let's put it to good use for the community. And the last thing you want to do is not complete that process, you know, let it become what it is, a valuable asset to the neighbors. And unfortunately, if you auction them off, that's the end of it. REPRESENTATIVE BROWN: Yes. Thank you. MAJORITY CHAIRMAN M. KELLER: Okay. Again, thank you very much for your testimony, Mr. Wetzel. Appreciate it. Thank you. MR. WETZEL: You're very welcome. Thank you. MAJORITY CHAIRMAN M. KELLER: Our next

41 0 0 testifier is Andrew French. Andrew is the Executive Director for Fayette County Redevelopment Authority, correct? MR. FRENCH: Correct. MAJORITY CHAIRMAN M. KELLER: Okay. The floor is yours. MR. FRENCH: Yep. Thank you, Representative Keller and other members of the Committee. I'm glad to be here. As indicated, I'm the Executive Director of the Fayette County Redevelopment Authority located in southwestern Pennsylvania in the beautiful Laurel Highlands. Fayette County has a lot of tremendous assets to offer, including the Ohiopyle State Park, the Great Allegheny Passage, home to two Frank Lloyd Wright homes, Falling Water and Kentuck Knob. That said, Fayette County, like many of the counties across the Commonwealth, also has a number of different challenges, which I would like to talk about today. While I recognize this hearing has been established to provide a five-year progress report on Pennsylvania land banks, I cannot speak to that issue specifically since

42 0 0 Fayette County has not formed a land bank and has instead decided to dedicate our efforts towards using local resources to compliment existing agencies that are already engaged in dealing with blight. I will provide more insight on this point later in my testimony. What I would like to focus on today in my brief comments is what we have accomplished in Fayette County in our effort to deal with blighted properties. Since our inception in, the Redevelopment Authority has dealt with literally thousands of blighted structures. In fact, that is what redevelopment authorities were created by the Commonwealth to do. Looking back over the years since the land bank legislation was contemplated and passed, the Fayette County Redevelopment Authority has accomplished much, including the following:. We've acquired and rehabilitated nine properties and resold those properties to low-income homebuyers.. We've rehabilitated owner-occupied residential properties.. We've demolished over 0 residential

43 0 0 blighted properties.. We've demolished seven major commercial blighted properties.. We've aided in the construction of over 0 new homes for sale to first-time low-income home buyers. In total, the Redevelopment Authority has invested over $. million in these efforts, using a variety of local, State and Federal resources and private resources, as well. While these numbers may seem low to those in more urban areas of the Commonwealth, please understand that in Fayette County, these projects have had a tremendous, a tremendous, impact on stabilizing our most fragile communities and have had a significant secondary impact of creating additional revenue for the impacted municipalities. In order to provide additional examples of our success in dealing with blight and repurposing property, I will quickly highlight the following projects:. Three Oaks Development in Redstone Township. This project involved the acquisition of a former obsolete public housing site.

44 0 0 Following demolition, funding from CDBG, HOME, PHFA-PHARE, USDA and private financing were utilized to construct new single-family units. Seven hundred thousand dollars in public investment was utilized to leverage over $ million in private investment. And the Original property value, which was valued at zero since it was a public housing site, increased to over $ million.. A little borough called Masontown Borough. This involved the acquisition and demolition of a long vacant commercial structure. The project will result -- it's currently under construction -- but it will result in the new construction of three single-family residential structures for sale to low-to-moderate income homebuyers.. Brownsville Borough, there we instituted a major redevelopment initiative, which involved the acquisition of vacant, dilapidated and condemned properties and demolition of seven properties thus far. This has resulted in the completion of a new town square, utilizing approximately $0,000 through Greenways, Trails and Recreation Program, the

45 0 0 Redevelopment Authority, Fayette County Tourism Fund, Heinz Foundation and other private donations.. And we also have the successful -unit Brownsville Senior Apartments, which is being developed by Trek Development, being made possible through $00,000 in demolition funding through Redevelopment Authority, and $. million through PHFA, the low-income housing tax credit, and PennHOMES. That will result in the total investment of $ to $ million. To transition and re-focus on the specific purpose of this hearing, I believe that the land bank legislation enacted five years ago is extremely beneficial in the fact that it reengages many communities in looking at the issue of blight and how to redevelop properties. Obviously, there are many challenges to developing, operating and maintaining a land bank, which is why Fayette County has opted not to form one, especially given the fact that their Redevelopment Authority is already, in essence, acting as a land bank. While the Fayette County Redevelopment Authority and many other redevelopment authorities across the

46 0 0 Commonwealth are acting in the same capacity as land banks, we are not afforded the same key powers given to land banks. Based on my conversations with my colleagues throughout the Commonwealth, mainly through the Pennsylvania Association of Housing and Redevelopment Agencies, or PAHRA, this is an issue of great concern. Our hope is that SB, which was introduced by the great Senator Pat Stefano from Fayette County, will correct this matter. I believe our ultimate goal should be to provide as many resources and tools possible to those agencies on the ground which are dealing with blight. Therefore, I hope this Committee and the House will approve SB to provide those key additional powers to redevelopment authorities to help us aid our local communities in dealing with blight. I once again want to extend my appreciation to you, Representative Keller, and members of this Committee for giving me the honor to testify before you today. I would also like to extend my appreciation to Christine Goldbeck for all of your advice and guidance over the past several months.

47 0 0 MAJORITY CHAIRMAN M. KELLER: Do any members have questions? My Executive Director has a question, so look out. MR. FRENCH: Sure. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR GOLDBECK: Okay. Let me -- well, let me back up just a minute, Andrew, because I was going to grab Representative Santora on the side, based on his question earlier, but just to -- I'm going to take a quick trip down memory lane to seven, eight, nine years ago when we were working on all of the land banks. Regarding the question you had about developers, I think it's important to point out that the realtors were very much involved in helping us put it together into a viable, for developers, making sure that they would have every possible opportunity from the private aspect of things to be involved. So I wanted to make that very clear. And essentially, it all has worked out very well in terms of working with the, as you will hear the land banks around the State say, working with the private developers. So you can

48 0 0 question me on that later, if you want. Now, Andrew, SB, if you recall many months ago when we were in dialogue, I said, the key problem -- and again, going back down memory lane, and I think I said this to you -- was that redevelopment authorities have the power of eminent domain. And my caucus beat me upside and down several times to make sure when land banks were being passed that eminent domain would not ever be associated with land banks because they cannot support it. I'm not sure that the bill, as it reads right now, takes care of that little issue, which is a huge issue for the Republican Caucus, but there are also Democratic members who have similar concerns. So statement, question, you can take that as a question and answer it for right now. MR. FRENCH: Sure. And I will say I recognize that and, obviously, in more rural areas of the Commonwealth, the power of eminent domain is used extremely sparingly by redevelopment authorities, just because we don't have the resources to actually use that power anymore.

49 0 0 I guess I understand when the land bank legislation was contemplated and drafted that the Commonwealth didn't want to create a number of different agencies out there that had that power of eminent domain. I think at the same time that the land bank legislation was going through, there were, in response to the Kelo versus New London case, there were changes that were made to the Commonwealth's eminent domain bill, as well as the Urban Redevelopment Law to kind of tighten the, you know, our ability to use those powers on what properties. I will say that SB in no way expands our power of eminent domain. It doesn't enable us to use it any more than what we're allowed to use it presently. It just simply gives us as an authority the same tools, or the intent is to give us the same tools that land banks have to acquire and repurpose properties. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR GOLDBECK: Okay. And one more question. May I, Mr. Chairman? You say in your testimony that you, as well as some of the other smaller, I believe, rural counties just don't have the resources or

50 0 0 0 just don't want to start a land bank. Is it a possibility that that might be more deeply explored among, say, a larger group of counties or a county and municipality for you guys to form a land bank? MR. FRENCH: We examined it. In Fayette County, we're the countywide redevelopment authority, so there are municipalities in the county. There actually are two smaller redevelopment authorities in our two cities within the county, but we obviously collaborate with those parties and we work throughout the county. So when we contemplated forming a land bank, it would have been a countywide land bank, similar to what a lot of other agencies have done. Again, our challenge was -- and I think we've seen this across the Commonwealth when I've talked to a lot of my colleagues, and I'm sure some of the other folks that are testifying today can talk more in depth about this, but I think what I have witnessed is that in most cases, if you have a strong redevelopment authority that's operating in a county and they form a land bank, almost always, it seems as

51 0 0 though the redevelopment authority is staffing the land bank. So operationally, they're the same. The staff of the redevelopment authority is the staff of the land bank. I know that's not across the board. There are some exceptions to that, but in a lot of different communities, that's what's happening. As I said in my testimony, we've got a lot of things going on in terms of trying to address blight throughout Fayette County and a limited staff and limited resources. And so in my mind, our efforts were best placed by trying to identify additional resources and trying to implement the actual projects and activities to deal with the blight that we have in Fayette County. MAJORITY CHAIRMAN M. KELLER: All right. Thank you very much. Appreciate it. Let the record indicate that Representative Eric Roe has also joined us. And I see Representative Dean just coming in also. Our next testifier, George Kelly, Director of Planning and Economic Development, Lackawanna County.

