COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA PUBLIC HEARING COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - - - Room 696, City Hall Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Tuesday, April 1, 2003 10:25 a.m. - - - BILL 030123 - An Ordinance requiring that any proposed rate filing with the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission on behalf of the City's natural gas distribution operation include a proposal to continue the existing senior citizen discount... BILL 030138 - An Ordinance enacting a new Chapter 19-2000 of the Philadelphia Code... - - - PRESENT: COUNCIL PRESIDENT ANNA C. VERNA COUNCILWOMAN JANNIE BLACKWELL COUNCILWOMAN BLONDELL REYNOLDS BROWN COUNCILMAN DARRELL L. CLARKE COUNCILMAN DAVID COHEN COUNCILMAN FRANK J. DI CICCO COUNCILMAN W. WILSON GOODE, JR. COUNCILWOMAN JOAN L. KRAJEWSKI COUNCILMAN MICHAEL A. NUTTER COUNCILMAN BRIAN J. O'NEILL COUNCILMAN FRANK RIZZO COUNCILWOMAN MARIAN B. TASCO - - - V A R A L L O, INCORPORATED LITIGATION SUPPORT SERVICES 1835 Market Street, Suite 600 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103 215.561.2220 215.567.2670 2 I N D E X BILLS 030123, 030138 PAGE MAMIE E. WIGGINS, Action Alliance of Senior Citizens of Greater Philadelphia ...... 4 JONATHAN STEIN, Community Legal Services ... 11 STAN SHAPIRO, Chief Staff Attorney ......... 22 JUDITH PRESTON, Crossroads Women's Center .. 27 NANCY CARROLL .............................. 28 TANYA WAGNER, Crossroads Women's Center .... 29 SAM WEINSTEIN, Gas Works Employees Union, Local 686 ............................. 31 PAT ALBRIGHT, Every Mother is a Working Mother Network ........................ 37 MILDRED BLACKWELL, Crossroads Women Center.. 44 MEGAN MCCOY, Center in the Park ............ 47 HARVEY CLARK, PGW .......................... 49 CHRISTINA COLTRO (ph), PGW ................. 58 3 4/1/03 - WHOLE - BILLS 030123, 030138
Good morning, everyone. This is the public hearing of the Committee of the Whole regarding Bill Nos. 030123 and 030138. I would ask Mr. McPherson to please read the title of the Bills.
Bill No. 030123, an Ordinance requiring that any proposed rate filing with the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission on behalf of the City's natural gas distribution operation includes a proposal to continue the existing senior citizen discount. Bill No. 030138, an Ordinance enacting a new Chapter 19-2000 of the Philadelphia Code entitled, "Discounted Rates for Natural Gas Distribution and Supply Services for Senior Citizens."
Thank you. I understand we have several panels who would like to testify. Would you call the panels, please.
Good morning. Please identify yourself for the record. 4 4/1/03 - WHOLE - BILLS 030123, 030138
My name is Mamie E. Wiggins. I am the President of the Action Alliance of Senior Citizens of Greater Philadelphia.
Thank you. Our organization is made up of 220 affiliated senior citizen clubs from all over the region, and we represent more than 120,000 senior citizens, including 12,000 dues paying members. We are here today to offer testimony on two City Council Bills that seek to extend the modest 13 percent Philadelphia Gas Works Senior Citizens 14 Discount. 15 Madam President, Action Alliance is the 16 organization responsible for the creation of senior 17 citizens gas discount about 30 years ago. The 18 leaders and members of the Action Alliance worked 19 with this Council and with Mayor Rizzo to offer our 20 residents over 65 and PGW customers a little help to help them stretch their monthly fixed incomes. Back then, the discount didn't seem like much because the cost of living was manageable to most senior citizens and retirees in Philadelphia. Over the years the program has grown to what is now a staple 5 4/1/03 - WHOLE - BILLS 030123, 030138 of retirement in Philadelphia. More than 71,000 seniors and retirees count on the percent gas 4 discount as a way to make ends meet today in 2003. 5 Senior citizens and retirees bear the 6 brunt of a bad economy, escalating houses, food 7 cost, and an unprecedented increase in healthcare 8 cost led by the criminal hikes in the cost of our 9 medications. As seniors can tell you, these days 10 every little thing helps in making our fixed income 11 last a little longer. 12 Madam President, the fact that we are 13 here today debating the fate of this unique program 14 for senior citizens is a testament to the failure of 15 some of our elected leaders to make the case for our 16 City, to defend what is good about this City and to 17 stand up to the political opportunists and 18 charlatans that double as policymakers in 19 Harrisburg. 20 I am not into name-calling but, Madam President, at my age there is a time to call it as I see it and tell it like it is. The so-called Natural Gas Deregulation Act is nothing but a sham perpetrated against the best interest of gas consumers in Pennsylvania and, particularly, 6 4/1/03 - WHOLE - BILLS 030123, 030138 Philadelphia. The Natural Gas Deregulation Act is why we are here defending something we gained 30 years ago. This senior gas discount program is in danger of elimination, and such an action will put in jeopardy the health and safety of many in Philadelphia, particularly those who are the most frail and least able to fend for themselves. We are here to sound the alarm about the potentially disastrous impact the proposed changes will have on Philadelphians who cannot afford to pay more for their utilities. Action Alliance is particularly concerned about proposed changes that will bar anyone turning 65 after September 1, 2003, from applying for the program or the other proposals aimed at establishing a vague means test for the gas discount after that date. We're also very alarmed that the Philadelphia Gas Works management and the City Administration submitted such plans without the approval of this City Council, as it is stipulated in the Home Rule Charter. This is yet another clear example that we are functioning in an era of confrontation rather than cooperation. The legislation that changed the natural 7 4/1/03 - WHOLE - BILLS 030123, 030138 gas sale and distribution system in Philadelphia left the door open for the Public Utility Commission to alter the benefit to seniors in the future. But it noted that only the Philadelphia City Council has the power to do so, not the Street Administration and not the Gas Works. The percent gas discount is one of 9 Action Alliance's most enduring victories. It was a 10 struggle we carried out and won in 1973, and we 11 insisted that this benefit be universal as an 12 incentive that the City of Philadelphia offer its 13 senior citizens to stay in the City. We give 14 millions of tax dollars to private corporations for 15 a few jobs.
