COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS - - - Room 400, City Hall Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Thursday, November 19, 2009, 2:50 p.m. - - - Bill 090736 - Transfers in appropriations for FY '10 within Grants Revenue Fund from the Director of Finance - Federal Stimulus Funding to certain or all City, offices, boards and commissions. (Bill held till 12/3/09.) Bill 090737 - Transfers in appropriations for FY '09 within Aviation Fund... Bill 090738 - Transfers in appropriations for FY '09 within Water Fund... (Bill held till 12/3/09.) Bill 090739 - Transfers in appropriations for FY '09 within General Fund... Bill 090740 - Transfer in appropriations for FY '09 within Grants Revenue Fund... COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT: Joan L. Krajewski, Chair Darrell L. Clarke, Vice Chair Frank DiCicco W. Wilson Goode, Jr. Jack Kelly Donna Reed Miller Maria Quiñones-Sanchez - - - V A R A L L O Incorporated Litigation Support Specialists 1835 Market Street, Suite 600 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103 215.561.2220 215.567.2670 2 11/19/09 APPROPRIATIONS - 090736,37,38,39,40
Good afternoon. Thank you all for waiting. It held up a little. But anyway, the Committee on Appropriations is about to begin. Will the clerk please read the title of the bill. But before we begin, I would like to recognize: To my left, we have Councilwoman Sanchez, Councilman Goode; to my right, Councilman O'Neill, Councilwoman Miller, and Councilman Clarke. Will the clerk please read the bills.
Bill No. 090736, an ordinance authorizing transfers in appropriations for Fiscal Year 2010 within the Grants Revenue Fund from the Director of Finance - Federal Stimulus Funding to certain or all City, offices, boards and commissions. Bill No. 090737, an ordinance 25 authorizing transfers in appropriations 3 11/19/09 APPROPRIATIONS - 090736,37,38,39,40 for Fiscal Year 2009 within the Aviation Fund from certain or all City offices, departments, boards, and commissions to certain or all City offices, departments, boards, and commissions. Bill No. 090738, an ordinance 8 authorizing transfers in appropriations for Fiscal Year 2009 within the Water Fund from certain or all City offices, departments, boards, and commissions to certain or all City offices, departments, boards, and commissions. Bill No. 090739, an ordinance 15 authorizing transfers in appropriations for Fiscal Year 2009 within the General Fund from certain or all City offices, departments, boards, and commissions to certain or all City offices, departments boards, and commissions. Bill No. 090740, an ordinance 22 authorizing transfer in appropriations for Fiscal Year 2009 within the Grants Revenue Fund from certain or all City offices, departments, boards, and 4 11/19/09 APPROPRIATIONS - 090736,37,38,39,40 commissions to certain or all City offices, departments, boards, and commissions.
Thank you. Is there anyone from the Administration here to testify? (Witness comes forward.)
Good afternoon, Councilwoman Krajewski and members of the Appropriations Committee. My name is Steve Agostini; I am the Budget Director of City of Philadelphia and I am here to testify on bills before you at the moment having to do with our year-end transfer ordinance for the General Fund. Those bills 090739, 090738, 090738, and 090736 make FYI 2009 budget appropriations between and among classes and departments in the City's General, Water, Aviation, and Grants Revenue Funds 5 11/19/09 APPROPRIATIONS - 090736,37,38,39,40 respectively. These transfers are requested so that final appropriations agree with the requirements of the annual financial report. With respect to Bill No. 7 090739, there are six transfers requested in the bill, including five transfers involving a net change in departmental appropriations and one transfer between class within departmental budgets that do not result in any net change in appropriations. All General Fund transfers total $11,585,068. One of the largest transfers, the Police Department requests $8.9 million to fund increased uniform costs associated with the 2009 arbitration award and a small increase in postage. The First Judicial District of Pennsylvania requests $1.9 million to fund payroll and other costs associated with the zero-growth agreement between the City and the First Judicial District. 6 11/19/09 APPROPRIATIONS - 090736,37,38,39,40 The sheriff requests a transfer of $359,000 to fund increased costs associated with the 2009 arbitration award and overtime spending that exceeded budgeted levels. The City Commissioners request a transfer or $223,000 to fund increased overtime incurred in processing a higher the higher volume of voter registrations for the 2008 presidential election. An internal transfer of $130,000 is requested by the Free Library of Philadelphia to fund telecommunication costs. Bill No. 090738 requests a transfer of $3.9 million in the Water Fund to cover the pension costs and retiree health-benefit costs associated with employees of the fund. Bill No. 090736 requests a transfer of $11.7 million in the Grants Revenue Fund to facilitate the transfer of remaining productivity bank loan proceeds to the General Fund. The bank 7 11/19/09 APPROPRIATIONS - 090736,37,38,39,40 had been discontinued and will be closed out. I appreciate the opportunity to testify before this committee today and would be happy to answer any questions you may have. Additionally, representatives from all departments involved with the transfers are here and available for your questions as well.