52 0 0 George, the floor will be yours when you get here. MR. KELLY: Good morning. And thank you for the opportunity to share Lackawanna County's experience with the Lackawanna County Land Bank. My name is George Kelly. I'm the Director of Planning and Economic Development. I'm the Executive Director of the Redevelopment Authority, the Regional Planning Commission of Lackawanna County. I also have the pleasure of being the managing member of the land bank, as well as one of its founders. Heavy consideration was given to using the redevelopment authority as the basis for the land bank with the additional members added as required by the Land Bank Act. With much deliberation and negotiations with the City of Scranton, who is our largest city as well as the largest holder of tax repository properties, it was decided to provide a clear focus and mission and that we would have to form a new entity, being the Land Bank. Scranton has more than 0 percent of our,000 properties in the tax repository. The Mayor of Scranton was provided with two

53 0 0 appointments directly to the Land Bank Board to ensure that their priorities were considered. In addition, we did an advisory committee with representation from the city, the head of OECD, the Treasurer, Licensing and Inspections. We also included two community development organizations. In addition, we also gave the school board two appointments because they had concerns about meeting their needs. So we wanted to be quite inclusive in what we're doing. Our Board consists of the past president of the Greater Scranton Board of Realtors, which is a countywide organization, a licensed realtor and appraiser from the city of Carbondale. We included a planning board member from Dunmore, the manager of the County's Regional Planning Commission, the head of OECD of Scranton, the Chairman of the Lackawanna Board of Commissioners and myself. An important and integral part of our land bank is we have our Deputy Director of Tax Claim as an advisor to the land bank. The bank is staffed with members of the Regional Planning Commission and the Department of Economic

54 0 0 Development. The same team also staffs our Redevelopment Authority. Having Patrick O'Malley, the Chairman of the Board of Commissioners, also chair the Land Bank has ensured that we all work together with a common vision driving the progress. The mix of board members has empowered the land bank to fast track the acquisition and disposition of properties. We're doing it as fast as days right now. To address some of the challenges by having this inclusionary mix, by including license and inspection, demolitions can be expedited. They also can be delayed, based upon the intended use of the properties. Initially, the Land Bank acquired 00 properties in bulk, and then we picked up an additional properties. There have been properties returned to the tax roll and productive use. Another are in que and are targeted to be transferred by year end. The majority of lots that have been provided so far have been side lot programs, nonconforming lots that have been in the repository for several years.

55 0 0 The clearing of municipal liens and claims, including CDBG demolition liens, have really cleared the way for residents to affordably take back our neighborhoods. A demolition lien could be as high as $,000, back taxes, six or seven. By taking them to a land bank, we're able to offer these properties for $00 apiece. We also work in conjunction with the County Prisoner Maintenance Team, the work gang, where they'll go out and maintain lots and fight blight and take care of some of the real problem properties that have been that way for a number of years. To fund the land bank, a $0,000 loan was provided by the Lackawanna County Economic Development Fund. And we were fortunate enough to get a Monroe County LSA grant for an additional $0,000. Without this seed funding, we would not have had the Land Bank. The County wasn't willing to commit the funds to actually seed it and start it, so by using the gambling grant, it definitely helped us to get started. In addition to the seed funding, we paired a half a million dollar EPA

56 0 0 Brownfield Inventory and Assessment Grant that we did as a coalition with our Redevelopment Authority, the City of Scranton and Lackawanna County, so that we could actually go after the properties that intimidate most land banks. The availability of funding for environmental studies has been a valuable tool in the disposition of commercial property. A large tract of brownfield land in Taylor Borough will be acquired once we get our intergovernmental cooperation agreement together. It's about a 0-acre parcel of land that has some issues that we'll be addressing. CBDG home funds of $0,000 were contributed to a United Neighborhood Services project in conjunction with Life Geisinger. They were building a four-unit senior residential project to allow people to age in place and not have to go into a home. We're working very closely with the Recorder of Deeds to implement the new demolition recording fee. That would provide an additional $0,000 in fees in addition to what we already have, $0,000 in affordable housing from Act. We are looking to pair $0,000

57 0 0 of our CBDG nonentitlement funds to match that demolition fee. We also applied for another LSA grant. We're asking for three hundred. We're hoping to get anything to really start the blight program countywide. We would use the land bank for that, but you don't have to be a member of the land bank to actually participate in the demolition and clearing of blight. Regarding SB, granting land bank powers to redevelopment authorities, the primary concern from a practitioner's standpoint is that we need the involvement of local tax bodies, local taxing bodies, as intended by the original act. This was really a deal breaker with the City of Scranton, that if we didn't give them the board positions, if we didn't include them, they were unwilling to join our land bank. They also didn't have the capacity or the resources to do it themselves. At a minimum, the redevelopment authorities should be required to hammer out an Intergovernmental Cooperation Agreement, an ICA, that clearly identifies priorities and addresses the needs of the communities. The combination of eminent domain and trump bidding - really

58 0 0 huge - at a judicial sale is a very powerful and far reaching ability that should be used with the expressed consent of the three taxing bodies. An ICA should outline if a land bank and a redevelopment authority can operate in the same field. The ICA should dictate who has the trump bid if both entities bid on the same property as part of a judicial sale. The Advisory committee should be required to provide direction and to help expedite all parties working together to fight blight at every level. In terms of moving forward, if a funding source, such as Keystone Community Grants, could be added, such as an Elm Street or Main Street type of program or a recording fee could be provided for the creation and initial funding of land bank activities, it would built upon the progress that we have made to date. If it wasn't for Senator Blake and our State Representative's commitment to advocate for an LSA grant, I wouldn't be here today thanking the Committee for allowing me to provide this update and to have the land bank be a valuable and effective tool in fighting blight

59 0 0 in our communities. Thank you. MAJORITY CHAIRMAN M. KELLER: Thank you. Thank you very much. I just have, more or less, a statement rather than a question. I want to commend you on the fact of the -day turnaround. That's pretty much unheard of. Second of all, I think that you've used every tool in your toolbox and thought outside of the box to bring this to fruition. And I think we can say that we can see that it works very well if all entities are a part of it. That being in itself, I think others should pattern off of what you've accomplished in your area. MR. KELLY: Yes. MAJORITY CHAIRMAN M. KELLER: So thank you for that. MR. KELLEY: Thank you. MAJORITY CHAIRMAN M. KELLER: Representative Santora. REPRESENTATIVE SANTORA: My question isn't necessarily geared to you, but in general -- and it's more of a concern -- I think there are a lot of great things happening with

60 0 0 0 these land banks, but the eminent domain piece of it is very, very concerning. I understand that redevelopment authorities have that right. That concerns me, as well. And every once in a while you allow it -- and it was prior to myself coming here; I know that -- but we need to really consider expanding the right of eminent domain by this, I'll call it merger, of these groups because we are talking about people's property rights. And people's property rights are protected. And by giving eminent domain, we are risking some of that protection. I'm going to tell you that this is going to be a big hurdle for many people in this caucus and probably even on this Committee. It's extremely concerning. It's something that I don't know if the next speakers can address it or one of the prior speakers wants to address some of those concerns, but it is a very, very serious issue for many people. MAJORITY CHAIRMAN M. KELLER: Professor Alexander, would you come back up here? I think some of those concerns can be addressed.

61 0 0 MR. ALEXANDER: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Your question is entirely appropriate, and it was very much at the heart of the discussions and negotiation on the Pennsylvania Land Bank Act in '0, '0, '0, ' and '. As we've done this throughout the country with now States having land bank legislation and 0 land banks -- you all have ; you all are at the forefront -- but one of the key issues, as we've done this nationwide, is to keep the focus of land banks on the abandoned property where there are no owners that care. We are not trying to undercut in anything we do in land banking redevelopment authorities. We respect that. And I get it that they may need the power of eminent domain for an assemblage, but that is not why we create land banks. That is what I tried to share in my opening, which I'm very nervous about mission drift and confusion. As my colleague has said, when you start doing both eminent domain and tax foreclosures, in the minds of people who own property, it gets very confused very quickly.