So why not provide this incentive to 16 thousands of seniors so they can stay and contribute 17 to the well-being of this City? 18 Madam Chair, I say to you today that 19 proposals to eliminate or alter this program 20 constitute a step backwards in public policy and that such a proposal is particularly detrimental to the health and safety of senior citizens. In effect, PGW's plan is more like a percent additional tax on senior citizens. We understand that PGW is using this 8 4/1/03 - WHOLE - BILLS 030123, 030138 opportunity to improve its financing. But let me remind you that senior citizens did not create the mismanagement of PGW. Thus, they should not be called to balance the utility's books on their backs. It is true that the Philadelphia Gas Works is a real mess, that more efficient management can improve service and cost to rate payers. But to argue that the best way to improve the situation is to eliminate the gas discount is truly nonsense. Action Alliance is asking every elected official in Philadelphia to step forward and defend our benefit. During the public hearings held by this Council about the fate of the discount, we heard from senior citizens themselves, yes, about how much this modest benefit helps them every month to stay warm, healthy and independent, a goal that we all want for ourselves as we grow older. 50 per month to subsidize the program for 71,000 older adults in the City. Those young workers said very clearly that they don't mind paying that small surcharge and know that their grandparents and elderly neighbors get the additional help. Philadelphia is a City of compassionate 9 4/1/03 - WHOLE - BILLS 030123, 030138 people, a community true to the principles of togetherness the founding fathers and mothers laid out for us 300 years ago. Why destroy the goodness that is expressed in programs like the discount for seniors? Madam Chair, there are some cynics, and you have read their columns in the newspaper who say we seniors and retirees are greedy geezers. They say City Council is pandering to the senior vote in an election year. Well, all I have to say is that we are responsible civic members of this community and we take that responsibility very, very seriously. We have a desire and willpower to engage in the system. And, yes, we all know when to raise an issue and when not to raise one. But this fight is not about scoring points. This fight is about preservation of a program that means life and death for thousands of people, particularly those who are the most frail of us all. Those cynics, the newspapers, have no clue about what it is to be a senior citizen today in these United States. Madam President, let me quote from sociologist Eric Klineberg, the celebrated writer of the book Heat Wave, which analyzed the disaster in 10 4/1/03 - WHOLE - BILLS 030123, 030138 Chicago in the summer of 1995 that killed more than 1,000 people in one month, most of whom were elderly people living alone in the City's most poverty-stricken neighborhood. " I believe that this City should move forward to prevent such similarities. This winter, six seniors have perished to the cold in their homes. That is a failure in which we all share. Responsibility to do away with the senior citizens gas discount at this time will be no future worsen a very precarious condition. I challenge this City Council, this Mayor, to such a social breakdown and to cooperate in improving the lives of our elderly residents. Thank you very much. )
Thank you, Ms. Wiggins. 11 4/1/03 - WHOLE - BILLS 030123, 030138 Good morning.
Good morning, Council President Verna and fellow Councilmembers. My name is Jonathan Stein. I'm general counsel here at Community Legal Services, joined by Ed McCool (ph) from the CLS Energy Unit. The CLS Energy Unit provides advice, assistance and legal representation to hundreds of individual PGW low income customers who are experiencing problems either obtaining service from PGW or preventing termination of services needed for home heating, hot water, and cooking. CLS also represents low and moderate income consumer groups, like Action Alliance of Senior Citizens, CEPA, Tenant Action Group and Acorn in proceedings before the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission involving PGW's rates and customer service regulations. I'm here testifying on behalf of our eligible client community of low income Philadelphians who live at about twice the poverty level, which includes the working poor, the unemployed and underemployed, TANF and SSI beneficiaries, and those living on very low fixed incomes. 12 4/1/03 - WHOLE - BILLS 030123, 030138 My testimony today is consistent with that presented on behalf of CLS by Phil Bertocci, the supervising attorney of the CLS Energy Unit, who a couple of months ago provided testimony and detailed written comments on the Senior Citizen Discount phase-out proposal before the City Council Committee on Transportation and Utilities. In this testimony this morning I'll talk very briefly about two subjects. The first is the legal and policy framework in which Council is called to act now in addressing the discount. And the second concerns the stakes at issue for PGW's low income senior citizen customers. Our analysis clearly shows that PGW's low income discount program will not be an adequate substitute or replacement for low income seniors who will be barred after next September from participating in the Senior Citizen Discount program. Unless the City takes action, there will be no discounts at all for a significant portion of this low income senior population. We thus wholeheartedly support the two Bills before you today in order to prevent the deterioration of a critical part of the safety net for Philadelphia 13 4/1/03 - WHOLE - BILLS 030123, 030138 senior citizens. Concerning the first area of the policy and legal framework. A couple of years ago, the Natural Gas Choice and Competition Act transferred jurisdiction over PGW's rates and tariff from the Philadelphia Gas Commission to the Pennsylvania PUC. The effects are well known. PGW has been under PUC jurisdiction where the PUC decides PGW's rate cases and customers with disputes with PGW have in great numbers exercised their right to appeal PGW decisions to the PUC. Less well known is what the Act legislates about the Senior Citizen Discount. This is because that part of the Act is not hit yet, and it will only hit this September 1st, 2003. So let's begin with the Act itself. You have to understand that many to do not think that this part of the law is very clear, and no court has ruled on its meaning. However, just in the last week or so, the PUC has indicated how it interprets the provisions of this Act concerning the Senior Citizen Discount, and the PUC has ruled the following -- this is on March 21st. First, the Gas Choice Act provides that 14 4/1/03 - WHOLE - BILLS 030123, 030138 senior citizens who are receiving the discount as of September 1st, shall be entitled to continue to receive that discount. Second, continuation of the program for any other seniors, that is for new seniors hitting age 65 after September 1, will not happen unless the City acts by Ordinance to define City policy on the scope of the discount. And let me add here that the PUC Commission essentially rejected a hearing examiner decision recommendation to it, which said that it is solely in the discretion of PGW, the gas utility, to phase out the discount. And they said, no, it is a decision of the City of Philadelphia.
And to the best of my knowledge, the source of law for the City of Philadelphia resides in this Body right here in this room. My third point is that the City's program as set forth in an Ordinance to be submitted to the PUC, it must be approved by the PUC under its standards. What are those standards the PUC will use in deciding whether to approve a modified program, modified by an Ordinance of City Council? " The term "just and reasonable" has a specialized regulatory meaning, but is still one of the broadest, if not the broadest, standards in public utility law. It's basically a balancing standard in which the PUC would balance the interest of customers as a whole against the utility's need to generate sufficient revenues to maintain its financial health. And in judging whether a proposed modified senior discount program is "just and reasonable," the PUC may consider a whole range of factors, factors which I'm sure this City Council will take into account when its Ordinances are passed through this Body. These factors may come down to the following: A forceful request from the City which says, we have senior citizens who have made significant contributions to our community. They are living in urban conditions with modest to very low fixed incomes. They have significant health vulnerabilities. Access to gas services is a necessity of life with a clear public health dimension, especially for seniors. Many elderly are very isolated, despite our best efforts. And 16 4/1/03 - WHOLE - BILLS 030123, 030138 finally, it's quite reasonable for our City to want to use a small fraction of its resources of our municipally-owned utility to continue to protect elderly in their own homes. We estimate the marginal cost of continuing the senior discount for new seniors applying to be about 1 to $2 a month on customers' bills. And that's about the price of one Sunday Inquirer once a month. That's what we're talking about in terms of marginal cost here, for those who want to purchase the Sunday Inquirer or don't want to purchase the Sunday Inquirer. This is the message so far that the PUC has not officially heard from the City. This is the message that should take the form of an Ordinance. Both the proposed Ordinances that are under consideration by City Council seek to prevent the termination of the PGW senior discount as of September 1st. We applaud you for your initiatives and support of these measures. Let me conclude by just speaking briefly to the harmful consequences of not continuing the senior discount. Those advocating the phase out of the senior discount claim that such a phase out will 17 4/1/03 - WHOLE - BILLS 030123, 030138 not have a substantial impact on senior citizens. They assert that if the senior discount program remains closed to new participants, truly needy citizens who are seniors will not be left out in the cold. Rather, it suggests that they will be able to obtain similar discounts from PGW's low income program, the CRP or Customer Responsibility Program. Unfortunately, analysis shows that this assumption is very wrong. Most seniors just above the poverty line with average gas usage will lose out under CRP. The poverty line for a single person is now only about $9,000 a year. If you're a two-person household of seniors, it's just $13,000 a year. And that's the poverty line. We know that the poverty line is a very arbitrary standard that almost no one can really live on. It was set in the '60s. And we even have the former Labor Secretary under President Clinton, Robert Reisch (ph), saying it's almost meaningless today to use that as an index of what it takes to live. Let's just take one example of an elderly husband and wife, a low income senior citizen household. You're PGW heating customers with average usage, a yearly bill of, say, about 18 4/1/03 - WHOLE - BILLS 030123, 030138 $1,250 a year. That's about $100 a month. This household's gross income is $1,344 monthly.
