Committee Hearing, April 12, 2005

2806 - - - COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA PUBLIC HEARING - COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - - - Room 400, City Hall Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Tuesday, April 12, 2005, 10:20 a.m. - - - Bill Numbers 050001, 050002, 050003, 040789, 040767, 050007, 050008. Resolution Number 050022. PRESENT: COUNCIL PRESIDENT ANNA C. VERNA COUNCILWOMAN JANNIE L. BLACKWELL COUNCILWOMAN BLONDELL REYNOLDS BROWN COUNCILMAN DARRELL L. CLARKE COUNCILMAN W. WILSON GOODE, JR. COUNCILMAN JACK KELLY COUNCILMAN JAMES F. KENNEY COUNCILWOMAN DONNA REED MILLER COUNCILMAN MICHAEL A. NUTTER COUNCILMAN JUAN F. RAMOS 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 2807 Budget - 4/12/05 - - - P R O C E E D I N G S - - -

Good morning, everyone. This is a continued public hearing of the Committee of the Whole regarding Bill Numbers 050001, 050002, 050003, 040789, 040767, 050007, 050008, and resolution Number 050022. We will now hear from the District Attorney. Please approach the witness table. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Good morning, Madam President and members of City Council. My name is Lynne Abraham, L-y-n-n-e, A-b-r-a-h-a-m, District attorney of Philadelphia. And I'm pleased to appear once more before the Council considering the 2006 budget for the District Attorney's Office. If you wish, Madam President, I would move that the amended statement of the District Attorney regarding her budget be admitted into the record in whole. And I will just briefly outline, if you wish, the 2808 Budget - 4/12/05 few salient points that I think...

That would be fine. We'll make certain that the stenographer has a copy of your testimony. It will be transcribed in full. And you can simply summarize, if you will. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: First I want to thank City Council, its President and staff for being so helpful last year when, after my presentation to City Council, we were facing an enormous budget cut which would have decimated many of our services, as I testified last year. Council was extraordinarily helpful in restoring a good deal of the budget cuts, probably about half, for which I am thankful. I want to talk specifically about the Blueprint for a Safer Philadelphia. The blueprint arose out of the culmination of a variety of shootings in Philadelphia which was, I think I can say with accuracy, the Fahim Thomas Child's killing in North Philadelphia outside the Pierce Elementary School. 2809 Budget - 4/12/05 As a result of that shooting, and a history of other shootings and killings in the City of Philadelphia, Dwight Evans, Jewel Williams and, a host of other legislators from both sides of the aisle contacted us. And in meeting with Representative Evans, he suggested that the District Attorney's Office come up with a plan of strategies that we would want the legislature to consider to implement. And so, we gathered a host of participants and partners and drew up what we called the Blueprint for Safer Philadelphia, a ten-point program that would help to fight crime, reduce the gun violence and give people in Philadelphia and those who visit here a better and safer self awareness and at least a modicum of safety and security. As a result of a tremendous amount of effort and work from our office and from all of our partners, this blueprint was submitted to representative Evans, Representative Perzel -- I should say Speaker Perzel, Senator Fumo and other senators. 2810 Budget - 4/12/05 And the legislature has been extraordinarily helpful in rescuing what for us would be the end of several important programs. And I'll speak at length later, if you ask me, on the blueprint. But I do want to point out that the blueprint, I believe, is one of the key features of a better, safer Philadelphia. And if it is fully funded and implemented and brought to scale, I believe that we can seriously impact violent crime and homicides in the City of Philadelphia, especially gun-related homicides and shootings. With regard to the other issues that I brought up in my budget request is another request, actually another plea for witness relocation funding. As you know, we have not received sufficient funds to get us through the myriad of requests that we get for witness relocation. We are holding our own, I am happy to say. However, we are facing a severe 2811 Budget - 4/12/05 crisis, if in fact the end of funding from the Attorney General's Office is upon us. S. Government to his office. And we get about 50 percent of that money. We get about $250,000 a year. The previous Attorney General, Jerry Pappert, advised us that that money had run out, and that we would be at the end of our ability to provide witness relocation for our victims and witnesses who were frightened about coming to court and had been either threatened, coerced or actually hurt or threatened to be hurt or killed if they came to court. We have had a recent meeting with the present Attorney General, and Attorney General Corbett has advised us that he will do what he can. However, he advised us that the Federal Government had cut his allocation; and therefore, he wasn't sure but he would use his absolute best efforts to try to find us sufficient money to match the amount he 2812 Budget - 4/12/05 had previously given us. However, this does not answer all of our questions. As you no doubt know, there are many people who either believe or feel or know that if they come to court, there are real threats to their lives and safety. And we need to be able to meet the challenge of getting our cases tried.

And we can only get our cases tried if real live witnesses come to court, come on the witness stand, and testify truthfully and not out of fear or threats or any kind of coercion from anybody. So, obviously witness relocation is a big, big issue for us and for the safety and the security of the City of Philadelphia. We also brought up a few other issues, although it doesn't cover every issue. One of our major issues is economic crime/cyber crime. We see a trend, a growing trend every year, of increased complexity from computer-related and cyber crime. There isn't a day that goes by that some newspaper, 2813 Budget - 4/12/05 some story or some innovation in technology isn't put to work against the interests of citizens in general, and not limited to but senior citizens in particular. The Cyber Crime Unit, as you may recall, was funded by a special allocation of City Council several years ago. And we are trying to keep that up and going. But it's expanding, as more and more people call us and tell us that their identity has been stolen, that their computer has asked them for information, that somebody is putting dangerous spam on their computer, that they are subject to phishing, p-h-i-s-h-i-n-g, on their computers and they have had their identity theft compromised or stolen. So we need to be able to do that, as well as combat all the technological marvels that are coming to our courtrooms. I. effect. Television is ahead of technology but jurors and witnesses expect gee whiz 2814 Budget - 4/12/05 stuff, as I call it. And while technology isn't the way television depicts it, we know that we have to keep abreast of cyber technology. That means in our courtroom presentations, in our ability to get and analyze information, and track information, and catalog it and present it in a scientifically compelling way. And that all requires funding and great expertise. And the expert pool is relatively small, given the size of the problem. So, we are looking to Council for assistance in that. And essentially, what we are asking this Council to do this year, recognizing the considerable budget crisis that the Mayor has depicted Philadelphia as presently going through, that we are asking Council to keep our budget at last year's level plus the cost of living increase. And that will at least keep our present system going and allow us to carry on the programs that we have -- that we have 2815 Budget - 4/12/05 implemented and give high quality direct service to the citizens of Philadelphia. So, I thank Council for its indulgence. And I'll be happy, along with my staff, to answer as many questions as we possibly can. And I appreciate your cooperation and consideration.