62 0 0 REPRESENTATIVE SANTORA: Do you have statistics on the other States to show the use of eminent domain since those groups came together, the land banks with the authorities? MR. ALEXANDER: Well, I can tell you that of the States that have adopted in the past eight years comprehensive land bank legislation, not a single one has the power of eminent domain. Indeed, every one has an express disclaimer of eminent domain in land banking legislation. REPRESENTATIVE SANTORA: So you're okay with us amending this and removing the eminent domain piece? MR. ALEXANDER: Well, I think that's not the dilemma that puts before you, because I'm not advocating that redevelopment authorities be stripped of eminent domain power. That's a very different question. What I'm concerned with is that right now, the way this amendment is or this bill is, you're moving land bank powers into redevelopment authorities, which already have eminent domain. So you're going to -- that's where the confusion is.

63 0 0 My suggestion is that you leave the organizations separate with separate missions, emphasize collaboration, intergovernmental agreements when possible, direct transfers from one to the other when possible; and they are possible. REPRESENTATIVE SANTORA: I can't say I disagree with you, so okay. Thank you. MAJORITY CHAIRMAN M. KELLER: Thank you very much. MR. ALEXANDER: Yes, sir. MAJORITY CHAIRMAN M. KELLER: Representative Dean, you had a question. REPRESENTATIVE DEAN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I apologize that I was delayed in getting here. So if I'm asking something that's already been spoken about, I apologize. But it's impressive what you talked about, the 00 properties in bulk and then an additional, and many of them you have been able to transfer and dispose of. I share my colleague's concern about the blurring of eminent domain power and authority, so I appreciate your definition of how it should be separate yet collaborative.

64 0 0 Can you sort of paint the picture of some of these properties? And as I said, if it's already been done -- MR. KELLY: It hasn't; I would be glad to. REPRESENTATIVE DEAN: Okay. Thank you. MR. KELLY: We have a lot of nonconforming lots. So they're little 0-by-0s or they're 0-by-00s, where we can't build on the lots right now. They've been in the repository for 0 or years. No one wants them. The taxes are very high on them because the assessments are obscure right now. And there are usual demo liens on the back taxes. By us taking it in, we clear all liens. We take care of all of the back taxes, except for IRS liens, which we are clearing property by property. We then will make that available for side lots, gardens, neighborhood gardens, a parking area for a school area. So we're taking a lot of those little lots and just putting them to use and taking them back. So we're fighting the blight. We have consolidated three lots into

65 0 0 one, which we did with a partnership with LIFE Geisinger in the middle of a really nice block. So therefore, we're going to integrate that. It's very close to a hospital and right in town. We have a commercial property that the roof is caved in. We have a little bit of environmental issues. There are some barrels laying around, an old oil tanker in the back. And we've taken that in. We have a developer who is investing a good $ million in the contiguous properties who is going to buy that once I finish up the phase two environmental studies. So it's been a real mix of a little bit of new development consolidating lots for homeowners that have been maintaining lots for a number of years and a little bit of commercial right now. REPRESENTATIVE DEAN: And of course improving the nature and quality of the community, you're helping seniors get housing. You're making sure that the environmental concerns are being taken care of and accessing the grants and environmental needs that you need to take care of. So thank you for giving me

66 0 0 some sense of it. My mother-in-law is from Lackawanna County. And even though she's been down in Montgomery County for about 0 years, she still considers that she's from Lackawanna County. MR. KELLY: Hopefully she comes back. REPRESENTATIVE DEAN: She's a Walsh through and through. Thank you very much. MAJORITY CHAIRMAN M. KELLER: Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Kelly. MR. KELLY: My pleasure. MAJORITY CHAIRMAN M. KELLER: Yes, go ahead. Do you have a comment? EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR GOLDBECK: I do. I have a comment and a question. My comment is on the funnier side of things. That would be that, Herb Wetzel, I think Mr. Kelly and I need to come down and do a couple Philly site visits and some creative funding ideas and hit my favorite Irish pub while we're there, me and Mike Kelly. So there's my comment. How did you manage to -- the creative -- we didn't fund land banks, as everyone remembers

67 0 0 or is learning. We just gave you all sorts of awesome powers and made sure you were transparent about how you did it. Who came up with the idea to go to the EPA for the, you know, for that kind of grant funding? And I want this on the record because it is so super smart to have done it that way? MR. KELLY: What happened was, I have a very good team, very enthusiastic and energetic. And I drive them to look for competitive grants, so we're not a burden to the taxpayers. I have a team of 0 people supporting all the different organizations, authorities and commissions. Sixty percent of our salaries are reimbursed, so it's not a burden to the General Fund. And then my team has raised three to four times our fully loaded salaries and grants. So we went to a DCED tour of Pennsylvania, talking about brownfields and how can we fight blight in that way. And my team and I sat down and said, hey, why don't we apply for this? And we realized that we could only get up to $00,000 by doing it ourselves. So therefore, we did a coalition with the City of Scranton. And up

68 0 0 until that point, the city and the county basically hated each other. They didn't talk. You couldn't even get them in a room. And being new to politics and being new to the job, I came in with a clean slate. So I approached the Mayor in an Irish pub, of course, and said, wouldn't it be nice if we could double up the ask; and we did. We used Langan Engineering, who is the poster child for brownfield inventory and assessment. They give the presentation for DCED. So we used that, and we were able to invest about $,000 to have them help us write the grant, submit it in. And with their connections with the EPA and knowing what they wanted, which it is a hard grant to get, we were able to take that in. Now, with that grant, we did the environmentals on a huge piece of property that a local YMCA community center is buying. We cleaned that. We have a tainted property right downtown across from a cathedral. We're at a phase two right now. Old dry cleaners, those are always headaches. We have a meat processing plant that was

69 0 0 donated to a local university that we are doing the environmentals on that and trying to get that cleaned, as well as this other property that I mentioned over by our Scranton Lace Company. So it was just -- it was kind of dumb luck that it kind of fell in. And then when we were sitting around getting the land bank started, the same traction that you're seeing with the other land banks in the State, my team didn't want to take in properties. Oh, we're afraid. We might get yelled as because they're blighted, and the City is going to yell at us to cut their grass. So that's why I gave them the ultimatum. I said, hey, in the next 0 days, pick 00 properties out of the,000 in the repository; we're going to acquire them. And we took those in right away, and then we started advertising, put it on the website, put signs up. You know, property, call Ralph, you know, doing things like that. And that's how we steamrolled it in. Thanks. MAJORITY CHAIRMAN M. KELLER: All right. Thank you very much.

70 0 0 0 MR. KELLY: Thank you much. MAJORITY CHAIRMAN M. KELLER: Our next testify is An Lewis. She's the Executive Director of Tri-COG Land Bank. An, the floor is yours. Good morning. MS. LEWIS: Good morning. Thank you for having me this morning. Just as a way of introducing who I am and some more creativity about what can be done with land banks, I am both the Executive Director of the Tri-COG Land Bank and of Steel Rivers Council of Governments in Allegheny County. The Tri-COG Land Bank was an initiative formed just this year -- actually, our legal paperwork was accepted in March -- as the culmination of over six years of work by the Steel Rivers Council of Governments and our partner, the Turtle Creek Valley Council of Governments. There has been lots of reference so far this morning about the strong focus several years ago and the numerous pieces of legislation that were coming through our State to help address the problem of blight. So our councils

71 0 0 of governments represent of the 0 municipalities in Allegheny County. Our region in the county is the most distressed. And so in 0, as this legislation was being proposed, we were aware of the Land Bank Act. We knew that there was a problem of blight, but we knew that we needed to understand it. So we set about the business of understanding and calculating the cost of blight. I've provided a couple of handouts for you. One of them is a summary of our municipalities. And what we did is we looked at properties that were in poor, very poor and unsound condition. We looked at what was happening around them. And we calculated the cost of police, fire, demolition, all of these direct costs. We also calculated the indirect costs. We replicated some efforts that were done in Philadelphia. And what we found is that responsible property owners were shouldering the significant cost. In our municipalities, about a quarter to a third of the county, 0 cost our local governments and our community $

72 0 0 million. If your house is within 0 feet of a blighted property, your house is being devalued by at least percent. If you're in a community with an emerging blight problem, where there is maybe one bad apple on the street, your house is being devalued by up to a third. When you blow that up countywide, that's a loss of $. billion, with a b, dollars in wealth. When you consider that over 0 percent of the personal wealth in our middle class households is borne and is contained in the equity of our house, that's an enormous number. We would never tolerate that with our retirement accounts. So we were able, because of that work and because of that study, to create a conversation among our municipalities, school districts in our county. Our land bank operates outside of the City of Pittsburgh in Allegheny County. We have members. We have municipalities. There are six school districts in Allegheny County. Our land bank requires that all three taxes jurisdictions are members of our land bank. We did this because, as many of us know