That's about $16,000 a year, or just a bit above the poverty level, about 135 percent of the poverty level. That level, by the way, is low income enough to be eligible to get the federal energy assistance program called LIHEAP. Right now, if one of those seniors is 65, they would be eligible for a 10 percent discount, reducing the bill from $100 a 11 month to $80 a month. If neither senior in this 12 household turns 65 until after September 1, there 13 will be no discount for them without a City 14 Ordinance. The program will be closed to them. 15 What about PGW's CRP program, the 16 Customer Responsibility Program? Will it help, as 17 PGW claims? The answer is no. Although they may 18 get some help if they had very high gas usage, the 19 program will not provide a discount to this 20 particular household. Thus, continuation of a crucial 30-year-old safety net for Philadelphia's elderly is a problem which Council is called upon to solve. The issue is not a hypothetical one. North Philadelphia senior, Inell Ward, age 64, because she is not yet 65, cannot today 19 4/1/03 - WHOLE - BILLS 030123, 030138 access the senior discount this year, despite her trying to live off a small social security survivor's check of $933 a month, a bit above the poverty level. " Seniors like her who are struggling now will have an even harder time if the City does not act to preserve the discount. We should not be asking our elderly to be choosing between food and heat. Thank you for this opportunity to testify. )
You're welcome. Thank you. Are you testifying, sir? Thank you both very much.
I think what the City of Philadelphia is attempting to do is absolutely outrageous. The Mayor responded to the business 20 4/1/03 - WHOLE - BILLS 030123, 030138 community about Chestnut Street, but apparently he doesn't care at all about the many thousands of senior citizens. It's absolutely outrageous. At the time the City had money for SUVs for practically everybody, but there's no money for senior citizens. Why are we sitting here so quietly? I think the outrage ought to be expressed by everybody, everywhere. This is Democratic City. The Democratic Party who is providing the leadership for the City says that their concern is the welfare of working people and poor people, yet it's the Democratic Party's leadership in this City that's causing all of this trouble. Let's stop that $18 million payment from PGW, that goes really not to the City of Philadelphia, but to all the campaign contributors. Let's begin thinking about the people in the City of Philadelphia. Our Mayor is courageous enough to reverse his decision on the closing of Chestnut Street. I want to applaud him for that. What he ought to do is show the same courage this time, not on behalf of business interest, but on behalf of the senior population of the City of Philadelphia that's contributed so much to the welfare of the City of 21 4/1/03 - WHOLE - BILLS 030123, 030138 Philadelphia. Mr. Mayor, I'm asking you to withdraw this outrageous request that PGW made. The $18 million that we extract from PGW is nothing compared to the need of the senior citizens. And I think that what I'm going to be proposing is something like a boycott of all taxes by senior citizens if this proposal goes through. There is absolutely no basis for treating senior citizens as if they were enemies of the City, when they're the main strength of the City. It's what gives Philadelphia character; its concern, its consideration for all the people who make up the population. So let's speak loudly. Let's be unhappy about what's being proposed. The State is telling us that we don't have any power to determine -- we in City Council, and we in the City of Philadelphia have to go to Harrisburg to have decisions made that affect only Philadelphians. It's sheer nonsense. So I salute the people who are testifying today. I think we've got to take a sense of outrage that this matter should even be coming before City Council. Thirty years after 1973 we're 22 4/1/03 - WHOLE - BILLS 030123, 030138 crossing out the few good things the City of Philadelphia has ever done on behalf of senior citizens, and we're saying, "Let's make more money available to the rich and let's take it from the poor." And we're not going to permit that. I'm sure this City Council is not going to permit that. And if it did, it ought to be tossed out, like everybody ought to get tossed out that supports the end of the Senior Citizen Discount. Thank you, Madam President. (Applause.)
Good morning, everyone. My name is Stan Shapiro. I'm Chief Staff Attorney for City Council. I've been asked by Councilman Ortiz to give some preliminary reactions to the opinion of the Law Department, which has been distributed to everybody and is on everybody's desk this morning. I must say I'm a little handicapped 23 4/1/03 - WHOLE - BILLS 030123, 030138 because this opinion was distributed just 20 minutes before the hearing and I haven't had a chance to review it in great detail. I do want to say I have great respect for the Law Department, but there are some things about this opinion which are rather disappointing and, frankly, they tend to characterize most of the opinions of the Law Department these days. First is, no presumption of the legality of the Ordinance and this Council's Ordinances have been held by law to be the equivalent of statutes and are entitled to a presumption of legality. There's nothing in the opinion which reflects that. Also, of course, as Council is the Law Department's client, one would think the Law Department would take into consideration Council's views on the Act, the Gas Choice Act, which is the basis for its opinion that this legislation is invalid, or at least one of the bases. Council has filed litigation seeking to declare that Act unconstitutional, thus displacing the provision which is the basis for the PUC's decision saying that new applicants for the Senior Citizen Discount should be denied. So if there were no Act, then the 24 4/1/03 - WHOLE - BILLS 030123, 030138 previous situation would be in place and the discount would be in place. There's no reference at all to that litigation. And, of course, the Law Department, in other litigation, has taken the position that a number of actions of the legislature recently that have overturned the Charter and Council actions are illegal, but they don't seem to be at all concerned about that in this opinion. Another characteristic that's interesting and disappointing is that despite the presumption of legality, this opinion, as many other recent opinions, only cites its own opinions, previous opinions. There's no authority, there's no 15 case law whatsoever that's cited in this opinion. And one would think that in declaring an act of this Body illegal, that it might wish to find some case law which would support that position. But there is no case law of any kind. The opinion which is out there, which is on the record, which is relevant, in addition to what Jonathan Stein cited in the opinion of the PUC, is reflected in the opinion of the administrative law judge which was reviewed by the PUC. One would have thought there might have some reference to that 25 4/1/03 - WHOLE - BILLS 030123, 030138 in the opinion, that is because assuming that the Act is in fact legal, the officials of the PUC and the judges of the PUC certainly speak authoritatively about the meaning of the Act which is being applied here. And the ALJ, whose final decision was upheld with respect to the Senior Citizen Discount, at least temporarily until the City acts, looked at the Act and said this, "thus, the Act acknowledges" -- and this has been distributed to everybody also on Council. There's a two-page handout. The first page is a section from the Gas Choice Act which relates to the Senior Citizen Discount. But the second page are two paragraphs from the opinion of the administrative law judge who reviewed this matter initially. " The program being the Senior Citizen Discount. And later she upheld PGW recommendation because she construed it wrongfully as being the opinion and desires of this Body. Saying at the end that she recommends that PGW be able to implement its proposal, not because I agree with it or because I think it comports with 4/1/03 - WHOLE - BILLS 030123, 030138 Commission policy, PGW has pointed out that it is unlike all the gas utilities regulated by the Commission.
And one of the key differences is its creation as a municipal utility through Philadelphia's City Charter and its relationship to Philadelphia's City Council. So there is acknowledgment by the PUC that City Council has authority over the program, but for some reason the Law Department has omitted any reference to this. So I think the opinion is rather disappointing and I think its conclusions are unfounded.
Thank you, Mr. Shapiro. Are there any questions from Members of the Committee? (No response.)
Good morning. Please identify yourself for the record and proceed 27 4/1/03 - WHOLE - BILLS 030123, 030138 with your testimony.