Are there any questions from members of the committee? Councilman Clarke.
Before we begin, I'm sorry, I'd like to recognize Councilman Kelly, that he's here today.
Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. Real, real quick. First, Mr. Agostini, good afternoon.
Good afternoon. 8 11/19/09 APPROPRIATIONS - 090736,37,38,39,40
The increase for funds, albeit small, it says it references for the Police Department arbitration award; what is that?
As part of our bargaining, two of the bargaining units are covered under binding arbitration awards.
So we have a neutral arbitrator, a representative from the City and a representative from either the firefighters union or the police union. And that then results, after many weeks, months of discussions --
I'm asking -- I guess the question is -- I'm 9 11/19/09 APPROPRIATIONS - 090736,37,38,39,40 asking is, I thought the arbitration was ongoing.
You are correct, there is an arbitration ongoing currently with the FOP and one that has begun with the firefighters union as well, but those are prospective --
-- for -- (Indiscernible; parties talking over each other.)
Are there any other questions from members of the committee? 10 11/19/09 APPROPRIATIONS - 090736,37,38,39,40 (No further questions.)
Is there anyone else here opposed [sic] to these bills? Oh, I'm sorry. We do have the stimulus bill -- do you want to call the stimulus bill up? Okay. Anyone here from the Administration on the stimulus bill? 009736.
Councilwoman Krajewski, members, I am Steve Agostini, Budget Director and also Recovery Officer for the City of Philadelphia. I'm here before you to testify on Bill No. 090736, which makes FY 2010 budget appropriation transfers from the Grants Revenue Funds from the Director of Finance - Federal Stimulus Funding to certain or all City offices, commissions, and departments. 11 11/19/09 APPROPRIATIONS - 090736,37,38,39,40 The largest request, $14 million, is for the Office of Housing and Community Development for community development block grant funds for a variety of housing and economic development activities. The Office of Supportive Housing requests $7.9 million for the Homeless Prevention and Rapid Rehousing Program, which will fund homeless prevention and housing stabilization programs. The Mayor's Office of Community Services requests $7 million for the community services block grant, which will fund job-training programs and workforce development for a variety of local populations. The Police Department requests $6.2 million for Byrne Grants for crime prevention and law enforcement activities and to COPS Grants to hire police officers. The Commerce Department 12 11/19/09 APPROPRIATIONS - 090736,37,38,39,40 requests $5.7 million for energy efficiency block grant funds. The Streets Department requests $4.1 million for energy-efficiency block grants funds for investments in energy efficiency and conservation. The First Judicial District requests $3 million for 52 positions -- to fund 52 positions from the Byrne Grant. The Managing Director's Office requests $1 million, which will be used at the Mayor's Office of Sustainability for energy-efficiency block grants as well as some administrative work for the Byrne Grant. Among the smaller transfers, the Department of Public Health requests $748,000 for five grants -- Healthy Homes Foster Care; Healthy Homes Child Care; (indiscernible) Kellenbeck vaccine research, meningococcal vaccine research, and improve immunization and registry programs used for environmental hazard 13 11/19/09 APPROPRIATIONS - 090736,37,38,39,40 inspection and disease prevention programs. The Department of Human Services, Prisons, requests $700,000 for ex-offenders job-training programs. The Department of Licenses and Inspections requests $573,000 for clean-and-seal programs from the Byrne Grant and in training programs from the energy efficiency block grant. The Mayor's Office of Arts and Culture and the Creative Economy requests 460,000 for Mural Arts restoration through the Byrne Grant. The Mayor's Office requests $450,000 for the Mayor's Office of Faith-Based Initiative Strengthening Communities Fund for nonprofit capacity-building and the Mayor's Commission on Aging Senior Committee Service Employment Program, which provides job training for low-income seniors. The Mayor's Office of 14 11/19/09 APPROPRIATIONS - 090736,37,38,39,40 Transportation requests $254,000 for an energy management office from energy efficiency block grant funds. I appreciate the opportunity to before this committee today and would be happy to answer any questions. I also understand that there's a lot to cover here. It's a fairly sizeable transfer ordinance covering over just $52 million, and I understand that there will be a lot of questions. Representatives from each of the grants entities that have received grants are here to answer your questions. I have also taken the liberty, if it would be helpful to Council, I have a -- what I'm calling sort of a "cheat sheet" that breaks out which departments getting what grants and to what level. Sorry I didn't include that with this, but I have it here if anyone is interested in seeing that. It's just a sort of easy way and it's one of the things I am using to sort of stay on top 15 11/19/09 APPROPRIATIONS - 090736,37,38,39,40 of this. And I have sufficient copies for everyone if folks are interested. So with that, if there are questions, I'm happy to answer them.