Thank you very much. Would you mind elaborating on the Blueprint for -- THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Yes.

-- a Safer Philadelphia? THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: I certainly will. We call this an agenda to implement a Blueprint for a Safer Philadelphia. It's a ten-point program and there are several initiatives. Would you like me to go down the initiatives?

Do you mind? THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: No, not at 2816 Budget - 4/12/05 all. I also didn't want to fail to mention that I have brochures for Council which I will give you in the next moment or two, and I'll talk about that.

Regarding the blueprint? THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: No. 10 Regarding child support. But I'll talk about -- I didn't want to forget that, Madam President. P. In 1998, my deputy John Delaney and I, as well as the Police Commissioner, several City officials, court officials, probation officers, journeyed to Boston to review their ten-point program. It was instituted by clergy, police, interested citizens, youth workers and others, to stem violence in a part of Boston. As a result of that two-day sojourn in Boston, the partners, as we call them, got together and formulated a program tailor made 2817 Budget - 4/12/05 to Philadelphia's youth violence problem. And what we did at that time is, we reviewed the whole City and said, with a small Federal grant that we obtained, what area of the City are youths the most likely to kill or be killed? We had our choice of several police districts. At that time, as you may recall, there was an area of Philadelphia which got a very bad name, and the people bitterly resented it. So, I mean no disrespect but it was called the badlands. It was the 24th and the 25th District, where a lot of killing was going on. And so what we did was, we started the Youth Violence Reduction Partnership there. This is a broad-based multi-disciplinary approach to preventing people between the ages of 17 and 24 from either killing or being killed. This is only one of ten points. I don't know how much detail, frankly, you want me to get into, but I'm prepared to fully delve into it. P. program has several components: Identification, positive support, surveillance, graduated sanctions and gun suppressions. What we did was, we went around the community and asked everybody in the community: The police, probation, teachers, parents, social workers, psychiatrists, mental health workers, judges, pick out the 125 young people in your district or division that you believe are the most likely to kill or to be killed. It wasn't scientific, but it was sort of a group think effort to attempt to identify those people most at risk of either one of those consequences. As a result of that, we put together a program which targets the City's most dangerous and potentially the most violent youths. Because if you look at the homicide figures, the people who are most likely to kill or be killed range anywhere from 17 to 24 years of age. 2819 Budget - 4/12/05 And as a result of that enterprise, to cut it to its quick, we began our Youth Violence Reduction Partnership. It was extraordinarily successful. But you can't measure success just in one or two districts, since homicide is spread out over the whole City. P. program. And they have agreed to do so, which will keep it up and running only at its present level which is really insufficient, in our view, to be a real measure of success. It is in the 24th, the 25th and a small part of the 26th, as well as the 12th Police District. But as you know, homicide is spread about the City. And while this program will keep it going, the money will keep it going, it's far from optimum. We need to bring this program to scale. The public/private ventures has put out a booklet that's called Alive at 25. , 2820 Budget - 4/12/05 keeping kids between and alive long enough to live to their 25th birthday. The second part of the program, number two on our ten-point program, is the Safe Neighborhood Initiative. This would allow the hiring of special officers, along with the Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms Division, as well as local and Federal prosecutors and probation and parole officers, to intensively supervise young adults in high crime police areas. This is the next cohort of the highest number of people to kill or be killed. That's to 32. We were able to 16 get a grant to do that. So, that was done as 17 well. 18 The third component was a juvenile 19 justice curriculum in the School District of 20 Philadelphia.

This is a year-long curriculum 21 for middle school students on the dangers of 22 violence, its criminal justice consequences, 23 and how to make responsible and informed and 24 intelligent choices in how they behave themselves. 2821 Budget - 4/12/05 This is an unfunded program. But the new curriculum has already begun. O. Vallas and his staff innumerable times. George Mosee, Deputy of our Juvenile Division, has trained all middle school teachers on the curriculum. And it is part of the social studies curriculum, and will be enhanced and expanded, assuming funding is available to us, to not only the middle school children but younger children. Because we see younger children obviously making not well-informed, intelligent decisions, which get them into trouble at a much earlier age than middle school, which is roughly as you know, 13, 14, 15, 16 years of age, somewhere in that age group. And this is a City-wide effort. O. Vallas very much wants and says he needs. And we're anxious to help him accomplish that because this will have a 2822 Budget - 4/12/05 better outcome for juvenile and adult criminal consequences, meaning a lower crime rate, safer neighborhoods, less criminal involvement by juveniles. A community educational involvement is an initiative to reach the at-risk populations of our City, through personal and community involvement and faith-based organizations. We have been able to get some funding through that, not for us but through those people who will do that. And we have engaged clergy of all denominations to help us in that regard. The fifth part, in no particular order, is zone courts. This is the ability of the court system to adjust itself to the realities of modern crime fighting. As you may know, from my various appearances before Council, I have been attempting to get the court system in tune with modern realities, because what happens is that court cases are assigned at random, not with regard to what district they 2823 Budget - 4/12/05 originated in, resulting in a police officer or police officers being sent on any given day to five, six, seven or eight or nine courtrooms, depending on the roulette of when each case comes up, meaning that police officers are trying to get to various courtrooms, with judges calling the calendar, officers not there. If the judge doesn't want to wait, the judge does one of several things, dismisses the case outright which forces us to rearrest and to implement the program all over again which is wasteful and time consuming and not efficient or the judge grants a continuance which counts against the Commonwealth in our time to bring a person to trial. And that results in time constraints and pressures put on us which we shouldn't have to have, and which we wouldn't have if we have zone courts. Here's the bottom line. The District Attorney cannot tell judges how to sit and where to sit. So, I have an appointment with the 2824 Budget - 4/12/05 Supreme Court later this month to ask the court to direct the local courts, in its wisdom, and if it decides to do so, to align our courts on zone or geographic bases so that officers who make an arrest in the 24th District, let's say, will be in front of the same judge for all cases arising out of the 24th District, eliminating some but not all of the backing and forthing. We still have to address the issue of juvenile courts and of course our divisional courts. But we're optimistic that the Supreme Court will consider this because the Supreme Court did accede to our request to give us a gun court. And we're very pleased that Justice Sandra Shultz Newman as part of our blueprint, met with the various partners and agreed that we should have a gun court which is the sixth part of our ten-point program. The Supreme Court agreed to dedicate a courtroom and a judge to hearing priority cases having to deal with people who are in illegal possession of firearms. 2825 Budget - 4/12/05 This is not just sort of a make weight.