73 0 0 in Pennsylvania, we have a culture of local control. We have over -- I was talking to Professor Alexander earlier. We have, units of local government in the State of Pennsylvania. We like our small governments. One of the things that I knew, being a COG Director, is that our local governments are like neighborhoods in a city. They have unique cultures. We have very passionate elected officials, and they want to be at the table. And so what our land bank offered was them to have a seat at the table. One of the things that the Land Bank Act smartly did was it called attention to the importance and the inclusion of residents. The Land Bank Act requires that on the board there be one resident member. We took that principle and we expanded it. Our land bank is governed by a nine-member board. But in forming that board, we have two advisory committees. Those advisory committees are made up of our municipalities and our school districts. They have two really important functions. They nominate and elect our board of directors and they vet and approve every

74 0 0 acquisition and every disposition going through our land bank so that there is full transparency so that everybody knows which properties are going in and which properties are coming out and what they're to become. Our land bank board is a balance of political representation. We have two municipal members. We have two school directors. We have a seat appointed by the county executive. We have three professionals. We have one resident. So all of our decisions are balanced based on best practices and what's best for the community. We've also developed a creative financing strategy. As Christine said earlier, the Land Bank Act came up with all of these great powers with no money to do that. So we looked to Cuyahoga County. Right now, arguably -- I am not an expert; I will defer to those national experts in the room -- but I believe they are probably by far the largest land bank, especially right now. But they have a very important source of revenue built into their State legislation. They get a scrape of delinquent tax collection.

75 0 0 And that flows through the county and is automatically deposited to the land bank. It allowed them to grow and operate at scale. We knew -- pardon me? (UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER NOT SPEAKING INTO MICROPHONE.) MS. LEWIS: They get a portion of the delinquent tax collection. The delinquent taxes are collected at the county level and Cuyahoga County gets a portion of that tax increment. It's done in other places, as well. We knew that we couldn't wait for a legislative solution, so we built in our intergovernmental cooperation an agreement. All of our members commit five percent of the prior year of their delinquent taxes, collected delinquent taxes. That has allowed us -- this year, that provided $0,000 of operating support. The other thing that that did for us, is it allowed us to go out to our local foundation community. We reached out to them. Five foundations are funding us and have given us $. million in operating support to fund our first three years of operating. Additionally,

76 0 0 our members commit to thinks that were created in the Land Bank Act. They agree to allow the land bank to discharge the past debt. Most of our communities, most of our properties are the properties that Mr. Alexander spoke of. They are the abandoned properties that are languishing. And most of our taxing body members understood that those taxes were never coming. And it was the right thing to do to just wipe the slate clean and forgive that past debt, so they agreed to that. They also agree, as the legislation allows, to share the future taxes 0/0 with the land bank. One of the things that, you know, just to kind of talk about what we've been able to accomplish this year, we are brand new. We're just getting started. We spent 0 passing by-laws, policies and procedures, but we've actually already started acquisition on 0 properties. We've identified two rounds of property consideration a year, and we'll be moving forward with our second round in the coming months. In closing, I want to speak a little bit to SB and return to the sort of fragmented

77 0 0 nature of Pennsylvania. I think that many criticize our State and our local governments and write them off as sort of small, inefficient and outdated. But as I said before, we are a passionate State. And a network of small towns, boroughs and smaller cities, which deserve a seat at the table. I think our land bank shows that the Land Bank Act allows for the engagement of those local community members. In our opinion, SB is a mistake. It abandons the preference for local control of land banks, as most redevelopment authorities are entities of the county. Furthermore, while I'm not an expert on the Redevelopment Authorities Act, I believe that that Act has no provision for local representation on those boards. Secondly, as Mr. Alexander spoke of before, SB misaligns the power of land banking with redevelopment authorities. It's giving them power that they weren't designed to have. And it does not provide any of the safeguards that the Land Bank Act does. For example, the Land Bank Act requires

78 0 0 that there not be an overlapping jurisdiction between land banks. You can't have two land banks operating in the same geographic region. Lastly, I don't believe that SB has had sufficient vetting. As has been spoken about earlier, the Land Bank Act was designed over three legislative sessions. SB passed in three months. Lastly, some have argued that SB would bring cost-saving measures by not forming a new organization. We just did it this year. It cost us maybe $0,000. So to gain $0,000 in the short term seems to be a very heavy price for what you would give up in the long term. Thank you. MAJORITY CHAIRMAN M. KELLER: Thank you very much, An. You know, I see you're very, very passionate about your job and how it works. I want to thank you for your testimony. I don't have any questions from any of the members. Oops, I got one there. Sorry. Representative white. REPRESENTATIVE M. WHITE: Could you just briefly discuss how your organization with the financing, the money that you receive, the 0/0

79 0 0 split, how is that working out? And is that indefinite, that 0/0 split, or is that for a period of time? MS. LEWIS: No. The Land Bank Act allows land banks to share future tax revenues 0/0 for a period of five years. And when you're dealing with smaller residential properties, which is what we will be dealing with, it's not a lot of money, honestly, but that's what that is. MAJORITY CHAIRMAN M. KELLER: All right. Thank you. Thank you very much, An. Appreciate your testimony. MS. LEWIS: Thank you. MAJORITY CHAIRMAN M. KELLER: Next up, we have Pat Mack, Deputy Director of the Housing Authority of Northumberland County. Pat, the floor is yours. MR. MACK: Good morning, Mr. Chairman, and members of the Committee. I want to echo some of the sentiments that some of my colleagues have offered here today. It's a privilege to be here and to discuss this legislation. I guess to get started, in providing testimony, we are a

80 0 0 0 housing authority, so our land bank is staffed by that. And I will get the elephant out of the room. Our housing authority is afforded the power of eminent domain. So certainly, as we have discussed that, it was, I think, a germane discussion that we were having when we were forming our land bank, who should proctor this thing and be at the forefront? That said, in forming a land bank. We were sort of ahead of the legislation. Prior to the passage, we had already commissioned some folks off the floor, a forum if you will, of municipal folks to talk about blight through our community. And it's through that municipal process and community support and everything that we were able to put together. We were already achieving goals prior to the land bank passage. So we had a blight strategy in place, and we were following that when the land bank came in. So one of the final blight summits and the meetings we held offered us this land banking opportunity. We had talked about it. We had heard about it. So we sort of hit the cusp as our wheels were already turning.

81 0 0 Our process had already begun with the repository list. So some of those municipal discussions led us to believe that, you know, we have this blight issue. Where is it, and how do we address it? And we found most of our issue, in a little county a little north of here, was on our county repository list. These were abandoned properties through what the Professor said earlier. They came with all of the modern amenities of central air, by way of that, no windows; many times, a sunroof. Most of them have a real nice sunroof and had collapsed in. So these were abandoned properties. That's sort of where we've concentrated our efforts. One of, I believe, the secrets to our success and the secrets to the land bank legislation was the municipal cooperation. Everything, throughout our process, was driven municipally. Those folks, as we developed the blight strategy, set out and picked the properties they wanted to choose to address. We've been the back-of-the-house support, and they've been out at the forefront. And we believe that process

82 0 0 worked simply because they were hearing from residents all the time. There were folks coming to the meetings saying, what are you doing to address this property; how will you address this property? And they were following those meetings regularly, kept continually coming. So we knew and they knew these were the problem properties to address. They also knew emerging trends in their community and could see what was needed better than a countywide entity dictating downhill to them. So whereas, our land bank hasn't done a lot of activity, the Housing Authority has provided the background to that, we've secured over a million dollars in grants and grant funding through various sources. Certainly, the folks at DCED, we appreciate all the work that they've done for us. And in helping to keep that ball moving, we've addressed over 0 properties on that repository list. Certainly, when you hear some of my colleagues from the bigger areas, it doesn't sound like a lot, but to us, it's tremendous. Our multi-municipal discussions led us to a

83 0 0 conservatorship action. We came to realize that several prominent blighted properties were not tax delinquent. There was one property owner that kept the taxes current. So we were able to have discussions amongst municipal representatives, combine them together and share the legal fees to address, I think it was a dozen to blighted properties. And as I said previously, these had all of the modern amenities. These were your true blighted properties when you looked at it. Just recently, one of our major accomplishments as a housing authority and working with one of our municipal representatives was to tackle several repository properties that fell victim to a fire. These were a dozen properties. It started on a corner lot and worked its way to the middle. We were able to abrogate these and acquire them from the repository list. After the fire had happened, we secured the funding to perform the demolition. And then following the demolition, the Housing Authority came in and accounted as the redeveloper. We

84 0 0 certainly believed that us doing that, in conjunction with what was recommended from our blight strategy, that in our development, we're hoping to inspire other private developers to come forward and see a vision and do it more on a private level than us on a public level. We've constructed these five beautiful townhouse apartments. You know, we think they are great. They're on a gateway street, but we wanted to do it in the essence of the land bank legislation, and that was to cooperate. We had the township come to us. We acquired it. They went to through the auction process, sort of following all of the steps that were outlined in the legislation to stay, you know, run parallel to that. So we're very proud, I think, of what we've done. We certainly want to thank what this Committee has offered us. I understand and we echo the concerns with some of the eminent domain powers, but I think we've sort of found a way to follow that. So with that -- MAJORITY CHAIRMAN M. KELLER: Thank you very much.