You could answer me. What is the current status of the proposal to relocate the Police Academy?
I will defer to the -- I believe Deputy Commissioner Gaittens is here. (Witness comes forward.) DEPT. COMM. GAITTENS: Good afternoon, Councilwoman Krajewski and members of Council.
Good afternoon. DEPT. COMM. GAITTENS: I'm Deputy Commissioner Jack Gaittens. Our intent to move Police Academy is based on us getting a military facility. It's part of the BRACC closure -- that's the base realignment and closing committee. 16 11/19/09 APPROPRIATIONS - 090736,37,38,39,40 There is a joint army and marine facility on Woodhaven Road. And when we submitted our proposal, we said we were going to move all of our training facilities up there. The estimated date that we were given was September of 2011. We are now checking with the City Planning Commission to get back to the Department of Defense to confirm that date. We have heard rumors that that may be pushed back because the location that they were supposed to move to has not been completed yet, so we are awaiting for confirmation of the date, but in our last discussion with them, they said September of 2011.
In the Police Commissioner's testimony, it stated that the grant will allow for the funding of 50 new police officer positions over a 36-month period. Is there any other hiring of police officers currently being 17 11/19/09 APPROPRIATIONS - 090736,37,38,39,40 conducted? And what are the current staffing levels of the police officers? DEPT. COMM. GAITTENS: All right. Currently, we have 6,557 sworn. We had originally anticipated putting a class in in November, but because of budgetary constraints, that has been pushed back. We are now hoping to put a class in in February.
Thank you. Are there any other questions from members of the committee?
Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. Good afternoon, Mr. Agostini.
I have questions about the personal services and fringe benefits that total a little more 18 11/19/09 APPROPRIATIONS - 090736,37,38,39,40 than 6.6 million. Are these funds being used to hire additional staff offset the cost of existing staff or a combination of both?
Excuse me. With respect to -- for that 6.6 million, if you are looking at the Byrne Grants and the courts, it is -- and I'm trying to find the exact reference of the 6.6 million.
That would be to maintain existing staff, approximately 52 court staff, in order to keep a number of courts open. As part of the 2010 budget, we made some changes to the appropriations to lower court funding that has -- at the time, we mentioned to this Council that we plan to pursue Byrne Grant funding in order to keep those courts open. I believe that the 6.6 million, however, represents an either two- or three-year funding period for the grants 19 11/19/09 APPROPRIATIONS - 090736,37,38,39,40 and not solely a one-year period. If the Court decides it wishes to use it all in one year, it would mean that it's not available in subsequent years to defray their budget. That's still something that I think the Courts are contemplating. And I believe representatives from the Court are here to answer questions.
Well, we weren't just looking at the Courts; I mean, we were looking at the -- we actually looked at this ordinance that describes personal services for most of these departments, not just the Courts.