This is a very substantive program, which addresses people who do not yet use guns but who are in danger of using them in the absence of direct intervention. It's a multifaceted program that addresses itself to... For example, if I'm arrested for position of a firearm that's illegal, the first thing that I am given is an assignment. My record is reviewed, and assuming I am not a violent, dangerous offender by my criminal record -- Maybe my first arrest or even my second arrest. Maybe I have a theft, a retail theft case, nothing very substantive. If I am suitable for the gun court program, I am immediately assigned a case manager. This case manager requires that I come to his or her office. And there are especially dedicated case managers who will interview me in depth. This is not for use at court, so their 5th Amendment implication, obviously, 2826 Budget - 4/12/05 is still in effect. I'm not required to give any information about myself that will incriminate me and nothing will be. But they ask me questions about my background. They do an intensive background survey of me. And they ascertain do I need services right then and there. Do I need mental health treatment? Do I need interventions? Does my family, any support systems that the court has to offer, can they put them in place? The benefit is that if I am a person either in crisis or I'm impulsive or I am angry or if I have anger management problems, the manager can go to the court and ask the court to implement corrective programs pre-trial, which do not impact on my guilt or non-guilt of the underlying case but which seek to get me services so that I won't feel the need to "A", carry the gun, and "B", that I will be less likely to use it. So, this is a pre-trial intervention program much like our other corrective court programs. 2827 Budget - 4/12/05 When my case comes to court -- The gun court so far has handled about 220 cases with a very high -- This is only in the first two months. So, it's a very, very expedited program. In the first two months we've handled over 215 or 220 cases, a very high percentage of guilty pleas, a very high percentage of non-jury trials, and a very high percentage of other consequences flowing from guilty pleas, guilty verdicts, and the like. I might also add parenthetically that Judge Jeffrey Minehart, the judge whom the Supreme Court assigned to this court, is just dandy. He's the dream of a judge that every person wants: Right down the middle, calls it as he sees it, keeps himself to the facts and the law. And if every judge does that, we would be just in a super peachy situation. So, we've done a tremendous amount with that. And after the conviction, if there is one, then there's after care, 2828 Budget - 4/12/05 intensive intervention. If the judge believes that there are guns in my house that I shouldn't have, the judge may sign an order giving authority of police or the probation department to search my house and take all my guns away, give me intensive supervision. And the interesting part is that, unlike the situation with the probation department, which is overloaded with cases -- Now, 200, 300 cases on a probation officer. They're especially assigned and paid for probation officers to this court who will handle nothing but these gun court cases. So it's a better result all around. It is still too early, of course, after just two months, to see what overall impact it will have, but we are hopeful within the year we will be able to do this. The seventh part is the five-year mandatory sentences for armed drug traffickers. And we have accomplished that, and... Let's see. There is a... I'll give you the poster in a minute. Here it is. 2829 Budget - 4/12/05 We have distributed this handout to every Police District in Philadelphia. We just reordered 30,000 of these.

This puts people on notice, through the Police Department, through various citizens groups, legislators, City Council people, if you like, in your offices, both here and any place else you'd care to, the notion that you're on notice. If you are... If you are in possession of a gun when you deal drugs for -- Let's use Mr. Taslowski as an example. I have a gun, Mr. Taslowski has the drugs or he has the gun and I have the drugs. So, if we're out there on the corner dealing drugs and either one of us is armed, each of us will be arrested and each of us will face a mandatory five-year sentence; no 20 plea bargains, no nothing. This mirrors the Federal statute and this is on both sides. There's information available to our citizens. The eighth and ninth part of our blueprint are other statutory enactments 2830 Budget - 4/12/05 which are presently being considered by our legislature. That's amending firearms possession, to increase the penalty for an illegal firearm from a first degree misdemeanor to a third degree felony. It also would disable or prohibit a person convicted of this offense from being able to get a permit to carry a firearm. And that's presently under consideration. This is Jewel Williams' Bill, House Bill 2799, and House Bill 2800 which was introduced this past July and is presently under consideration. The ninth part of our ten-point program is the Armed Violent Career Criminal Statute which creates, again, another mandatory sentence for violent criminals who possess firearms, a minimum of which is five years who have two prior convictions, ten years if three or more prior convictions. This is Dwight Evans' Bill, House Bill 1795, which was also introduced the same day as Jewel Williams' Bill, July 3, 2004. That is also presently under consideration. 2831 Budget - 4/12/05 And the last thing on our program was the Federal Project Safe Neighborhoods and the State Alternative Program. , tracing all firearms, targeted approach to violent hot spots in Philadelphia. And that is part of a budget appropriation of 2004. Now, those are the ten points. We're well on our way, but I have to sound a note of caution, that all of these programs are funded only in part and only for a brief amount of time. I've already spoken to Representative Evans and other legislators about permanent funding. And obviously, the state is going to consider our joint request from all of the partners involved: The Police Commissioner, the School District, the legislature, community groups, the District Attorney's Office, the State Attorney 2832 Budget - 4/12/05 General's Office, and other of our partners. But I don't know what the future will be for these programs. Every crime-fighting program depends on funding. And if the funding goes, all these programs which we believe have a high potential for success will be gone as well. And that is the only note of caution that I sound. It's not a full funding. It's not a dedicated source of funding. We're sort of lurching from year to year hoping that funding will continue. And that's the ten-point program.