Good morning. My name is Judith Preston and I'm here with Crossroads Women's Center. Madam President and Members of Council, I would like to address what seems to me to be a problem that we're experiencing through history. It seems like there's a profit-making agenda over a human agenda. They sold the mentally ill down the river when they closed the state hospitals, sending many of the patients to "live-in homes" in our communities. Then they sold the kids down the river when they privatized the schools. Imagine stockholders making money on kids' education. Now they intend to sell the poor and folks on a fixed income down the river by privatizing our public gas company. We all know what happened in California when they privatized the utilities. At the time, they said it wouldn't happen here. But it's beginning. Back door meetings between the PUC and the gas company, with the PUC consenting to cut the 20 percent discount for seniors. I'll be a senior in three years, and I want to protect my interests. I see my gas prices 28 4/1/03 - WHOLE - BILLS 030123, 030138 going up. And if privatization takes effect, there will be no regulation and the sky will be the limit. Can we learn from history? Deregulation equals privatization and contempt for public welfare. We can't let it happen again. We want City Council to fight for us. Support the two Bills before you today. Thank you very much, Madam President. (Applause.)
My name is Nancy Carroll. I'm a new senior citizen. My birthday was just in March. Thank God it was in March and not in September, because if it was September I would be left out. I would not get the percent discount 18 that they give seniors. And I want to say that I 19 think that 25 percent should be left for all the 20 other seniors that's coming along, because America 21 is brought up on seniors' backs. We are the seniors 22 that are bringing forth America. And the seniors 23 that's coming behind us is going to be left out if 24 they take the discount away. We depend on that 25 discount because we need it. We're on fixed incomes 29 4/1/03 - WHOLE - BILLS 030123, 030138 and we need every penny we can get and more. Thank you. (Applause.)
Hello. My name is Tanya Wagner from the Crossroads Women's Center. I'm here today as a young woman, a young person, to voice my support for the PGW Senior Citizen Discount with no 11 means testing for two reasons. First, I'm part of a family that has cared for me and made sure that I have what I need to survive up until this point. That family includes parents, who, for the time being, are doing fine. But as they are just nearing the age of becoming senior citizens, I know that one day they might need my care and support. Like so many other women, many in worse financial situations than I, I maybe counted on to provide them primary care and help them pay their bills. I want to be sure that the 20 percent discount is still in place for their sake and for mine, especially in an unpredictable economy. Secondly, I will hopefully be a senior 30 4/1/03 - WHOLE - BILLS 030123, 030138 citizen myself one day. I know that if this discount goes through, we'll be one step closer to privatization of our gas services, a step that has only made things worse in regard to other formerly public services. In what should be the prime time of my life, I want the public services I need to stay ensured for all of us. Thank you. (Applause.)
I forgot to say that I'm with the Crossroads Women's Center.
Thank you very much. Take your time, please. Can we one of the Sergeant-at-Arms help, please? Thank you. Our next panel will be?
Sam Weinstein, Pat Albright, representatives from Center in the Park, and Mildred Blackwell.
Good morning. Please identify yourself for the record and proceed with your testimony. 31 4/1/03 - WHOLE - BILLS 030123, 030138
Good morning, Madam President and Councilmembers. My name is Sam Weinstein. I'm here representing Gas Works Employees Union, Local 686. I'm the workers who work at PGW. I'm also part of the SOS Coalition, Save Our Services Coalition, which has collected more than 11,000 signatures opposing cuts at PGW, including the senior discount. I wanted to speak today in support of these two Bills. When last I testified here, I was hoping against hope that City Council might be able to act quickly enough to forestall PUC action removing the Senior Citizen Discount. Unfortunately, as we all know, as we sit here on April Fools Day, the discount is history for anyone not registered in the program as of September 1, 2003, unless these Bills become law and get the approval of the PUC. The fact is, that PGW asked the PUC to remove the discount, without reference to City Council, in direct opposition to the conclusion of a study which it itself had commissioned, and is not proposing that any savings be returned to consumers. They don't intend to lessen the bills that consumers get as a result. We don't know what the total cost 32 4/1/03 - WHOLE - BILLS 030123, 030138 of massive bonuses given to more than 50 PGW managers in the last few months is, but we suspect that it is greater than any savings realized from cutting the senior discount over the next couple of years. At the same time, our members have gone without a raise for quite some time. A right wing idealogically driven Pennsylvania PUC was only too glad to go along with the request of PGW and help cut the senior citizens of Philadelphia off at the knees. The State seems intent on going after the extremes first. Having privatized our kids, they now attack our parents and grandparents. What is clear is that PGW is helping the State determine social policy for the City of Philadelphia through a Body wholly owned by the City. But the next time mismanagement of PGW calls as a budget deficit, the State will not be the one coughing up money to bail it out. It will be the City and the people of Philadelphia. Let me reiterate that. It is not senior citizens who are responsible for the financial straits that PGW is in, though apparently, some would like them to pay for it. The billions of dollars of debt was caused by mismanagement, in some 33 4/1/03 - WHOLE - BILLS 030123, 030138 cases criminal mismanagement that the courts have had deal with. Senior citizens are being targeted to help pay the interest on that debt. Just the interest. And, you know, I have referred to a right wing PUC, but I find myself in a world a little like Alice's Wonderland, where nothing is as it should be. I gather that the Republican candidate for Mayor of Philadelphia opposes doing away with the discount, while the Democratic Mayor has done nothing to prevent its demise. This is truly through a looking glass darkly. I must reiterate what the others have said, that the vast majority of seniors are women of color and that the vast majority are far from rich. I would note that our members go into seniors' houses. They see as they do their work, because those are their working conditions, they see the situation that seniors are in and they know that those people are not rich and that they need this discount. Let me comment on one proposal that has been bandied about, that the discount should be means tested. PGW does deal with several programs 34 4/1/03 - WHOLE - BILLS 030123, 030138 that are indeed means tested, such as the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program, or LIHEAP. But PGW itself has admitted that 50 percent of the people in Pennsylvania eligible for LIHEAP live in Philadelphia, people that have that low a level of income, but only 28 percent of the money allocated for the state actually goes to residents of Philadelphia. It gives you some idea that half the people that should be entitled to LIHEAP are just not getting the money. This is indicative of what happens with means tested programs.
They fail to get resources to the people that need them. On the other hand, what is clear is that rich senior citizens, contrary to propaganda on the other side, don't apply for the discount. Twenty percent of the people who would be entitled to it, don't apply. They don't need it and they don't apply for it. And I can't help but notice that the cost of the discount is approximately $20 million annually. Over the next five years, the savings from this policy will be minimal, maybe one or two million a year. But even if the whole $20 million was saved, that would be the equivalent of about 20 35 4/1/03 - WHOLE - BILLS 030123, 030138 minutes worth of cruise missiles that rained down on Baghdad in one night, just minutes. ) 5
I will end with a story 6 which has horrified me and my members. Last week 7 PGW sent out 46,000 shutoff notices. Many thousands 8 of those shutoff notices went to senior citizens. 9 That's because they thought they were the poorest 10 section of the population. We think maybe 6,000 or 11 so were actually in genuine arrears, which gives you 12 some indication of what will happen if the Senior 13 Citizens Discount disappears over time. The results 14 will be that that 6,000 will not be 6,000. It will 15 be 30, 40, 50 or 60,000. That's what we will be 16 looking at every April 1st, shutting off all the 17 senior citizens in Philadelphia. 18 But that's only the beginning of the 19 story. We understand that even the widow of the man 20 who created the Senior Citizen Discount, Councilman Rizzo's mother, received a disconnect notice. I mean, this the height of absurdity. I've talked to the Councilman and he says his mother has never missed a payment, and I believe him. This was not an accident. I repeat, this is not an accident. 36 4/1/03 - WHOLE - BILLS 030123, 030138 Apparently, PGW did not get enough applications for LIHEAP this year, at least in part because their closure reduction in the hours of operation of the district customer service centers, which is where you make such an application, that's because you couldn't apply anymore. It was much more difficult to apply, another stellar management decision. However, there is another side of LIHEAP that they still had a chance of getting their hands on called Crisis Grants, only available to people who had been given notice of disconnect. Apparently, they hoped by sending out these notices of disconnect they would get people to apply and receive the Crisis Grant money, which would then go to the company. This is federal money administered by the State. Sending 46,000 disconnect notices out to seniors, among others, the vast majority of whom don't deserve such notice, with the intent of getting your hands on federal money gets dangerously close to fraud. It is indicative of what PGW thinks of seniors. In summary, I ask you to make it clear that we have had enough of an unelected Body making public policy, that we restore the status of those 37 4/1/03 - WHOLE - BILLS 030123, 030138 who have stood by Philadelphia through good times and bad times. That we all rededicate ourselves to making life easier, not more difficult, for the poorest section of society. Please pass these Bills to support senior citizens. (Applause.)