85 0 0 Members, questions? Staff? EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR GOLDBECK: Okay. So back to the elephant in the room, how do you address, how do you deal with any eminent domain issues that come up with housing authority/land bank? MR. MACK: I think our board, just knowing the current make-up and probably the past make-up, I don't know that it's ever even entered the discussion. I think that some of the earlier testimony, they'd be used so lightly that you don't even acknowledge it. But also, we've driven it municipally. So when we've been dealing with blight, I think the township level folks and the city level folks have picked from the list and said, here's where we want to deal. And certainly, some of the biggest properties that we have had have set on the repository list for years and been extensive. So when you're looking at poster children for blight, these have jumped out from that repository list to us because they've set -- speculators have come and gone on these properties and they're just sitting there just

86 0 0 wasting away. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR GOLDBECK: (Microphone not turned on.) MR. MACK: No. We haven't even raised it. As a matter of fact, probably the only time that it entered the discussion was in the joint conservatorship action between the township and the city. And again, I think conservatorship was such a new tool and an innovative tool afforded to us by the legislature and offered so much of a better opportunity that that was the route we chose. And while it was an education, I think it worked. It was a lot cleaner. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR GOLDBECK: Just a note to the members, Mr. Chairman, the Conservatorship Act that Pat is speaking about was also a House Urban Affairs Committee law. It came about in 00. And it is also being used as one of the tools around the State by municipalities very successfully. So it's one more tool in addition to the land bank. I didn't know Northumberland was using it. MR. MACK: Yeah.

87 0 0 MAJORITY CHAIRMAN M. KELLER: Representative Santora. REPRESENTATIVE SANTORA: I appreciate your comments about the fact that you're not using eminent domain, that the Board's policies -- now, unfortunately, for us, we've got to look well beyond your current board, the next board and the board after that. We have to think about that into the future. So those are, I think, some of the concerns that you're hearing from up here and why we've got to make sure that we address this properly for many years to come. MR. MACK: And very appropriate. MAJORITY CHAIRMAN M. KELLER: Representative Dean. REPRESENTATIVE DEAN: Thank you for your testimony. In doing your review of properties in your county for the Housing Authority, what's the scope of the problem? And I also see it as the scope of the opportunity. You said you're addressing 0 properties at this point. So what does it look like? What does the timeline look like?

88 0 0 MR. MACK: Most of the time, our timeline is pretty straight forward. We're able to come in at the municipal level. They approach the tax claims bureau. Ninety percent of the properties are sitting on the repository list. It's a simple dollar transaction. And we have allocated funding, various streams we've combined through Keystone Communities, CDBG, some private funding, looking forward to using the Recorder of Deeds fee that we just enacted, the Blight Demolition Fund, to bring that in. So from that standpoint, it probably is -- from the time we pinpoint it until the time we're actually sinking a shovel in the side of a house, months. This just depends. We're trying to get into more of a -- it has to work into the process, lumping the bids together, just being economic with the dollars. You know, also contractors sometimes, we see a lot of bids get more competitive in the winter because they -- this is a good piece of filler work for them. Most of the time, we are talking about demolitions. REPRESENTATIVE DEAN: And how many properties or parcels are within your repository

89 list? 0 0 MR. MACK: I haven't looked at it currently. It was a couple hundred -- much to the Lackawanna County's state, I'm a recovering planning and economic development director, so I can relate to all he's saying of being creative, but the list is rather extensive, but we're dealing a lot with his same standpoint of side lots, nonconforming, you know, real oddball setup in housing. We have a lot of old coal-style housing from old coal companies that have just gone through generations. So as the population has declined or moved into the more farm setting or out of the cities, this is what we're seeing. I think each of them that we approach presents something unique. When we're looking at a demolition, it's real tight quarters. REPRESENTATIVE DEAN: Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you, Chairman. MAJORITY CHAIRMAN M. KELLER: Thank you, Mr. Mack. I appreciate your testimony and being here today. Next on our agenda is Winnie Branton,

90 0 0 0 the Housing Alliance of Pennsylvania. Winnie, the floor is yours. MS. BRANTON: Good morning, Chairman, and members of the Committee. My name is Winnie Branton, and I serve as the Program Manager for the Housing Alliance's Blight and Land Bank Training and Technical Assistance Program. The Housing Alliance is a statewide coalition that advocates and provides leadership and a common voice for policies, practices and resources to ensure that all Pennsylvanians, especially those with low incomes, have access to safe, decent, accessible and affordable homes. We also advocate to advance strategies for community development and revitalization. And as I mentioned, I serve as the Blight Program Manager. In that role, what I do is, I've provided local governments with knowledge and training on all of the strategies that have been discussed this morning: conservatorship, land banking and other tools that are used by local governments to address blighted properties. What I want to do this morning is talk a

91 0 0 little bit about the progress that the Pennsylvania land banks have made and fill in some of the additional information that's already been provided this morning and then have some comment on SB. To start with the land bank legislation, it was passed in 0. And what I think makes it really an effective tool is the fact that it was flexible and optional. It's not mandated. It gives local governments a lot of different measures and methods for collaborating to address blight by using a land bank. The Housing Alliance worked over a decade, as was testified to this morning, with this Committee and the legislature to develop tools that would work for local communities. And part of that coalition included, as Christine mentioned: realtors, developers, environmentalists, community activists, everyone that touched blighted property was at the table helping to craft that legislation. And you worked over three legislative session to get the right land banking bill for Pennsylvania. Professor Alexander testified that, you know, there are many States that have land banks

92 0 0 and the legislation has to be tailored to what the needs of that State are. And Pennsylvania certainly did that with the Land Banking Law. We had very great support from this Committee. Representative Taylor, Representative Ross and others worked hand in hand with the Housing Alliance to get the land bank bill passed. And thanks to the Pennsylvania Legislature's six-plus years of looking at national models, bringing in experts and hearing from the community, we have a terrific bill that is working well across Pennsylvania. At last count, we mentioned there are locally created, locally controlled land banks. Hopefully, there will be a number soon. Last night the Borough of Pottstown was considering a land bank ordinance. So they may be added to the list. Within your materials, there's a map that shows the land banks that really go from Erie to Philadelphia. They touch on suburban, urban and rural communities, and the tool is working well. As some have testified this morning, it

93 0 0 can be a county, it can be a city, it can be multi-municipal. The land bank legislation allows for any of those entities to form a land bank based on the passage of a local ordinance. And again, they're locally created, locally controlled. They offer a modern system for recycling land that is designed to be lean and nimble and not as cumbersome as the old system that was slow and fragmented and required, you know, a really good problem solver to even get access to the properties and know which ones very available and know how to get your hands on them. So to begin talking about the progress, I want to touch on really the three key elements of what land banks do, acquire and hold properties, clear title and remove liens and then transfer the properties. There's been a lot of discussion about eminent domain powers this morning. Land banks do not have the power to acquire properties using eminent domain. The key acquisition power for land banks is they're able to go and negotiate with the tax claim bureau to acquire properties at judicial sale, the free and clear sale, without having to

94 0 0 bid against other bidders. And what happens at these judicial tax sales often is folks are not capable, they don't have the financial capacity or the expertise to redevelop the properties that they can acquire for as little as $,000. So the land banks are able to negotiate with the tax claim bureau a little to acquire some of those properties in advance without having to be the highest bidder at those public auctions. And then that power is being used across Pennsylvania by land banks today. In Westmoreland County, they've used it as part of their acquisition of parcels that were the former Monsour Hospital. That property was very blighted, had been abandoned for decades. And it's in the City of Jeannette. And now it's under contract for redevelopment. That was the use of the land bank's judicial tax sale acquisition power that allowed the land bank to acquire that parcel and now put it into the hands of a new developer that's going to bring taxes and benefits to that community. The second part of this is clear title. And clear title is important, as An testified. There are Intergovernmental Cooperation

95 0 0 Agreements, where the municipalities and they agree that any property that the land bank takes, they'll extinguish the liens and they'll have clear title to the properties, which scrubs it clean and enables it to be transferred to a new owner. So that is being used across the Commonwealth. The land banks are negotiating these Intergovernmental Cooperation Agreements with the taxing bodies, so that everybody is on the same page. The taxing bodies are partners with the land banks in bringing these properties back into productive use and they do that through these Intergovernmental Cooperation Agreements. The third element is the transfer of properties to new owners. And you've heard testimony from George, from An, from Pat and from others and Herb that properties are being transferred. That the land banks are moving properties from vacancy and abandonment into the hands of new owners and the land bank statute and the framework provide an opportunity for enormous community input and community participation in that whole process.