Thank you. I certainly appreciate your taking the time to go over the blueprint of the ten points for a safer Philadelphia. And I'm delighted to hear that at long last somebody's talking about zone courts. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Yes, indeed.

I guess I'm dating myself, but way back when, many 2833 Budget - 4/12/05 moons ago when I worked in the District Attorney's Office and I was in charge of listing cases, we did it manually. If Officers Goode and Verna were partners, I listed or of their cases in 7 one courtroom. 8 With all the modern technology that 9 we have today, I don't know why we would have 10 to have officers running to seven different 11 courtrooms in one day. 12 Don't they put the names of the arresting officers on the bills of indictment? THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Of course.

And are they not placed into a computer, where you could just push a button and Officer Goode and Verna's arrest come out? It just seems so ridiculous to me that with all of the modern technology that we have today that we can't do something like that. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Councilwoman, we have been asking the courts 2834 Budget - 4/12/05 which as you know are responsible for the listing of cases. We don't list cases; the court does. We have been asking the court to do this for years, for at least seven, eight, nine years.

I'll tell you. I think... THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: And they have refused to do so.

And I think that every budget hearing that I've attended I've asked the same question. And at one time the court said, oh, it would be unconstitutional to do that. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: No, it wouldn't.

Why? THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: It wouldn't be unconstitutional. As a matter of fact, it would be efficient and effective. I think that the way that we best serve the public is by giving them the fastest, most efficient way to dispose of cases, without it at all infringing on the 2835 Budget - 4/12/05 defendants' constitutional rights. But judges are reluctant, extraordinarily reluctant. And the court administration, the President Judge, the former President Judge, Labrum Davis turned us down cold. We have been asking and asking and asking.

May I ask why anybody would turn that down? THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Do you want my honest opinion?

Yes. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: I think that judges are afraid that they might have their names well known in the community. And they are concerned that they might be somehow associated with any or all of their decisions. Here's my point. Here's what victims and witnesses and defendants want and are entitled to: A fast, expeditious, correct way of determining: Are the police right? Did they get the right guy for the right reasons or are they wrong? 2836 Budget - 4/12/05 We certainly don't want cases disposed of because the officer was in another courtroom and the judge dismisses the case. That is not justice for the victim, and it isn't justice for the City of Philadelphia, and it isn't justice for the defendant either. But what it's become is a series of games that are played in the courts. And we want the Supreme Court to even consider doing it on a pilot project basis, to see whether or not it works. Now, we know, for example, that Judge Minehart is in court every single day on gun court. We know that Judge Presenza has been in drug court every year for what, five years? Doing drug court. Judge Presenza, doing the same kind of prosecutions that we're talking about, and Judge Minehart in the first few months of the drug court, have done simply a sensational job. They get through their case load. 2837 Budget - 4/12/05 They're not breaking, you know, land speed records. They're doing it quietly and efficiently. I believe the entire court system will work the same efficient way by doing things the way you and I both agree they ought to be done, in zones.

And you wouldn't have to have seven district attorneys -- assistant district attorneys working on this. If a case is continued, it would go before the same judge and the same assistant district attorney would be assigned to it. I think, as I said, with all of the modern technology that we have today, I just don't know why we are not taking full advantage of it. I found your testimony quite interesting. However, I think we better get back to the issue at hand, your budget. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Mm-hmm.

I see that it is being proposed that your budget be... 2838 Budget - 4/12/05 I believe, it's $918,999 less than what you had in '05. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: That is correct.

Now, you are stating that you're requesting that your budget remain the same as last year, with only the increase being for cost of living. However, we don't have a dollar amount for that. Can you tell us how much money you're asking to be... THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: $30,472,788, plus a COLA of $473,000, give or take. It's $472,649. The $30,472,788 includes the COLA of the $473,000, give or take.

So that's what you're actually asking for. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Yes, ma'am.

The Chair recognizes Councilman Kelly for a point of information.

Point of information. Thank you, Madam Chair. 2839 Budget - 4/12/05 I just want to ask why the First Judicial District will not list multiple cases for the same officer for the same courtroom. Is there any... THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: They just refuse to do it, Councilman. And for the life of me, I do not understand this. My whole point --

In other words, the police officer would go from court to court to courtroom.

And a police officer in a busy district -- and there's scarcely a district that isn't busy, I might add -- could find himself assigned on the same day to eight or ten courtrooms, sometimes in the same building. But when he's on the stand testifying in, let's say, the eighth floor or the ninth floor, and somebody wants him on the fifth or sixth or seventh floor, he can't be there. When the case is called, we say to the judge, judge, officer "X" is testifying 2840 Budget - 4/12/05 in front of judge "Y". Well, sorry. Case isn't ready. Either dismissed or continued. We say, well, you know, he's testifying in front of another judge. Can you wait? They say, nope. Can't wait. So, you're going to have to ask the First Judicial District that question. I refuse to answer for them. I don't see the reason or the point of it. But I've been arguing with them over this question for seven or eight years. They still haven't given me a satisfactory answer.