Good morning. I am Pat Albright, representing Every Mother is a Working Mother Network, and also Crossroads Women's Center. We're pleased to be here today to lend support to two very important Bills introduced by Councilman Ortiz and Council President Verna. These Bills deal with what to us are extremely important issues. The continuation of PGW's Senior Citizen Discount as is, and the right of City Council to a say in policies affecting the health and welfare of the people in Philadelphia. To us, these issues are critical ones, and we point out that those who would be most harmed by the termination of Senior Citizen Discount Program, as had been said before, would be overwhelmingly women, and mostly women of color. As we said in our testimony to the Utilities and Transportation Committee on February 38 4/1/03 - WHOLE - BILLS 030123, 030138 20th, many of those who utilize our center, already struggling to make ends meet, would be put in even more desperate financial straits by PGW's proposed ending of its Senior Discount Program. Grandmothers and grandfathers, too, many of whom are seniors, are increasingly counted on to care for grandchildren and others in need of care. They are already stressed to the limit financially and otherwise, and must not be asked to bear an additional burden to help bail out PGW or to prepare it for privatization. We understand that the PUC in its recent ruling has also paved the way for the sale of PGW, and we strongly oppose this move that would make the needs of people even less central to its operation. As it is, even with the discount in place, those of us not who are not yet seniors find it painful to see our parents or grandparents working at McDonald's in their golden years so-called, despite declining health and often with disabilities because their income is pitifully low, even after a lifetime of working, and they can't afford even the bare necessities of life. Again, it's the women who are worse off 39 4/1/03 - WHOLE - BILLS 030123, 030138 in retirement. As Crossroads Women's Center director Phoebe Shellenberg (ph) testified at the Germantown public hearing, due to the pay gap between men and women on the wage job, and lack of any pay for the work of raising children and caring for people, women's pensions, including social security, are either nonexistent or much lower than men's. Older women's income is, in fact, half that of older men. When we're talking about women of color, the statistics are even worse. At the Germantown hearing, which took place on March 21st, hosted by the Crossroads Women's Center and the Every Mother is a Working Mother Network, every single testimony was in favor of maintaining the discount as is, if not increasing it, to keep up with the spiraling gas cost. All spoke of how desperately seniors need such assistance in paying their bills. The same was true at a hearing the previous day in South Philly. Yet the PUC finds it acceptable to approve cutting the program. It's right that City Council made this move to intervene. And apparently in Harrisburg, they don't care that several seniors died this winter and many 40 4/1/03 - WHOLE - BILLS 030123, 030138 more lives would be at stake if the discount were cut. Is this how the richest country should be treating its seniors? We see billions going to war, yet our senior citizens lives are apparently considered expendable. This is intolerable. While women seniors who work at or make use of our center today depend on the discount, those of us who will be new seniors in the future will need it just as much or more, given the way gas prices have risen. We have paid our dues over many years and want what we are owed when we turn 65. We totally oppose any attempts to means test the program, which would amount to just another way to cut it. Means testing would result in many who are eligible and need help not getting it. We're glad to see that both Bills oppose such a move.
The Crossroads Women's Center and Every Mother ia a Working Mother Network are both members of the Save Our Services Coalition that Sam mentioned earlier that was formed to oppose the PGW cutbacks in services, including the closures and cutbacks of PGW neighborhood customer service offices. The elimination of two of six neighborhood 41 4/1/03 - WHOLE - BILLS 030123, 030138 offices and the cuts in hours of the remaining offices have already created hardship for many, including seniors who rely on these offices for paying their bills or applying for the senior discount, LIHEAP grants or for other financial assistance in paying their bills. Sam has documented it. We've seen some of the results of those cuts already. Women, again, are particularly impacted, as we're often the ones paying those bills. Many of us single mothers or grandmothers, including welfare mothers, are already stressed by the demand of welfare so-called reform, who end up having to travel greater distances to reach an office, often with children in tow, are paying more at check cashing offices. Impacted as well are people with disabilities, people without checking accounts or phones or in need of bilingual services. Again, the PUC has seen fit to approve such closures and cutbacks in the neighborhood district service offices. We hope that City Council will address this issue in future legislation. On March 8th, women in Philadelphia and in 70 countries worldwide took action on the brink 42 4/1/03 - WHOLE - BILLS 030123, 030138 of war on Iraq as part of the 4th Annual Global Women's Strike. We pressed governments everywhere to invest in caring, not killing. We support these two Bills and urge their passage by all of City Council who have already pledged their support. We urge Mayor Street to come on board to support these Bills and help move Philadelphia towards the investment in caring for all who live here. )
Is anybody here representing the Mayor or the City Administration?
So the Mayor has full knowledge of it? I think the fine people here are preaching to those already convinced. I think it's a disgrace that the Mayor doesn't have representatives here and that he's not here. He's 43 4/1/03 - WHOLE - BILLS 030123, 030138 the one who ought to be hearing it. (Applause.)
He ought to be listening. And I think the people here ought to give consideration that when at the end of this hearing I think we all go down to the second floor and ask to meet with the Mayor. (Applause.)
Let's tell the Mayor it's part of his duty. I believe he knows it, but it is certainly part of his duty to listen to the people of Philadelphia so he'll know how they feel about things and why he made a wrong decision here. To Mr. Weinstein, I'd say, I liked your statement, but I think you let the City of Philadelphia off too easily. It's not just the State that's committing a crime, it's the City of Philadelphia that's trying to, in effect, kill off the senior citizens. And I think we've got to let the Mayor know how we feel about it. That's the only way a Mayor, any Mayor, responds, when he knows how the people feel. Right now the Mayor is shut off. When the business people on Chestnut Street and that area thought their livelihood was 44 4/1/03 - WHOLE - BILLS 030123, 030138 endangered -- and that's how we feel, don't we, about the cutting off of the Senior Citizen Discount. (Applause.)
They went to the Mayor. And I think we ought to do that and I would respectfully suggest that the people here ought to think about it. And if they do, Councilman Ortiz and I will be prepared to join you in the request to go down to the second floor with you to request an immediate meeting with the Mayor so he can hear this report. He ought to be here. (Applause.)
Thank you. Councilman Ortiz, your light is on, but we do have two other witnesses.
Thank you. Please identify yourself for the record.