And in the case with most of the departments, what we are looking at is either maintaining existing staff, most notably in the Courts, but in some cases augmenting staff, additional staff. Most of the funding that we receive, with the exception of the Byrne 20 11/19/09 APPROPRIATIONS - 090736,37,38,39,40 Grant, cannot be used to supplant existing General Fund dollars, so they would have to go for new staff members. One of the things that we have been insistent upon is that if we are to hire new staff with these grants, that as much of our benefit costs as possible should be picked up by the grants so that they are not a cost to the General Fund. And if you want, I can try to give you a breakdown by the total number of positions so that you have an appreciation of what's new and what represents sort of existing staff.
Okay. I'd actually like that if you could just send it to the chair of this committee.
Thank you. And also, for the materials and supplies with a total of over $4 million, I basically have the same question: Are these funds being used to purchase 21 11/19/09 APPROPRIATIONS - 090736,37,38,39,40 materials and supplies that would not have otherwise been purchased offset the cost of materials and supplies already budgeted, or a combination of both?
I can say -- and I will go back and check this. For the materials and supplies, that represents expenditures that would not have happened but for these grant dollars.
And I can go back, but I don't anticipate -- I don't remember offhand any expenditures going for existing purchases that we had planned, again, with the expectation that we could not use those dollars to supplant the existing General Fund; they had to be used for additional funds. But I will check and confirm that for you.
Okay. You know, nearly 80 percent of over 41 million of the stimulus funds are being used towards the purchase of 22 11/19/09 APPROPRIATIONS - 090736,37,38,39,40 services. Can you give examples by office or department what services are being purchased?
I think in many instances, Councilwoman, they are either contractors or vendors that we are utilizing for the purposes of delivering some of the services. I believe, for example, in some of the energy-efficiency grants that we are receiving, that it is a direct purchase with a provider that will actually then go in and do that work. I believe that, in some cases, that is also the case with some of the supportive-housing dollars that we have in hand or that we are about to receive, where they are either expansions of existing programs or augmentations to programs that we have, where we're using a vendor, a contractor; and, hence, the services component that you see are reflected here.
So these 23 11/19/09 APPROPRIATIONS - 090736,37,38,39,40 are the same vendors that were probably listed in the budget testimony of departments, or new vendors?
In some cases, they may be existing vendors. In some cases, we will be going out with new requests for proposal for new vendors.
Okay. And so, did you say that you would send the information over, more detailed?
I can do that. That's not -- in some cases, these are sort of estimates. We have not -- we don't have a firm number. But to the extent that I have a sense of what we will be contracting out, since that's also a function of what we report to the federal government, I'm happy to bring that over to you and bring it over quickly.
You know, I'd really like to see this information ongoingly, you know, what the contract is. We may even know people that might 24 11/19/09 APPROPRIATIONS - 090736,37,38,39,40 want to bid on these contracts. Would that be listed on your website?
No, that wouldn't be. And in some cases -- in many cases, we will not be able to show you the actual vendors. And the reason is that to date, we've received about $158 million in grant letters, in authorizations if you will. What we actually have in the treasury, I believe, as of this week is just below $20 million. Most of that will require us to go forward with either a request for proposal. So we have not identified in most cases vendors to -- at this date who would be eligible to get a contract awarded to them. To the extent that we do have that -- and I believe there are instances where we have a vendor that's lined up -- I can provide that to you and we will get that to you. 25 11/19/09 APPROPRIATIONS - 090736,37,38,39,40
Okay. Will you also include whether they're a minority vendor.
I will -- I will endeavor to do that. In some cases, I may not know, but I will work to try to capture that information.
Yeah. Well, the department should know, though, right?
So somebody knows. Right, okay, because we wanted to receive that. Okay. I'll let someone else ask some questions. I do have one or two others. Thank you.
Mr. Agostini, could you explain how the fringe benefit amounts were determined? 11/19/09 APPROPRIATIONS - 090736,37,38,39,40 They really go from zero percent in some cases to 67 percent in others. And I -- I'm just trying to figure out how fringes could be that high.
In those cases, we tried to calculate -- where we could, we could we tried to calculate the full cost, which would have been not only the fringe benefits associated with health insurance or unemployment insurance or FICA, but also pension-related costs to the extent that we could capture that as well. And I think that's where the higher number comes from. It's including the pensions as well.