Okay. Madam Chair, I believe that this is something that we should address the First Judicial District for this. I think it makes sense.

Very well. Thank you. I just have another question or two. I notice that just about every Council member here wants to be recognized. You mention the issue of your office 2841 Budget - 4/12/05 not being able to retain experienced prosecutors. What is the average stay of a prosecutor? And can you tell us what the average pay is at that time? THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: It's hard to figure out an average, but here's the way it usually works, Madam Chair. The starting salary is what... 46... I'm going to give you... $46,000. Now, the average starting salary in our largest law firms is $115,000 to $125,000. So, if you really want to get technical, although I said less than half, I was hoping that you would ask me the median. The median in Philadelphia is about $70,000, $80,000 for medium sized law firms. But I hasten to add that these great men and women could go to the largest law firms and get the $125,000. So, they come to us burdened with a tremendous amount of student loan debt. And we've been championing student loan forgiveness for public service but we haven't 2842 Budget - 4/12/05 been able to get that. So we have a group of people who stay just for the three-year commitment. They give us a three-year commitment. Many of the people stay for three years, and then they move to the larger law firms because then they have litigation skills. Then there's another group that stays from between three and maybe five or six years. A smaller group than stays from five to maybe ten years. And some stay for even longer than ten years. Now, the difficult question to answer is, many of those people don't really come intending to spend either more than three years or maybe more than five years. But I must confess that the job is so interesting, that even though it's a great personal sacrifice, they stay longer. But the history of the District Attorney's office has been that we can't keep the most attractive people because the lure of big salaries outside is tremendous. 2843 Budget - 4/12/05 And when they marry which they do and have children which they do, their expenses go up far more than we can adequately compensate them. Even though they deserve much more, we can't keep them. So, if you want an average, it's about... The average is somewhere between four to six years, and the average salary between four and six years is around $60,000 which at the smaller firms would be their starting salary six years previous. So, they're working really for essentially nothing.

Having to do public service. That's what it is. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Well, public service is; but, you know, you have to pay the rent and you have to pay your student loans.

Of course. Of course. And was this ever attempted to be addressed, as to how we can keep well-qualified prosecutors in the D.A.'s 2844 Budget - 4/12/05 office and pay them a -- certainly a much more reasonable salary? THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Well, Councilwoman, as you know, our budget, our Class 100 funds only allows us as much leeway as the amount in Class 100 allows us. You may remember a few years ago our starting salary was about $37,000. And we came to Council and said to you -- I think it was two years ago -- we can't even attract and keep people for their three-year commitment at $36,000. We just had to raise it because the prices of the marketplace were just too spectacular. And we told you what we wanted to do. And that's what we did. But we just can't go any further on the present budget, Councilwoman. And if we suffer this $1 million cut, there are going to be substantial and dire consequences for the citizens of Philadelphia.

The Clerk of Quarter Sessions testified last week on her budget. And she indicated that there 2845 Budget - 4/12/05 would be five new courtrooms that would be coming into existence. If in fact that were to happen, would your budget be able to cover it? THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: No. 7

Do you know of five new courtrooms coming into being? THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: I don't know, but if you'll -- I think if you hearken back to my testimony last year, when I advised the Council that if the court system was going to add courtrooms, we don't have the manpower to cover them. We can't sacrifice. We can't sacrifice quality legal representation to victims of crime and to the ultimate safety of the community by just putting a warm body in a room. It's not going to work. We need D.A.'s. And we have D.A.'s who are diligent and hard working and dedicated, but they also need time to prepare. And time to prepare means they can't 2846 Budget - 4/12/05 be, you know, hitched up to a courtroom where they have no time off, they have no time to call witnesses, they have no time to go to the scene, they have no time to interview and do all the things that they need to see and do, and be in courtroom five days a week, ten hours a day, and then start up the next day and the next -- you just can't do it. You do need prep time. You do need down time. You need time to collect yourself. And even if they work weekends, which many of them do, how long can you beat these people into submission? You just can't do it. So, I can tell you as a statement of fact, we're not going to staff those courtrooms. So, the court can do anything it wants. There won't be any D.A. in there without adequate funding, preparation, and the proper way to represent victims of crime and our neighbors. These are all our neighbors, these victims.

Thank you. I think because of my questioning 2847 Budget - 4/12/05 about an explanation of blueprint it really did take quite a bit of time, and I know I certainly went over my five minutes. However, there are a number of Council members that would like to be recognized. For the first go-around we will accommodate everyone with five minutes. The first one to be recognized is Councilman Goode.

Thank you, Madam President. Good morning, Madam District Attorney. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Good morning.

Let me start by saying, I take no issue with the level of your budget request. Public safety is a serious priority of mine. I want to talk a little bit about the fact that you amended your testimony, your written testimony, and also in your oral presentation, I think, reflected the changes in your written testimony. Can you tell me 2848 Budget - 4/12/05 why there was a change in your written testimony and how and why and when you made that decision? THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Yes. The gentleman to my right, Mr. Taslowski -- As you may know, I do not write my own testimony throughout. Mr. Taslowski does the first testimony for me, and submitted it to Council before I had a chance to thoroughly read it and review it. And he went away on military leave. And when I reviewed it thoroughly, I contacted the Council President's Office and said that with her indulgence I'd like to amend our testimony so that it more nearly reflected my views of it. And the Council President gave me leave to do so. I did so and I submitted a letter to her with, I believe, sufficient copies to go around to all of you, to indicate that with no disrespect meant to my very noble and worthy deputy, that I really wanted to put a 2849 Budget - 4/12/05 different spin, if you will, to my testimony. I am realistic and I'm not a Pollyanna person. I understand, you know, realities of the situation. But I didn't want to -- I didn't want to sound the same tone as the original budget message. I wanted to be more in tune with my own personal thoughts on these issues, and being mindful of Council's assistance in the past.