Madam President and Councilmembers, I am Mildred Blackwell from Crossroads of Women, and I'm a senior. Good morning. 45 4/1/03 - WHOLE - BILLS 030123, 030138 I would like a few true answers. Why do the seniors have to suffer for the PGW executives' high living? And why wasn't their executives reprimanded to pay back the money or serve time in prison? No. The seniors are paying, and it's sad. It's sad. PGW executives, again, who absorb the missing management of the funds for the big time computer system that never worked. Again, the seniors. PGW cut back and closed some of their offices. That's very bad for seniors. We did not have money to pay the gas now and you have to pay for sending your payments in, for instance, pay stations or money orders and your postage. Everyone does not have a checking account. But you still have to pay that postage for that check. Whereas, if an office is open, it's probably in their general area, they walk around there for a little exercise, pay it, and get their receipt instantly. The handicapped seniors traveling for open offices is very inconvenient. PGW service is terrible. It is terrible. I know things are changing, but PGW 46 4/1/03 - WHOLE - BILLS 030123, 030138 started an insurance plan, okay? At first they came out right away when you called. And now, you call and they say, hold the line a while, and they play music. You hold so long, you can't hardly hold the phone because your hand is getting cold. Then when some rep does come to the phone, they tell you it may be a couple of days, but you paid that insurance policy for that year. What do they want us to do? Go into hypothermia or just freeze to death like we have this year already? The question is, are we insured to pay for getting no consideration at all? Why are we paying? So I'm saying today, please, we don't need to privatize anything. We need to speak to our Mayor. We need to get -- that's what I would call grass roots. To the City Council, I plead to the entire Council to please pass these two Bills. And being concerned with us, please, if we go down, we ask you to please go down with us fighting for this Bill. I thank you. (Applause.)
Thank you very much. 47 4/1/03 - WHOLE - BILLS 030123, 030138
Good morning. My name is Megan McCoy and I'm a social worker at Center in the Park. Today I speak on behalf of over 1,000 home-bound older adults that receive services through Center in the Park and who are unable to be here today. There are thousands of home-bound seniors in the City of Philadelphia. They cannot leave their homes as easily as you or I. In the winter months, they must run their gas heat all day and all night. The Senior Citizen Discount helps to offset the cost of heating their homes. Yet gas prices rise, insurance copays rise, and the mere cost of living rises. But these things rise at a rate that is disproportionate to the meager increases given by Social Security every year. If Social Security give them a $10 raise, you know that the cost of Medicare is going to go up $12. The older adults that I represent live on a fixed income and their needs and expenses outweigh their means. Receiving PGW's 20 percent discount means that a home-bound senior can fill a prescription or buy a little extra food. If this discount were taken away, the results would be 48 4/1/03 - WHOLE - BILLS 030123, 030138 disastrous. Our older adults need this discount. It is not a luxury; it is a necessity. So on behalf of our home-bound seniors and the many Center in the Park advocates who provide them with services, I ask PGW to respect older Philadelphians. And I respectfully ask City Council to support the Bills before you today. Thank you. (Applause.)
I have just been advised that the Mayor has asked Mr. Joel Avery from the Communications Office to sit in on the hearing and to report back to him what most of the testimony was about. At this time, the Chair recognizes Councilman Ortiz.
We don't have anyone here from the PFMC Board, and we do have Harvey Clark. But Harvey, although I appreciate and I like Harvey Clark very much over the years, and has been a friend in all of his jobs that he's had in the City, he's the Vice President of Marketing and Corporate Communications, so he can only state what Mr. Knudsen stated before in the hearings we had in 49 4/1/03 - WHOLE - BILLS 030123, 030138 Wilson Goode's committee when we began this investigation into the percent discount. 4 I suggest, Madam Chair, since Harvey 5 Clark cannot really change policy or state about any 6 changes of public policy, that his testimony be 7 included in the record because it states what the 8 public policy of PGW is; is that right, Mr. Clark? 9
I'm Harvey Clark, Vice 14 President of Marketing and Corporate Communications. 15 It's fine to just enter my testimony on the record, 16 but also with me is PGW's chief counsel, Abby 17 Pozefsky, the City Solicitor office is represented, 18 our outside counsel, and Dan Clearfield from Wolf 19 Block is also represented. 20
And that's all fine and good, but they don't make the public policy, sir.
No. But I think that they offer a position -- most of the discussion that I've heard so far, Councilman, has been on legal issues 50 4/1/03 - WHOLE - BILLS 030123, 030138 and I think these --
Well, we're dealing here with the authority of City Council's ability to legislate on the issue. And I believe that is a right that we have. We know what the public policy of PGW's stance is on this issue at this point. And we do have a situation in which we would have preferred somebody from the board to come in and testify as to that, but we do have that testimony already on the record. And it is part of the overall investigation that we have done. And I read your testimony and it essentially is a rehash of the previous testimony given by Mr. Knudsen. So, Madam Chair, I say that we put the testimony of Mr. Clark's into the record as Mr. Knudsen's position and the Board and we continue on with the hearing. Thank you.
Very well. Thank you. Do we have anyone else to testify on either Bill? Mr. Weinstein, I listened to you very attentively and you talked about shutoff notices going out, and I know that we received many calls, 51 4/1/03 - WHOLE - BILLS 030123, 030138 as my colleagues have. You say 46,000 such notices went out?
Well, very quickly calculating, it had to cost PGW anywhere between $12,000 and $13,000 just for postage.
They thought it was going to be a good investment because they were going to get so much money back through the Crisis Grants.
And how many people have, in fact, paid their bill? Everybody that I spoke to had paid their bill.
Part of what happens, which is part of the absurdity -- I didn't want to go through all the details -- but part of what happened is, a lot of people are on a budget plan, a level payment plan, so they pay $100 every month through the summer. Whatever their actual usage is, they're paying the same amount and it gets sorted out in the end. And, of course, in the winter your bill will be fairly high; in the summer your bill 24 will tend to be much lower. And so they sent notices out apart from anything else, disconnect 52 4/1/03 - WHOLE - BILLS 030123, 030138 notices to people who are on that level payment plan, just because they were paying $100. But that bill was actually $250. Of course, that would have been made up in the summer, right, when they would have been paying $100, but their bill would have $20. And normally it is not -- you don't send out disconnect notices to people who are on that plan. That's why they signed up for the plan is so that everything would get budgeted throughout the year.
Madam Chair, it's even worse than that. People that aren't even on the budget plan received that notice. Apparently, the computer identified customers that had a dollar amount over a certain dollar, and even though the bill hadn't been sent or the money due, received that notice and then the next day got a call from the Crisis Grant, a computerized call, suggesting people sign up for the Crisis Grant. Again, people that owed no money to PGW, no balance due. I'd like to hear, Mr. Clark, how they're 53 4/1/03 - WHOLE - BILLS 030123, 030138 going to communicate back, apologize or whatever? Even though it's an expenditure to the company, they upset a lot of people unnecessarily with this notice, especially our seniors. One in particular -- I hate to say that it is my number one constituent -- but she was terribly upset by the fact that she received this notice because one of her commitments before she does anything else is to pay her bills. I'd like to have Mr. Clark come to the table to tell us exactly what occurred here, Mr. Clark, and let us know what you're going to do to try to make it better.