I will have to go back. And I'm not sure if it's a portion of the entire payment for that year, which I believe is what it is, as 27 11/19/09 APPROPRIATIONS - 090736,37,38,39,40 opposed to the entire unfunded liability, which probably will be difficult, but I will go back and look to see if that's possible.
I don't know. I would have to go back and look at the grants.
Is there someone available from the Office of Economic Opportunity? 28 11/19/09 APPROPRIATIONS - 090736,37,38,39,40
I believe so. I believe Mr. Dow and I believe Mr. Greenberger is here as well. (Witness comes forward.)
Previous to this hearing, there was a briefing that was a follow-up to another hearing that was held regarding an Urban League report that dealt with economic inclusion, among other things. We were pleased to have testimony from Dr. Bernard Anderson, who's an economist professor at the Wharton School for several years, also served in the Clinton Administration, at the Department of Labor. In part of his testimony, he said: "Our immediate goal must be to 29 11/19/09 APPROPRIATIONS - 090736,37,38,39,40 assure full minority-group participation in projects supported by economic stimulus funds. "The City's expected to receive more than $157 million for projects on infrastructure, energy, and the environment. The City must assure that systems are in place to identify, train, and hire minority-group workers on the projects and set goals for minority contract participation in all funding opportunities. Post-monitoring must be implemented assure the goals are met." Can you respond to what Dr. Anderson sees as an imperative in terms of what needs to happen in terms of economic inclusion on these dollars?
I would -- not having read his testimony and hearing that one expert, I would agree with him.
And what is the City prepared to do? Are there goals set for these dollars? And what is the process by which disadvantaged workers 30 11/19/09 APPROPRIATIONS - 090736,37,38,39,40 and businesses can secure these opportunities?
Councilmember, if I might, for a moment, we heard -- we heard Council loud and clear when we did our briefing. I've, since that time, actually met with Della Clark from the Enterprise Center. We are working with the Enterprise Center to participate, if not be a partner, in a number of what we hope will be monthly events from now for the foreseeable future to try and engage the community to be sure that we're out there. So that's one of the things that we're doing. We've also asked representative from the Enterprise Center, who are being used by the federal government as a model for increasing participation across the nation by the U.S. Minority Business Development Agency. We've asked them for a sense of what other communities are doing as best practices so that we'd have 31 11/19/09 APPROPRIATIONS - 090736,37,38,39,40 a handle on that. And I've also requested to the Recovery Office in the President's Office if they can give us information on best practices; and including in that, the potential or waivers, where that might be appropriate for us, so that we can pursue what might be more aggressive goals and --
So we have not as of yet, you're saying, ascertained what the best practice would be for economic inclusion.
I am certainly not expert on that and I'm trying to pull from as many sources as possible.
Have we set any goals for these dollars at all in terms of economic inclusion?
Outside of what we've -- we have in terms of our current OEO goals? No. 32 11/19/09 APPROPRIATIONS - 090736,37,38,39,40
So if we don't have best practices in place and we don't have goals set, what is the process, even if it is the normal process, for participation? What is the process by which people secure opportunities?
It's the normal contracting processes that the City of Philadelphia has in regards to its procurement. So if a contract is going out with an RFP, the Office of Economic Opportunity has the opportunity and will present ranges for individual contracts; and then, before awarding of those contracts, have the ability to confirm whether or not the minorities, women or the disabled that are listed as subcontractors or as primes on those contracts have indeed been communicated to and verified. 33 11/19/09 APPROPRIATIONS - 090736,37,38,39,40 And so, it's the normal operating procedures that we already have in place that we are fine-tuning at the moment.
This morning, City Council unanimously passed Councilman Clarke's bill requiring economic opportunity plans for stimulus dollars. How might that affect the process?
Currently, as it's written, if not mistaken -- and, again, I don't have those details right off the top of my head, but I don't believe there's a threshold for those EOPs on stimulus projects. So without a threshold on the projects, it would then be -- then the intent would then be for all of the federal projects to have, or federal grants, to have EOPs on it. If that's the case, if that remains the same, that will be very cumbersome for the City of Philadelphia to maintain. 34 11/19/09 APPROPRIATIONS - 090736,37,38,39,40 As an example, most projects have a threshold that they have to be a million dollars or above. We made one exception with the bond funding a couple of years ago; that was at 250,000 and above. Now --
My question was: Councilman Clarke's bill was unanimously approved, it will go to the Mayor's desk, the Mayor will sign it. The Administration testified in support of it; how will that affect opportunities for economic inclusion?