96 0 0 Land banks have to prepare and submit for public comment policies and procedures that are subject to public comment. Those policies and procedures will govern how land banks acquire property, how they dispose of properties, who is going to get the properties and for what price. So the process really supports a community investment in the redevelopment of these properties. So for some of the factors that contribute to the success, I would have to say local leadership is clearly at the top of the list. You've heard this morning from land bank leaders who, you know, have been the pioneers. They've gone forward, they've taken the risk, created the land bank, been very creative in establishing ways to fund and operate their land banks. An's discussion about the scrape of taxes and the way they've reached out to the philanthropic community to get support is just an example of what land banks across Pennsylvania are doing to try and fill in the needed resources to bring those land banks to fruition. The other key to the success is,

97 0 0 besides the local leadership, the creative problem solving is the framework of the Act itself. It really provides a way for the community to become involved. It builds public trust and public support for the land bank because all the taxing bodies have to be part of that work. The other part of it is that land banks and the legislation support the use of already available resources. We've heard testimony from housing authority representatives, redevelopment authority representatives and COGs that say, we have existing entities, we're using those, we're sharing services, we're sharing staff, but we still are keeping our land bank mission separate. We have our own board. And that land bank board is who makes the decisions. Even though it might be administered by the redevelopment authority or the housing authority, the land bank board works within the parameters of the State statute, the local ordinance and their by-laws and policies and procedures. Some of the challenges that others have testified to include that this is hard work and

98 0 0 that it's expensive. A lot of the properties have no value, so you have to be creative in trying to match them with adjacent property owners or assemble them for larger developments. And then, lastly, the challenge is SB. The Housing Alliance has put together a position paper that talks about SB and how it would upset the progress that Pennsylvania's land banks are making. And just to cover briefly what those are, again, to focus on what An also testified to, it abandons the local focus and local control of dealing with vacant, abandoned and blighted properties. The Land Bank Statute empowers communities, and SB empowers redevelopment authorities, but it doesn't give the same responsibilities that the Land Bank Law gives to the land banks. It merely gives powers to the redevelopment authorities without the corresponding responsibilities. Secondly, SB creates real risks for land banks. There is no protection of their territories as An testified to, and there could be competition between land banks and redevelopment authorities in terms of using

99 0 0 those special powers to acquire properties at judicial sales. The other key challenge with it is that it blends the use of eminent domain and land bank powers in one entity, which would be the redevelopment authority. And then, finally, we have a system that's working. It's really in its infancy. It's showing signs of success and should be allowed to develop and be used to its fullest potential before there are real efforts to change the framework for dealing with vacant and abandoned properties in Pennsylvania. I'm happy to take any questions that you have. MAJORITY CHAIRMAN M. KELLER: Do you have some? We have the Executive Director that has a question. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR CASTELLI: Winnie, in your experience with the land banks that have been established, could you just explain to us the process to establish a land bank? MS. BRANTON: Sure. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR CASTELLI: What actually has to be done? Do you have an idea of

100 what the average cost would be to start up a land bank? MS. BRANTON: Yeah. What's great about the land bank legislation is that it requires the passage of an ordinance by either the local government or the county. So the first thing is an ordinance has to be passed. If it's a multi-municipal land bank, you have to have an Intergovernmental Cooperation Agreement so that the municipalities all are on the same page and they all agree that this land bank is going to be operated together. So the first legal document you need is an ordinance and perhaps an Intergovernmental Cooperation Agreement. The Housing Alliance has provided a lot of training and technical assistance to communities across Pennsylvania and has a wealth of information on its land bank web page, which is PAblightlibrary.com, which has sample documents, ordinances, by-laws, policies and procedures, articles of incorporation. Every document that a land bank may have to create, there are samples on the Housing Alliance's web page. And I would say we've looked at numbers

101 0 0 0 in terms of the costs of organizing, and as An testified to, our number was also around $0,000. But again, there are many documents out there that communities are just sharing. Plus, the network that you've seen this morning, everyone is willing to help. So if I might have a question about George, how did you work out with the City of Scranton the arrangement to get the ordinance passed -- and in fact, I contacted George because of the City of New Castle and the City of Altoona were all in the same spot. Like there was a county that has some capacity, a city that has capacity. How can we work together? And George was able to share with us how he did that. So I would say the cost estimate would be around $0,000, but there's also a lot of available resources and help that's for free. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR CASTELLI: Have you heard any complaints that it's overly burdensome or complicated? MS. BRANTON: No. I think part of the issue is, yes, it would be way more efficient, right, if a redevelopment authority could just

102 0 0 0 exercise these powers; but efficiency is not really what the goal is here. The goal is to have a successful and community-supported and publicly available process that's transparent, accountable and nimble and able to respond and help create markets for these properties that have been dead to the market and just causing problems in communities. So I have heard very little, until SB, that the reason why people weren't forming land banks was because of the cost or the efficiencies. You know, it's a process and you want the community to be involved, but cost has not been raised as an issue until SB. MAJORITY CHAIRMAN M. KELLER: Representative Dean. REPRESENTATIVE DEAN: Thank you, Winnie, for your testimony. MS. BRANTON: Sure. REPRESENTATIVE DEAN: And I note from your testimony that it looks like you literally wrote the book on Pennsylvania land banks. So you're a good person to be in front of us. I'm thinking about the fiscal impact. And I saw in the testimony that An offered us just some of

103 0 0 0 the impact of the cost to municipal services, the loss of tax revenues. Through your office, do you have any sort of important data points, fiscal impacts that land bank legislation and ongoing program development across the State is having on our dollars, our fiscal impact? We're here, and we're constantly looking for how do we reduce property taxes. And it seems like this has a direct impact in that area, among others. MS. BRANTON: A couple of points: one is the Tri-COG's Cost of Blight Study that An referred to is used universally across the Commonwealth in educating local governments about how much it costs. Now, some communities have done their own superficially, but after seeing what the Tri-COGs did in terms of bringing all of that together, it's obvious. Everybody that you talk to at local government can say, we're spending money on police, fire, on our code enforcement department. All of these expenses that we're putting out, we're getting nothing back in return. So addressing blight in return is going to shift

104 0 0 0 those costs and expenses, but in terms of gathering data yet on what a land bank is achieving in terms of tax coming in, I think it's too soon. We were talking yesterday about the fact that the bill is five years old, but the first land bank wasn't created until six months after that. The second one wasn't created until a year after that. So many of these land banks are just getting started. So in terms of having data to show what their impact is, I don't think that's available yet. But I certainly expect that that will be collected over time and hope that, you know, the legislature would be interested in seeing that data as it's collected and brought before you. REPRESENTATIVE DEAN: Yes. And just from An's numbers, just some very round numbers, you know, $0 million in municipal services going out and $ million loss of revenue in. And that's just those two data points. You magnify that across the State, it's quite remarkable. MS. BRANTON: The loss of household wealth, I remember seeing that data point and

105 0 0 0 thinking to myself, it's not just like the local governments spending money on things and we're paying taxes on that, but it's my property being impacted. I've been called and asked, how can we help homeowners who live near vacant properties and abandoned properties get fire and hazard insurance because they'll be dropped if somebody goes through the neighborhood and sees it or they'll have higher rates than others. So there are costs that individual homeowners are incurring that have to do with the broader problem of blighted properties. Understanding that and recognizing that is really important. REPRESENTATIVE DEAN: Okay. I think An wanted to contribute. MAJORITY CHAIRMAN M. KELLER: An, yes. MS. LEWIS: Just to begin to speak to your question, we have not done a follow-up study on the improvement of structures, but we have done a follow-up study on the effect of blighted land and the stabilization of those blighted lots and the improvement to the community in Allegheny County. And we have found that just simply

106 0 0 0 taking, in a regular community, simply taking one lot and cutting the grass appreciates the value around it somewhere between two and six percent. MAJORITY CHAIRMAN M. KELLER: All right. REPRESENTATIVE DEAN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. MAJORITY CHAIRMAN M. KELLER: All right. Thank you. Thank you, Winnie. MS. BRANTON: Thank you. CHAIRMAN M. KELLER: Appreciate it very much. I'm going to call the next two testifiers up together, Ryan Kuck and Aaron Sukenik. First of all, I want to thank both of you for agreeing to participate. Sitting through land bank discussion may not have been exactly what you two gentlemen actually do, but I think the thought behind my madness was the fact that there's a possibility of working together with redevelopment authorities and land banks with what each of you do. So with that, I'm going to turn it over