Councilman, this might fall under the heading of no good deed goes unpunished. Our attempt was, because there was an extension to the time which you could receive a Crisis Grant, which usually ended around April 1st, was extended to April 11th. Our intent was to notify people who were going to be receiving shutoff notices. And we sent a flyer out saying that the extension had gone until the 11th of April. With that, we sent shutoff notices because you need a shutoff notice to get the grant. The grant had also been extended from $300 54 4/1/03 - WHOLE - BILLS 030123, 030138 to $600. So our purpose was to target folks that were still eligible and only had or days to 4 get the Crisis Grant. We targeted about 45,000 5 people. 10,000 of those were senior citizens, and 6 mistakenly, rightfully, as been testified, there 7 were about 3,400 people that were on the budget 8 program that mistakenly got the notice. 9 As was explained, people on the budget 10 program always have a running balance, so those 11 3,400 mistakenly got the shutoff notice and were alarmed about it. We started trying to discuss that with the media on Friday, who aired it with an explanation and a telephone number to call for anybody who had wrongfully received the shutoff notice and flyer. It aired on Channel 10, I believe on Channel 29, KYW Radio all during the weekend, that there had been an error. 3,000 out of 50,000 customers had received the shutoff notice in error. So we did the best that we could over the weekend. Those folks are being notified by telephone. They were notified over the weekend, and as we speak today, those 3,000 people are being told that there was an error made and to disregard the shutoff notice. 55 4/1/03 - WHOLE - BILLS 030123, 030138
Mr. Clark, how many customers were notified that aren't on the budget? I, again, know of customers who are not on the budget, pay their bill in full each month, but there was another parameter I think you left out, that if you had a balance over a certain dollar amount that you received a notice?
Councilman, the shutoff notices go to people who are in arrears for over 30 days. Let me point out that this company is owed by 65,000 people who are our customers, have bills in arrearage of over 30, 60 and 90 days. That adds up to $110 million for us, Councilman. And I don't think that any company can be expected to operate properly unless it tries to collect some of money that's owed it. The 50,000 notices -- or 45,000 notices that went out, went out to customers that are in arrearage. 10,000 of those 50,000 or 45,000 were senior citizens that are in arrears. And of those 45 to 50,000, there were about 3,400 senior citizens who are on the budget program that wrongfully received the flyer and the shutoff notice.
Well, that is not 56 4/1/03 - WHOLE - BILLS 030123, 030138 entirely accurate. We'll have to talk more. Thank you.
Would you say if one owes a bill of $200 they're in arrears and it causes a shutoff?
They'll receive a notice that shutoff proceedings may begin, yes.
Well, most of the people that I am aware of that received a notice had paid their bill and got the shutoff notice. And then when they called they were told to ignore it.
The customers that called of 3,400 were told to ignore the notice, those people that are on the budget.
Can I get the answer to that last question? I didn't hear your answer to the question. Mr. CLARK: My response was that there are 3,400 customers that received notices mistakenly that were on budget payment programs.
Why was the mistake 57 4/1/03 - WHOLE - BILLS 030123, 030138 made? What caused the mistake to be made? PGW spent millions of dollars wastefully on a computer system that didn't work. We were told many thousands of people weren't billed for many months. We had testimony at a previous hearing that there are many people wrongfully getting the Senior Citizen Discount, yet PGW has chosen not to check for the last eight years. PGW has not checked the list to bring them up to date. And then you're asking the senior citizens to give up their senior citizen discount, including those that are using it properly?
Point of information. I want to just go back briefly. Mr. Clark, I just got a communication from my office and they told me that there was another parameter that apparently you left out on this notice issue. Apparently, if a person was in the process of being billed and the dollar amount was over a certain amount, even though they're not on the budget or -- you're making it sound like all these people are delinquent. That is not the case here. Some people that got that notice were not 30 days. They haven't even gotten their bill yet. So 58 4/1/03 - WHOLE - BILLS 030123, 030138 if you're the Vice President of Communications, Mr. Clark -- no disrespect -- you should know this. Can you get somebody who can explain it like it really is, sir?
Yes. She's sitting right next to me, Councilman. Her name is Chris Coltro (ph).
Could you just respond to that particular point right now?
Yes. Good morning. I'm Christina Coltro and I work at PGW. We did select, as Harvey said, a group of customers that owed more than a certain amount, $300 in bills to us, and we overlooked the fact that some of them, about 3,500 of them, were on a budget plan. I will be glad to look at any accounts that you may bring up to our attention of customers that were not in that situation. Our purpose was to target people that we believe are potentially eligible for the opportunity of getting a Crisis Grant in head of high bills. That was our intent. We do apologize for the inconvenience that this may have caused. The purpose was, again, to target them for the grants. 59 4/1/03 - WHOLE - BILLS 030123, 030138
Well, I think then you should speak to the people that are communicating with me, telling me that there is a group of people that haven't even received their recent billing, but the billing in the database says that there's a dollar amount over a certain dollar that received that notice. They're not on the budget. They're not in arrears. The due date for the new bill hasn't even approached, and they received that notice. So I don't want to beat it to death, but if we're going to hear from the management of the company telling us what the situation is, at least we would like to have it right, or be told that we're wrong, what we have. I'm easy. You can tell me if I'm wrong. Twice now I've gone over this with PGW and they're telling me that people got the notice that were not late in their payment. And if that's not true, just tell me.
PGW understands the legal liability of lawsuits from people -- do you know what you do to somebody, a senior citizen in his or her late years living alone, just barely making it, maybe not really making it except by only 60 4/1/03 - WHOLE - BILLS 030123, 030138 eating one or two meals a day, or cutting the medicine in half or in third, and then they get this letter after the kind of winter we've had? Do you know you know the harm you do to that person's life? Don't people consider that before they send out a letter that it's got to be right, because you do so much damage to people? You cause terrible worries. You cause all kinds of medical ailments. How could you make such an error? Doesn't anybody check the work? Who makes the decision? You know it isn't as if PGW for the first time was making mistakes. PGW consistently makes mistakes, and it's the feeling of many people that you're asking the most vulnerable people, the poorest people, to pay for your mistakes. (Applause.)
I think PGW should stop sending out any letters unless PGW is in a position to come and testify and say, we checked out, and we know that every one of these notices was properly issued. We are very concerned. We don't want to cause people to have heart attacks or worry them to death that they're going to lose their heat when they paid their bills. Some of them didn't eat 61 4/1/03 - WHOLE - BILLS 030123, 030138 in order to pay their bills. I think it's a totally irresponsible action by PGW, and I don't think we want to ever hear again of the repetition of that kind of an error. Thank you, Madam President. (Applause.)
Thank you. Mr. Clark, to the best of your knowledge, was this matter discussed with anyone in the Administration or City Council?
Do you know if the PUC was requested to continue the Senior Citizen Discount?
I misunderstood your question, Councilwoman. We're back to the Senior Citizens Discount, are we?
Okay. I'm sorry. I misunderstood the question. It is my understanding that the Administration, that PGW and that our legal counsel 62 4/1/03 - WHOLE - BILLS 030123, 030138 has advised us that this is the position that we're in, that on September 1st of 2003, that the PUC is in charge of rates and tariffs as they solidified today --
Who said that we're in the position that we're in? I'd like you to answer my question. Was the PUC requested to continue the Senior Citizen Discount Program?
That's something that we'd have to direct at either the CEO, the City or someone other than me. I can't respond to that.
But you came here to testify and to represent, I assume, PGW.
Well, I think it's very simple questions that we're asking, and I would hope that you would be able to supply us with some answers.
Yes. 63 4/1/03 - WHOLE - BILLS 030123, 030138 Councilman Ortiz.
Madam Chair, like I said before in terms of reference to Mr. Clark, I think he came to, in essence, restate the position. The questions you're asking, I think we asked of Mr. Knudsen in the first hearing that we had here, in terms of the percent discount and the Resolution 9 that was Chaired by Councilman Goode at that time. 10 I think all of those answers are already in the 11 record. 12 Mr. Knudsen said at that time that they 13 did not come to City Council, that they went and 14 stated and asked the PUC for the elimination of the 15 20 percent discount as of September 1st without 16 contacting us. But I believe through conversation 17 -- because Ms. Wilkerson was here at that time -- 18 with conversations with the Administration; is that 19 correct, Mr. Clark? 20
Today is April 1st, which in addition to being April Fools Day and Bad News Day, also happens to be the day when, I 64 4/1/03 - WHOLE - BILLS 030123, 030138 believe, the right to shut off is changed and, technically, under the law, PGW has the right to shut off; am I right as to that, sir?