My question, though -- My line of questioning next really relates to sort of a disconnect between that written and oral testimony and the actual budget reality. So, I ask you a series of questions about your written and oral testimony. Does it actually reflect a change in your budget? And to what extent does it? THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: I don't believe it changes our budget at all, no. 23

Okay. Does it reflect a change in your programs and initiatives? 2850 Budget - 4/12/05 THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: No. 3

Does it have any dollars for witness protection and relocation? THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: No, it does not.

Does it actually provide new dollars -- THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: I'm asking Council for money. I've been asking Council for money for witness relocation, Councilman. We have never received any money from City Council specifically earmarked for witness relocation.

So, you would like to us do that on top of your budget allocation? THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Well, obviously, Councilman, we obviously need as many dollars as we can because Federal money is drying up and state money is drying up. And so, I'm presenting our budget to you with the realities that whatever you give us we will try to do our best with it. 2851 Budget - 4/12/05 However, the best is not good enough when victims' lives are at stake. So, because I've gone to --

So, your budget does not currently reflect -- THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: It doesn't currently, but I'll be happy to receive any additional assistance that Council wishes to give us for any and all of our victim assistance programs.

Okay. Your budget does not also have any money for increasing the salaries of District Attorneys -- Assistant District Attorneys, other than the cost of living increases? THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: That's correct.

So, what new dollars are there to improve public safety? THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Say that again. I'm sorry.

What new dollars are there to improve public safety? THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Well, 2852 Budget - 4/12/05 Councilman, you know, in light of the fact that the Mayor proposed cutting our budget $1 million, it's $1 million to improve our public safety capabilities.

It's $1 million over what the Mayor suggested. But my question is, what new dollars are there for public safety in your current budget? THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: The dollars that we have will allow us to -- If Council agrees with our suggestion, we will be able to keep our public safety dollars at the same level as last year. Being realistic about what I can ask for and what I can get are two different things. I could come in here and ask for $10 million more in my budget. I don't want to be unrealistic. I want to try to help the Mayor and Council and the City, given the budget realities. And I believe that given the programs that we have, plus the funding, the new dollars we got from the state legislature, with the programs that they have 2853 Budget - 4/12/05 initiated, we will be able to keep the same high level of programs.

Madam District Attorney -- THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: So the new dollars are -- the new dollars are the Youth Violence Reduction Partnership, $2 million. Not for us. Not for us but --

I'm asking, what dollars in the City budget that you're requesting are new dollars for public safety? It's a simple question. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: The only new dollars are the same dollars that I had last year.

Okay. Thank you. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: No 19 additional funding.

I'd like to move on. I have no problem talking about challenging your level of budget request at all. And my next question will get to where I'm really going. How do we actually 2854 Budget - 4/12/05 buy more public safety? THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: How do we actually what?

Buy more public safety. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: I think we have --

If we wanted to invest more money, how do we actually buy more public safety? How do we actually buy a reduction in crime and violence? THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Well, I think, Councilman, that there are so many programs out there that have not really been fully tested at any great length. I find myself testifying in front of the legislature and Council bodies on programs that we have been proposing for years which have never been implemented. So, I believe that we can take the programs, for example, implicated in the ten-point program and direct all of our or most of our dollars to that. Rethinking, using the same... 2855 Budget - 4/12/05 (Timer buzzes.)

That's for me. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: ...using the same dollars that we have but in a different way. In other words, I think that full planning, a full planning document which implements the programs on the ten-point program, plus some of our other programs, will redirect the same dollars in a more effective way. So, I don't believe it's always and only dollars. But I do believe it's a different way of thinking about prosecuting criminal cases. For example, if we do zone courts, we'll actually be saving the City, I believe, millions of dollars in police overtime, millions. So, by asking for no more money doing zone courts... It doesn't cost us any money to do zone courts. We just put district attorney "X" into a courtroom. And those five or ten police 2856 Budget - 4/12/05 officers who aren't working double overtime shifts and day off shifts by making sure the calendar is attuned as much as possible to the officer's regular work shift or limiting the number of regular days off will save millions and millions of dollars. So...

So, we need a better strategy. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: It's rethinking the way we do it. And this is more efficient, more effective. Its dollar cost average is better.

Thank you, Madam District Attorney. Thank you, Madam President.

You're welcome. The Chair recognizes Councilman Nutter.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Madam District Attorney, good morning. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Good 2857 Budget - 4/12/05 morning.

I did -- I took down a couple notes from your comments. So, first, I'd like to get a law enforcement definition of a super peachy situation. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: I beg your pardon?

A super peachy situation; is there a law enforcement definition? THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Yes, there is. There is. I'll tell you what I meant by that. There are people who think that the prosecution wants judges who are just prosecution minded. There are other people who want judges who are just defense minded. My definition of a super peachy situation is, if we get every judge in criminal court who is 100 percent right down the middle. If a person who sits as a judge delivers a verdict in accordance with the law and the evidence, not shading it to one side or the other, that is the optimum that people 2858 Budget - 4/12/05 in a free state can hope for, and that's my desired outcome.

Only in a way that you could deliver it. I would strongly encourage that after some of the activities of the spring, you might want to -- you might just want to relax. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: I am relaxed.

It was a totally whimsical question, but I knew you'd have a definition for it because you're right down the line. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Thank you, sir.

Let's go into your testimony a little bit. You talked about the Youth Violence Reduction Program. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Yes.

And I may have missed, popping in and out of the room. I know you were talking about possible state support maybe, if I heard you correctly. But when you talk about taking the 2859 Budget - 4/12/05 program to scale, presently it is operating in three police districts? THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Essentially 24th, 25th, a little bit of the 26th, and part of the 12th.

Okay. So, maybe three-and-a-half or so. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Give or take, yes.