107 0 0 0 to Ryan and let you start. MR. KUCK: Thanks. Good morning. Thanks for the invitation, Ms. Goldbeck, Chairman Keller and Chairman O'Brien, who happens to be my Representative, who I guess is watching, and distinguished Committee members, I appreciate the opportunity. As you said, I'm here to share a little bit of a different message, which is sort of the power that urban agriculture can have in situations like this to take the tool of a land bank and other similar tools and hopefully have benefits to an entire neighborhood or entire city. I'm Ryan Kuck. I'm the Executive Director of Greensgrow Farms, which is a nationally-recognized urban agriculture project and rather unique in the world because of our social entrepreneurship model. We're 0 years old this month, which is a milestone I think few if any of ourselves thought we would reach. We're an urban farm in a post-industrial neighborhood called Kensington in eastern Philadelphia, which is rather notorious for being the center of the region's heroin trade,

108 0 0 0 but it's also a really proud community with a lot of resiliency and people that are used to making a lot from a little, but it's still not necessarily the place you would think of to start growing lettuce. We started with a pretty simple idea that growing food closer to where it was being eaten could be fresher, healthier, cheaper than something trucked across the country and maybe we can make enough money to create some jobs, create a little profit for ourselves and maybe take a corner of Philadelphia and create something positive for the neighborhood. That first year, we grew $0,000 worth of lettuce and put it in a station wagon and took it downtown to the fanciest restaurants in Philly. Twenty years later, we're still working on the profit piece, but we're a $ million social enterprise with over 0 employees making living wages. We create linkages and improve revenues for dozens of small regional farmers that are looking for access through the urban markets and really proving the agriculture is important to the health and vitality of our cities.

109 0 0 0 We're a non-profit, but over 0 percent of our revenue is earned income, and the rest is made up of grants and other contributions, which is pretty rare in our field. Urban agriculture is usually viewed as a charitable activity, but I think we're a case in point that there is economic value here. There is economic opportunity here. And if you look at the $00,000 houses selling around the farm now, every single one lists the farm in the MLS description. We have a residual impact on the neighborhood that goes well beyond what we can do individually. Our farm is built on a super fun site. We are a former galvanized steel site, an entire city block in Kensington that was abandoned for decades. It took years and years of activism from neighbors to get the EPA to come in, recognize what I quote very often as a real and immediate substantial threat to public health, to take that soil, deal with the dipping tanks that kids were playing in. Every time it would rain, contaminated soil would wash out into the neighborhoods and really were poisoning the neighborhood for many

110 0 0 0 years. And even after they were successful in getting the EPA to come in and take out all of the contaminated soil, clean up, cap with new soil and clean the lot, it still sat vacant for decades because no one could find value for this piece of land. And even though we weren't a direct recipient of the land bank process, because as you've heard, the Philadelphia land bank is still achieving its full potential, I believe, we were successful in that someone took a chance. There was a process for land to be taken from delinquent and irresponsible landowners and given to a civic organization. So our land is owned by the New Kensington Community Development Corporation, a local CDC that was a known entity and not just a crazy person with a shovel who wanted to grow food. That gave some legitimacy to the project. And 0 years on, we think we've earned the right to own it, but I'm working on that. I think it shows how the idea of a land bank can take risks on projects like this that can have meaningful impact over the long term and give them credence, give them legitimacy and give

111 0 0 them the opportunity to really develop and flourish. One of the things that I feel very passionate about is that agriculture is often viewed as an interim use. It's viewed as something, you can clean and green a lot until development happens. Maybe that is more marketable or is seen as more conventional in terms of building houses and other types of development, but I really believe and I think we've shown that having spaces like this, dedicated green space, through a land bank process that can prioritize and equate green use of the situations, urban agriculture, other parks as an equal development priority for our neighborhoods and having that open and transparent process that a land bank affords, allows us to better plan neighborhoods and better predict and get in front of other ways of displacement and gentrification that are happening in Philadelphia and make sure that these resources are available to everyone, that they have value and permanency in these neighborhoods, even as other forces come in. So we're still working on that. I think

112 0 0 we are very hopeful for what's been accomplished from the land bank in Philly, as Mr. Wetzel said, making sure we're inventorying and protecting some of the gardens that haven't been lost. We have half as many community gardens in Philadelphia as we did 0 years ago when I started this work because of displacement, because we haven't had the tools to get in front of things like the tax lien sales and other things and just getting in contact with and understanding who is taking care of spaces. But land is wealth and this presents a really unique and a powerful opportunity to give tools and opportunity for people in these neighborhoods to have real and immediate impact on where they live and ways people cannot and cheaper than other people can if you wait for things to happen, from grants or from other people stepping in from the outside. In 0 years, our visions and programs have changed considerably. You know, we used to grow lettuce in recycled rain gutters, but now we have,000 people a year that come to our gates. Really, we're a destination, an al fresco community center.

113 0 0 We have mobile markets that take farmer markets on wheels to community centers and schools. We have a community kitchen for small scale food entrepreneurs to get a leg up. One of our tenants won Shark Tank two years ago. We have the city's largest independent garden center and do a tremendous amount of workshops and all kinds of educational programs that all help not only sustain our bottom line but again provide that impact and make sure that we're following the credo that I have, which is the farm has to find value for everyone in the neighborhood. We can't just serve the people looking for organic lettuce. We really have to find value for every single person in that neighborhood, and I think we're really successful in doing that. But land rights and land tenure is really important for allowing us to have tools to build capital to invest in the future or in the next couple of years, being able to take a loan on the land to build a barn or whatever the next infrastructure piece is. It's something that's really important. And making sure that

114 0 0 these tools give legitimacy, give long-term leases to projects. It's is important to make sure these projects are successful. We came across this recently. We opened a new satellite farm in west Philadelphia and what took nine months in to get this farm, it took me four years to get just a year-to-year lease for this new plot of land because of all of the challenges facing how land is disbursed in Philadelphia and the different mechanisms as other testifiers were describing to aggregate parcels and figure out who the ownerships are and transfer them. So this process, it is happening, but it's definitely something that we could use more tools to do more efficiently and more actively. I think that's it. I'm happy to have a lot more, but in the interest of time, I'm happy to take questions and talk about specific details about our operation and business. And I definitely welcome everyone to come visit the next time you're in Philadelphia. We're a lovely place, especially in December. We have Christmas trees and wreaths

115 0 0 and all kinds of things all over the place and lights up. It's as close as you can get to going out to the country and chopping out your own tree, is to come to Greensgrow and walk through the whole forest. It's a pretty magical time. Thanks. Thanks again for the invitation. MAJORITY CHAIRMAN M. KELLER: Thank you. Aaron. MR. SUKENIK: Yeah, sure. Well, thank you for having me. Good morning. I think it's still morning. So I'm the Executive Director of the Hilltop Alliance, and the Hilltop Alliance is actually not an urban agriculture organization. We're an umbrella community development corporation for a coalition of south Pittsburgh neighborhoods. The geographic area of the city, if you're familiar at all, is kind of above and beyond Mount Washington and the South Side. And speaking of Mount Washington, the Mount Washington CDC is actually one of our member organizations. And between 00 and 0, the

116 0 0 Mount Washington CDC led the formal creation of what's called the Emerald View Trail Park. So through trail development, signage and maintenance, they measured that effect and found that they saw a value, an average increase value of percent on streets with well-managed trail entrances compared with values of like properties. So a light bulb went off for us that maybe there's something in this green space asset development area that we should look to scale. So going away, though, from Mount Washington, the other Hilltop neighborhoods have only seen really decades of decline. The median value of homes in the Hilltop are approximately a third of the city's, so ranging from $,000 to $,000 median, compared with $0,000 at the city median. So this green space asset development was prioritized as a way to restore homeowner equity. And this is important, specifically, because, you know, restored homeowner equity provides the ability to finance long deferred home improvements and maintenance. And also, knowing roughly, how much you're affecting

117 0 0 increased value, you know, that controlled growth through green space asset development makes it a market base benefit to buyers and also a justification for making the investment in the first place. But the added equity really prevents long-time homeowner displacement through the ability to safely stay in their home borrowing against higher appraisals in the event of something catastrophic. So really what I'm underlining here is a lot of people in the neighborhoods, if their roof collapsed tomorrow, they could not draw equity or have the savings to fix that. So as a strategy for building community, you know, through quality of life and through facilitating economic development, we began this business line of green space asset development, both large and small. You know, our mantra really with it, though, was to be highly strategic and know exactly what else we're really striving to leverage. So a few examples of those are adjacent -- and also, you know, with these examples, the additional value that they add that I'll remark on -- adjacent unbuildable lots, which is, you

118 0 0 know, I heard a lot of folks referring to land assemblies. This is basically a land assembly, but one thing that we did was assemble the properties with the city on the site of the historic curved incline called the Knoxville Incline and created a greenway. So many of the houses' backyards, you know, abut the greenway, the official greenway now, of what used to just be vacant land. And it now acts as a defined transportation asset that also connects two neighborhoods and their business districts. So just in the past couple of years, we've seen houses abutting the greenway selling for 0 to 0 percent more. So that's about a $0,000 price point compared to a $0,000 price point. With individual vacant lots, we started this Lots of Flowers Program, which we've been really utilizing the city's Adopt a Lot Program and paying for a contractor to mow, till and plant wildflower seeds and put worms in the lots and having a nearby resident steward the site to water, pick up litter, things like that. And the signage is showing the types of things being grown, kids love it.