I would like hear assurances from you that there will be nothing done to shut off anybody until you've cleared up this error, because otherwise I'm very fearful that you're going to shut off the wrong people. You sounded before, sir, when you spoke to us, as if we in City Council have not been supportive of PGW. We've been tremendously supportive. We've made advances of money to PGW, against sometimes our best judgment. We didn't come after you when you wasted $35 million on a computer system that didn't work at all. We've forgiven so many things that were done wrong. Was it $60 million? I stand corrected from Councilman Rizzo. Now, can we have assurances that before there's any cutoff of service to anybody, that the particular cutoff will be checked by somebody in authority who will then be able to come before us if there's any question and say, yes, I reviewed this 65 4/1/03 - WHOLE - BILLS 030123, 030138 case and in my judgment it was proper? Because we don't want 3,500 people -- in fact, we don't think a single person ought to get their gas shut off because you made an error in PGW. (Applause.)
Can we have that assurance? Can either of you give us that assurance?
Yes, sir, we can. Those customers who received the shutoff notice will not be terminated due to receiving that shutoff notice.
All right. We'll see. We hope that word is going to be kept. We're ready to be convinced. Because, otherwise, I think what we may have to do, Madam President, is go in for a Charter change, eliminate PGW as a City-owned utility and create a department of gas in the City of Philadelphia, like the Water Department. (Applause.)
Because everybody knows PGW is a fictitious element. It is not a company. It is just an aggregate group of buildings with people assigned to work those buildings. All 66 4/1/03 - WHOLE - BILLS 030123, 030138 of those buildings are owned by the City. Everybody that works, works for the City, but all the reasons that we keep it as a utility is for the protection of bond holders. But if there's no concern given to the citizens of Philadelphia -- we don't get these kind of complaints about the Water Department. We get it only about gas. And we get it in large numbers. And I think we ought to emulate and follow the policies we do in the Water Department, unless PGW straightens out its act. And step number one in straightening out its act is to avoid all mistakes like the ones that were made in these notices and in any possible shutoffs. Second, PGW must immediately change its policy on the Senior Citizen Discount. It's got to go to the PUC and say, we know longer want to terminate the Senior Citizen Discount because we think it's bad for the company. It's bad for all the people in Philadelphia. Unless those two things are done, Madam President, I respectfully am making a public announcement now that my office is going to begin the study of how we get rid of PGW as a public utility and recreate a department of gas supply in the City of Philadelphia. 67 4/1/03 - WHOLE - BILLS 030123, 030138 (Applause.)
The legislation today has to be moved out of Committee today so that Council can act on it very quickly.
Thank you, Councilman. The Chair recognizes Councilman DiCicco.
Thank you, Madam President. I want to ask my colleague, Councilman Cohen, a question, using his legal expertise. Your concern about the gas shutoff -- and I understand the representative from PGW said that they would not shut off any customer services in lieu of the mistakes that been made. While I take the lady at her word, I don't know if she's in the position to make the final decision on that. These kinds of things, generally as they go up the ladder, kind of get lost. Is there anything we can do, either as a Legislative Body or with one the advocacy groups to get a temporary restraining order to ensure that occurs or does not occur?
Well, I think we would be in better legal position to do it the 68 4/1/03 - WHOLE - BILLS 030123, 030138 moment we get notice of even a single incorrect application of a shutoff. I think you're very wise, Councilman DiCicco, in suggesting that the Law Department of the City Council be prepared to act at once in support of the people if that happens.
Mr. Clark, couldn't that confirmation be done within minutes? Couldn't a phone call suffice to Mr. Knudsen or Mr. White or whoever makes the decision to tell us that that, in fact, will be done according to the --
No. That there will be none, zero, until you resolve the issue. That was obviously a very clear statement.
I cannot make that commitment, and I'm not sure who can. 69 4/1/03 - WHOLE - BILLS 030123, 030138
What I did say, sir, is that those customers who received a shutoff notice that are not past due, that received those shutoff notices improperly will not be terminated. However, the system will continue picking up accounts that are past due more than 30, 60, 90 days.
That's not how I understood Councilman Cohen's request. Thank you.
Thank you, Madam President. I believe that through Councilman Ortiz's original comments, we've established that no 20 members of the PFMC Board are here, nor is PGW's CEO. I concur with Councilman Ortiz that no 22 testimony from PGW today is going to add anything to this matter, so I would say we move forward on the matter.
Thank you. 70 4/1/03 - WHOLE - BILLS 030123, 030138 Are there any other questions or comments from Members of the Committee? (No response.)
This will conclude our public hearing. - - - 71 COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA PUBLIC MEETING COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - - - April 1, 2003 - - - Public Meeting conducted by the Committee of the Whole, held in Room 696, City Hall, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, on the above date, to consider action on the following: BILLS 030123, 030138. - - - PRESENT: COUNCIL PRESIDENT ANNA C. VERNA COUNCILWOMAN JANNIE BLACKWELL COUNCILWOMAN BLONDELL REYNOLDS BROWN COUNCILMAN DARRELL L. CLARKE COUNCILMAN DAVID COHEN COUNCILMAN FRANK J. DI CICCO COUNCILMAN W. WILSON GOODE, JR. COUNCILWOMAN JOAN L. KRAJEWSKI COUNCILMAN MICHAEL A. NUTTER COUNCILMAN BRIAN J. O'NEILL COUNCILMAN FRANK RIZZO COUNCILWOMAN MARIAN B. TASCO - - - 72 04/01/03 - WHOLE - PUBLIC MEETING
We will now go into our public meeting. The Chair recognizes Councilman Goode regarding Bill No. 030123.
Thank you, Madam President. I move that the amendments to 030123 that's distributed to City Council members be approved. (Duly seconded.)
It has been seconded. All in favor of the adoption of the amendments will say aye. (Aye.)
The ayes have it, and the amendments have been adopted. The Chair recognizes Councilman Goode regarding Bill 030123.
Thank you, Madam President. I move that Bill 030123 as amended be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation and that the Rules of Council be 73 04/01/03 - WHOLE - PUBLIC MEETING suspended to permit first reading at our next Council Session. (Duly seconded.)
It has been moved and properly seconded that Bill No. 030123 be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation, as amended, further that the Rules of Council be suspended so as to permit first reading at our next Session of Council. All in favor will say aye. (Aye.)
The ayes have it and the motion carries. The Chair recognizes Councilman Ortiz regarding Bill No. 030138.
Thank you, Madam President. I move that Bill 030138 be moved out of Committee with a favorable recommendation and a recommendation that the Rules of Council be suspended so as to permit first reading at the next Session of City Council. 74 04/01/03 - WHOLE - PUBLIC MEETING (Duly seconded.)
It has been moved and properly seconded that Bill No. 030138 be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation, and also a recommendation that the Rules of Council be suspended so as to permit first reading at our next Council Session. All in favor will say aye. (Aye.)
The ayes have it and the motion carries. Both bills have been reported out of Committee. This concludes our public meeting. Thank you very much. (Council adjourned at 12:05 p.m.) - - - 75 C E R T I F I C A T I O N I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing proceedings of the Council of the City of Philadelphia of April 1, 2003, were reported fully and accurately by me, and that this is a correct transcript of the same. RE: COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE ___________________________ Lisa C. Bradley, RPR and Notary Public