We would anticipate, as has been our experience when EOPs are involved with contacts, that it would improve opportunities for minorities, women, and the disabled.
As a general statement, I'm saying: Specifically how will that help disadvantaged businesses and disadvantaged workers seek opportunities and secure opportunities? 35 11/19/09 APPROPRIATIONS - 090736,37,38,39,40
How would it help the individual? I mean, what it does is, it puts a greater light on individual contracts.
That's exactly -- well, right now, the legislation, I believe, states -- it proposes that EOPs would be created for all federal stimulus contracts.
So it there will be economic opportunity plans for all stimulus contracts?
Yeah, so if the Mayor signs that, yes. When the Mayor signs that, yes. What we got to be candid about is that as it's written with all of the 36 11/19/09 APPROPRIATIONS - 090736,37,38,39,40 level -- in the previous EOP legislations, there ever been thresholds so that we can manage the capacity of the economic opportunity -- the Economic Opportunity Office to manage those. Right now, without a threshold, it can create -- and we don't know yet, but it could create an undue burden due to the volume that might result from that, and so what we would want --
Just real quick, Councilman. I noticed some hesitation in your voice about the timing, 'cause these two bills are on parallel tracks, and we don't know when the Mayor may sign this. We actually -- because we're on recess --
We're ahead of it? So if we were to attach an 37 11/19/09 APPROPRIATIONS - 090736,37,38,39,40 amendment to this bill today, similar to the EOP legislation, how would that impact?
The bill 7 that we passed today that Councilman Goode was referencing required EOP --
-- for every contract. If a similar bill or an amendment was attached to this legislation that we're passing today, would that position you -- would that --
First let me ask you, would that be something that you would be supportive of --
-- to ensure that there's no question, the EOP requirement that's in this bill that's basically making the money available.
But we would want to 38 11/19/09 APPROPRIATIONS - 090736,37,38,39,40 have a conversation with and see if we can negotiate or however we can get in it there, is what the proper threshold would be for us in regard to contacts --
-- so that the volume of contracts is managed. I mean, it's simply a -- it's a matter of the capacity of the unit to --
I understand that. The EOP -- just to make sure we're on the same page -- basically requires that the contractor outline what his game plan is for --
It doesn't set any particular thresholds, and I agree --
No, what I'm saying is thresholds, meaning, are we going 39 11/19/09 APPROPRIATIONS - 090736,37,38,39,40 to have a -- let's -- for example, to be simplistic, if there's an RFP for a $40,000 threshold.
Just let me be clear. It's a dollar threshold on the amount of the contract.
Just real quickly, Councilman, and I want you to get back to your point. But just for clarification, your testimony today has been that essentially stimulus dollars are going to follow the same process for inclusion as 40 11/19/09 APPROPRIATIONS - 090736,37,38,39,40 normal City contracts.
There was already a EOP component within the Philadelphia Code.
There was already thresholds set within the Philadelphia Code.
Councilman Clarke amended that to include all stimulus projects. There was no need for an amendment to it if it was going to follow the system that was already in place.
I'm comfortable with that. I mean, if that is correct, because the threshold that's in place, 41 11/19/09 APPROPRIATIONS - 090736,37,38,39,40 that dollar threshold per contract --
No, no, no. 4 The point is that the reason why there was an amendment that includes stimulus project would be so that we could lower the threshold from what was already in the code.
So is the Administration willing to lower the threshold in terms of what's required for EOPs, in compliance with what will be Councilman Clarke's soon-to-be ordinance?
I think we would be comfortable, but what we don't know right now, sitting here today, is what the threshold is, what that dollar threshold is.
Right. And so right now, in the current legislation is a million-dollar threshold. For every contract above a million dollars, it has 42 11/19/09 APPROPRIATIONS - 090736,37,38,39,40 to have an EOP attached to it.
In the bill 12 that was unanimously passed this morning --
Right. And what I'm saying is, that would create an undue burden on the Office of Economic Opportunity.