119 0 0 And while it is too early to really measure the effect on sale prices, the immediate cost savings is maintenance in the city's mind. So the installations cost us about $,000, and it will require one mowing per year. And the city currently pays approximately $,00 per year to mow each vacant lot, okay. So this could essentially repay itself in two years with no thereafter maintenance costs. Neglected parks was another big one. We partnered with the Park Conservancy to complete master plans for parks and then pursued pretty high valued grants with national philanthropy sources. So we did get a $00,000 capital reinvestment grant in one of those parks. And that was then able to leverage another $0,000 for low-income homeowner exterior renovations, which then -- and all of those homes are actually on the three blocks that face the area of the park that's getting this $00,000 capital improvement. And then additionally, in the next two to three years, we'll have site control of six vacant homes on those same three blocks that we'll then renovate and rehab for, you know, for

120 0 0 0 probably an affordable sixty, roughly sixty to eighty percent median price point. And we're doing that through the city's property reserve process, which is -- gosh, it's certainly not a land bank, but basically, community development organizations work closely with the city to be able to put properties through the clearing title process that then are tagged for the community development organization to acquire from the city. And then lastly, which I think is the main reason why I'm sitting here, is large vacant land. So through some community planning, we identified significant vacant property and acreage owned by the city's housing authority. It was formally a barrack style apartment complex built at a time when really the city's population was at its peak, so that's in the early '0s. But by HUD definition now, and by current HUD scoring criteria, the site actually ranks very low for affordable housing because it's got limited public transit, it's not within walking distance to business districts or job centers. So it's really relatively isolated from the other business

121 0 0 districts in the area. So agreeing that some sort of housing should still be on the site, and also, you know, we would have to comply with that under the HUD deed and trust on the property, you know, we still sought to do something transformative with a large portion of the site. So this became this hilltop urban farm project on approximately 0 acres of the site. So by having such significant acreage, the urban agriculture opportunity there will be at a scale that makes it really more financial viable than a lot of smaller urban agriculture projects that you see in cities. So over the course of community planning and engineering site assessment, the final plan includes a youth farm, a production farm, including an on-site farmer's market, an events barn, a community farm and garden plots and a farmer development program. So the farmer development program, which is the one I usually get asked the most about, will serve really a need in the workforce development gap in the local food production economy. So it will train interested growers on

122 0 0 enhanced growing, not only that, but the business of farming and creating marked value added products. So at the end of a couple of years, they'll be in both a business and growing advanced position to be able to lease rural land in Allegheny County that's currently -- I believe I heard the other day the median age of a farmer in Allegheny County is. So a lot of that property is either, you know, going to become more housing development or sit fallow. So what the local land trusts are trying to do, including the Western PA Conservancy and the Allegheny Land Trust, is try to acquire those properties to get farmers to lease because they might not be able to afford the acreage. And so what we're doing is creating that pipeline of potential leasees. So even though it's very early, you know, in the development, the project has already, you know, gotten to be something of a regional identifier. And it will be the largest truly urban farm in the country and just within steps of residential neighborhoods that, you know, have seen, up to this point, about, you know, five decades of decline and disinvestment.

123 0 0 So that's it. MAJORITY CHAIRMAN M. KELLER: All right. Thank you. Very interesting stories and information. Any questions from any of the members? Yes, Representative Dean. REPRESENTATIVE DEAN: Thank you both for your testimony and the innovative stuff, although as you say, 0 years in the making, so not brand new. What I think is fascinating about it is the notion of talking about the issue of hunger. An awful lot of people in Pennsylvania know that we are an agriculture rich State and would assume that our hunger level is low, and it isn't. I'm from Montgomery County, 00,000 people in that county, 0 percent of whom are hungry. You know, that's 0,000 people in Montgomery County. And your county of Philadelphia, your number is twice that plus. So what I think is cool is that in addressing different problems, whether it's blight or you're adding value through green space development and trails, you know, improving property values where you are, you're

124 0 0 also tackling another issue that we ought to be able to tackle here in Pennsylvania because we are agriculture rich. So I just commend you for the innovative stuff you're doing. And maybe we see those numbers decrease. Thanks a lot. MAJORITY CHAIRMAN M. KELLER: Quick questions from me. Ryan, you spoke about agriculture on wheels -- MR. KUCK: Agriculture on what? MAJORITY CHAIRMAN M. KELLER: On wheels. MR. KUCK: On wheels, yes. MAJORITY CHAIRMAN M. KELLER: Can you elaborate a little bit on that? MR. KUCK: Agriculture on wheels, we have a mobile market. So they're pretty popular around the country. No one has quite figured out how to make them sustainable, but we give it a try. And actually a big part that helps is the WIC-managed Farmer's Market Nutrition Program. So I would say sometimes 0 to 0 percent of our income from the mobile market comes from these vouchers that seniors don't

125 0 0 have a place to redeem because you have to redeem them with a farmer, and there aren't that many farmers in Philadelphia. So programs like that are really the bread and butter and allow us to go and try new things in these neighborhoods, these sort of incentive programs. But yeah, so we have -- basically, we took an old bread truck. We have fruits and vegetable and we go out in the neighborhoods and try to find partners with community centers, schools, health centers, basically anyplace there's a conglomeration of people in one place at one time and try to put fresh fruits and vegetables at an affordable price in those places where those people are. MAJORITY CHAIRMAN M. KELLER: Well, one of the things that I've been investigating -- and I think I read an article that Ohio does it -- it's called bus stop farmer's markets. You know, it might be something that if the legislature can help identify that with you and make some of that happen, I could see that tying together with that. Aaron, on your side, have you reached out to the veteran groups in establishing

126 0 0 veterans being involved in that farming facility and actually being able to go out and lease those pieces of property? MR. SUKENIK: Yeah. And I know, actually, the Veterans Leadership Program in the county is located in south Pittsburgh. So we have been working with them. Also, we've been working with them a little bit on housing related things, too. So I don't know what internally their pipeline is, necessarily, but I mean we definitely have a preference for, especially south Pittsburgh-based individuals and entities. And actually another thing, just speaking of that, we have a relatively sizeable Bhutanese refugee community also. And so the community farm plots concept, which is next to the community garden, is largely for that community. And the reason is because prior to them, you know, settling in south Pittsburgh, they were in refugee camps for decades in some cases. But prior to that, they were rural farmers. So, you know, they come to south Pittsburgh with a real affinity for growing, you

127 0 0 know, their own food and the knowledge of how to do so, which has been really good for their participation in local community gardens of helping educate, you know, local south Pittsburghers, but they do have a preference of how that would be laid out that's different than what's necessarily our standard model for urban gardens. So that's what the community farm plots are. MAJORITY CHAIRMAN M. KELLER: Okay. Any other members? Christine. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR GOLDBECK: Yes. Thank you. I wanted to focus on something you hit on, reclaiming a property, planting wildflowers, inserting worms. And I think the important thing that I wanted to highlight about that is land banks, and anybody really dealing, you know, with the CDCs, land banks, there could be high costs in the mowing of the grass, the caring of these properties. So you're inserting worms, planting wildflowers, and it's essentially very low maintenance for about $,000?

128 MR. SUKENIK: Yeah, one mow a year in October. 0 MAJORITY CHAIRMAN M. KELLER: Well, ladies and gentlemen, first of all, thank you to all of the testifiers. I certainly appreciate you taking the time to spend with us today. Members, thank you so much for being here today to listen to the testimony. I appreciate your indulgence and taking time out of a non-session day to actually be here in Harrisburg and listen to this hearing. So this hearing is finished. Thank you. (Whereupon, the hearing concluded.) 0

129 C E R T I F I C A T E I hereby certify that the proceedings are contained fully and accurately in the notes taken by me on the within proceedings and that this is a correct transcript of the same. 0 Tiffany L. Mast, Reporter Notary Public 0