What is your estimate of what it would cost to take the program city-wide. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: We asked the legislature, sir, for about $13 million for the program. And that's not city-wide, if I could just make a bit of a correction. What we do, when we look at the Y.V.R.P. as presently contemplated is, we look at the districts that have the most homicides, and they are not the whole city. It doesn't mean that we're not mindful of a district that has one or two. But when we look at the City as a whole, we look at the districts that have the most 2860 Budget - 4/12/05 violence prone component of people from to 24. And so, we're looking at our youth violence reduction --

Right. 6 THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: -- 7 partnership to expand to all those districts. 8

And what do you 9 think? That's about another six or seven or 10 eight or ten? 11 THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: No. We got 12 $2 million. So, we believe that we needed 13 probably another $10 million, $11 million 14 from the state. 15

No. No. No. 16 The number I gave was not in millions of 17 dollars. I was asking how many additional police districts do you think that is? Is that about a half a dozen, maybe seven or eight? THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Well, it's the... Let's see. It's the 22nd. I'm just going to do this off the top of my head, so please forgive me.

It's all right. 2861 Budget - 4/12/05 Go through -- Sure. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: It's the 22nd, 23rd, the 18th, the 19th, the 16th, the 17th.

Amen. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Yes.

Boy, do we need it there. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: The 39th, parts of the 14th, parts of the 35th. So -- and there's -- I'm sure there's another one off the top of my head that I've forgotten.

It's all right. So, maybe about nine or ten. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: About nine or ten altogether.

Okay. And $13 million covers the nine or ten additional districts? THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: We believe that if we get that kind of money we'll be able to bring to it scale, to see how the program's working, and so we can really get some true sense of a different approach to 2862 Budget - 4/12/05 fighting homicide.

Right. And what's your best sense of the prospects of the $13 million from the state? THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Well, I've spoken to House Appropriations Chair Evans. And he says he's going to try. But I have to be honest with you. The budget realities in Harrisburg, I don't know how much the Governor and the legislature is going to be willing or able to give to Philadelphia, given the other monies that we've asked them for on top of the Y.V.R.P.

Right. Okay. So... And in this budget is part of the strategy here you are anticipating trying to get Y.V.R.P. money primarily from the state. So, there's no -- is there any request in this budget for additional funding for the Youth Violence Reduction Program? THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: No, there isn't.

Okay. Because 2863 Budget - 4/12/05 you were going on the state rep. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: We have money from the state.

I understand. Okay. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: But I want to be cautious in my statement about that. The District Attorney's Office per se gets virtually nothing from that money. I want you to know that. We're not getting any additional --

I understand. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: -- funding. The money that is gotten from the state pays the probation officers.

Right. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Parole officers.

Mostly for salaries. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: And PAM and those other groups that go out, the street workers, and so forth. They're paid. We are not getting any money from that. 2864 Budget - 4/12/05

No; I understand. I didn't think you were trying to load up the budget or something. No. I know where the money is going. Let's go... The next to last on your testimony you talked about minority prosecutor's reception and the recruitment committee. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Correct.

Could you... Maybe a two-part question, the second of which is a data request. So, could you give us a sense of what the results were from the last go-around? And then my data request is, if you could provide an analysis of your office, from a demographic standpoint, year by year over the past five years with a gender and race breakdown. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: We will get that to you. Sure.

For the attorneys. 2865 Budget - 4/12/05 THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Sure. We'll get that to you.

What was the most recent situation? THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Insofar as success is concerned?

Yeah. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Highly successful. Our incoming class of hires, 11 this incoming class coming in in August, 50 12 percent are minority. 13 With regard to our -- 14

These are 15 attorneys. 16 THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Yes. 17

Mm-hmm. Sure. 18 I have their names and their schools, if you 19 want them. 20

No. 21 THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: With regard to minority attorneys, do you want office wide or attorneys?

On the data request, you can break it out. 2866 Budget - 4/12/05 THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Okay. Thank you.

Keep the attorneys in one group and the office -- THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Sounds good.

Why don't we do attorneys and non-attorneys. Is that a relatively high number, as compared to the past few years? THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Well, it's -- We... I don't know. I think it's -- Let me just think if I can... I just don't remember from last year's testimony, but we endeavor to mirror in our employee base the people whom we serve. So, we always have minority receptions. We have a brochure. We do special minority recruitment.

Right. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: I'll provide you with a copy of our brochure, if you'd like to. We send people from our office throughout the eastern part of the United States at minority fairs. We're hosting, by the way, 2867 Budget - 4/12/05 Councilman, the National Black Prosecutors' Association this summer in Philadelphia. And we'd be delighted if you'd like to come because we would attempt to try to lure some prosecutors from other cities and states to Philadelphia.

You're not going to lure them at $46,000 a year. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Well, I'm sorry. It is what it is.

I understand. I'll come back. Because we have had some discussion about this over the years. And I certainly applaud the efforts. But for whatever reason my recollection is, is that maybe in the past things were a little tougher, and that the numbers have moved up in recent times. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: It's always tough, Councilman, when you're trying to attract people with a lot of debt, $100,000 worth of debt or more, when the marketplace is so alluring. And it's difficult to retain, as I 2868 Budget - 4/12/05 indicated to the Council President, because our salary scale is so low.

Right. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: So, it is always a constant battle to attract and keep talent. Now, these people want to come. They really want to come. But we can't keep them. I might also add that if you look at the city's law firms, they have a dismal, a dismal record of minority attraction and payment. Their figures are embarrassingly small, sometimes in the lower one -- single digit. And the Legal Intelligencer did a big story about that, which I'd be happy to send to you when I send our figures to show that.

Okay. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: We are far and away the best and even striving to be even better than any law firm in Philadelphia, small, medium or large.

Okay. I'll look forward to the data. I know my time is up. 2869 Budget - 4/12/05 THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Thank you. We'll be happy to provide it.

Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman Rizzo.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Good morning. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Good morning.