That was not your testimony at the economic development hearing.
Our testimony was that we were in support of EOPs on 43 11/19/09 APPROPRIATIONS - 090736,37,38,39,40 federally-stimulated programs, as is the current legislation --
-- that he was lowering the threshold by making the amendment to the code, 'cause otherwise, there was no need for a bill. The reason why he added the stimulus projects was to lower the threshold.
Okay. My understanding was that it was to make sure that the intent was to make sure that all federal stimulus contracts, that it was specific to federal standard contracts.
But those projects would have already been covered under the City process. Your testimony 44 11/19/09 APPROPRIATIONS - 090736,37,38,39,40 has been that the stimulus dollars that are going through the City process already existed.
And if not mistaken, our testimony was that -- we also said that within the context of what was currently on record, or as legislation, was the context that we didn't need that other bill; however, that we support --
No, no. 14 That wasn't the understanding; at least that wasn't my understanding.
We had a conversation about the amount because we believe that $1 million, which is the threshold on the current broader contract, as it relates to the EOP, was too high.
So we purposely did not put in that 45 11/19/09 APPROPRIATIONS - 090736,37,38,39,40 one-million-dollar threshold because we wanted it to affect the smaller contracts.
So what you're telling me is that your preference would be that we put the specific threshold in the bill. I will ask for the Mayor to send that bill back when we get through with this hearing so I can put a number in there.
Will do, will do. We'll ask the Mayor to do just that, and then we'll --
I mean, I don't -- but you tell me what you think the number --
If the intent is to capture a greater number of contracts, we can lower the threshold dollar amount. We have to be careful about 46 11/19/09 APPROPRIATIONS - 090736,37,38,39,40 what -- how low do we go. I would say, you know, is it 750? is it 500? I think 500 is probably the minimum. We'd have to figure out and see what comfort level you would have, get an indication of what the volume of contracts very well may be, and then go for it. So I would say we would be comfortable with asking you to --
And, actually, as I think through this and I hear your testimony, I actually don't think there should be any threshold, because the reality is, this is one-time money. The reason why we set a million-dollar threshold on the earlier version, which encompassed all contracts, was because of the voluminous nature of how many contracts on an annual basis go through the city. But this is one-time money, and I don't think it would be an undue burden 47 11/19/09 APPROPRIATIONS - 090736,37,38,39,40 either on the Administration or any contractor who got a contract from stimulus dollars just to simply tell us what your plan for inclusion is for the contact that you got. The likelihood that they're going to be here next year getting another contract is virtually nil. So I don't think it's a --
I think that what we don't know -- you know, as we are being -- as Steve said, we're being aggressive with applying for contracts. As we are successful in that, it creates a volume that is unknown right now. And we hope and anticipate that that volume is significant; that means that we are being successful at getting additional dollars for the City of Philadelphia. With that in mind, then we know, then, if we have a zero threshold on contracts, it then becomes an undue burden on the City, an undue burden on 48 11/19/09 APPROPRIATIONS - 090736,37,38,39,40 the Office of Economic Opportunity, because of the staffing levels that are appropriate.
The term "undue," I guess, bothers me because it implies that it's a little bit too much work for you. And I think that the nature of the issue is, like, very important to a lot of us, as I'm sure it's --
It is very important to us. And so the threshold is -- it allows us to -- it becomes a question of quality versus quantity. I think that you would agree in order for us to effect positive change in the minorities (indiscernible) for the City of Philadelphia, we need to do it in a quality way. Now, there's certainly a balance between quality and quantity. So what we need and what we would prefer is that there is a balance there. And that would be a threshold of some number that 49 11/19/09 APPROPRIATIONS - 090736,37,38,39,40 would enable us to achieve that so we could get not only the quantity that we would think is appropriate but also the quality of work that we think is effective for us to achieve our goals.
Okay. I hear you. I mean, I don't agree with you, but I hear you.
Mr. Dow, is it really reasonable to suggest that there are going to be a lot of smaller contracts?
If there might be a number of subcontracts, is it really reasonable to suggest that there are going to be a lot of small contracts?
You don't 50 11/19/09 APPROPRIATIONS - 090736,37,38,39,40 know what contracting you're going to do with these dollars?