There's an issue that is causing a lot of disruption in our City that I'm going to ask where you think maybe your office could help. I've had conversations with the Police Department. And it pertains to what you've talked about a little bit ago as to technology and some of our capabilities. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Mm-hmm.

Bomb threats have become a real, real problem for the police department, dozens of officers responding. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Mm-hmm.

And doing some 2870 Budget - 4/12/05 research, that the Patriot Act has allowed under exigent circumstances for police agencies to almost immediately, without search warrants or any document, to get telephone information where the bomb threat came from. Our resources are limited at the police headquarters when a person calls 9-1-1. But also now they're calling the schools and there's technologies available in the schools. Unfortunately, not a lot of the principals knew that the technology even existed, to be able to determine the source of the call. The Police Department seems as though they're just so overwhelmed with this because there's just dozens and dozens of these types of calls, clearing airports and hospitals and transportation hubs. Is there something that your office can do? I think if something happens, and people realize that this is bad and that this is going to put people in jail that make 2871 Budget - 4/12/05 these kinds of calls, that cause evacuations of 30th Street Station and other transportation facilities, what can the Police Department do? What can the School District do? What can the District Attorney's Office do to really focus on this problem? Because if we added up the money that we spend every time there's a suspicious -- there's a call made... I'm just appealing to you for some help. And again, I know your resources are limited. But something has to happen here because the Police Department's really not doing much about it. The School District's not really doing much about it. And it just continues, dozens and dozens of calls every week, that are very disruptive and costly to our City. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Councilman, the Patriot Act and the incidence of 9-1-1 and all the other terrorist incidents have put a tremendous strain on every police department in the country. 2872 Budget - 4/12/05 And while we are part of the task force on anti-terrorism, the anti-terrorism task force, there is no money in the Patriot Act or any place else to any prosecutor's office to do anything. In addition to that there... I'm talking about local prosecutors. Federal prosecutors, perhaps, but not local prosecutors. I can tell you, no place in the country is any local prosecutor getting any money from the Patriot Act to do anti-terrorism efforts. So, to answer your question, if I'm not getting any money, I don't know what I can do. The Federal Government, if you've been reading the papers about our anti-terrorism capabilities, it's an extraordinary strain on the Police Department. And you're right. When people call in a suspicious package or a briefcase that some innocent person left on the subway platform or the el platform, there's 2873 Budget - 4/12/05 tremendous deployment of police personnel and the bomb squad. That's all very expensive. I don't know what I can do to try to help the police, except what we've always been doing, meeting with the U.S. Attorney, as we do every month, on an anti-terrorism task force; have some of our officers working on the joint terrorism task force; and trying to funnel information and deploy as best we can to anticipate everything we can while, we're not receiving any money for it. So, the answer to your question is, I'm not included in the budget pie, so I don't know what I can offer you or the Police Department.

District Attorney Abraham, I understand the responses when there's a suspicious package. We have an obligation. And the money is spent. I'm talking more so these unfounded threats that now, because we met with all of the cell phone provides and we met with all of the land line providers. We have now a process in place to find out where these 2874 Budget - 4/12/05 calls -- if someone calls a particular school and threatens that school, they now have the capability of tracking the call and making an arrest. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Absolutely. Of course. Absolutely. If they make an arrest for a bomb threat that is unfounded or even if it's real -- Obviously, if it's real the Federal government may take the case. But if a person calls in a false police report about a threat of a bomb that is absolutely without foundation, then the police should make the arrest, and we will prosecute, of course. And we would also not only prosecute locally but we would coordinate our efforts with the U.S. Attorney's Office to make sure that if this person was a threat to the security and the integrity of the United States of America, and that this person posed a real and present danger to the safety and security of the citizens of Philadelphia, we would respectfully ask that the Federal 2875 Budget - 4/12/05 government take that case and prosecute it because there is immediate pre-trial detention. There is trial within 60 to 90 days. There are very substantial Federal penalties for this kind of activity, and very substantial sentences without good time, earned time or parole. So, we would do whatever we could locally after consulting with the Philadelphia Police Department and our Federal counterparts to see which jurisdiction is better able to handle the false, threatening phone call. And all we need is whatever the police want us to do. We're full partners in anything they want us to do, as well as with the Federal Government.

I think the concern, and I know it's my... I have, like, 30 seconds.

30 seconds.

I think the 2876 Budget - 4/12/05 problem is that the Police Department is under the impression that if they would bring one of these nuisance calls to the District Attorney, it would probably not be dealt with. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: They can't be under that impression, Councilman, because they have never yet called us for a case that we would decline.

And I straightened that out. I said, well, tell me the last time that you brought one there. And that was the answer. And I think that that may change because really the resources are being spread so thin, that they need to make sure that the word gets out there -- and that's part of my rationale speaking about it today -- because it is getting out of hand in this city. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: I can't imagine a situation where somebody called in a bomb threat. There are specific Pennsylvania statutes that would cover 2877 Budget - 4/12/05 exactly that. There's risking a catastrophe, there's threats and other statutes which we would take in a heartbeat as long as we are sure that the person whose cell phone it is is the person that made the phone call. For example -- And I want to be clear on this. If you have a cell phone. And you give to it me and I make the phone call. And by the time the police get to you it's two days later and you have your cell phone back and it's not you who made the phone call, we have to be sure that the person in possession of the cell phone was the one who made the call.

Okay. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: So, we don't have a problem about prosecuting anybody who is shown to us by evidence, we can walk into a courtroom and prosecute, is the person who made the call. That's not the problem for us. You can assure the Police Department, as I certainly will, and by this 2878 Budget - 4/12/05 testimony am, we'll take any bomb threat. I can't imagine anybody getting away with that.

Great. Thank you. Thank you, Madam President.

You're welcome. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Miller.

Thank you. Thank you, Madam President. Good morning. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Good morning, Councilwoman.

Great. I just -- In reading your testimony I have a couple questions. Is the blueprint that you're describing, is that the same blueprint that Representative Evans and Dr. Stick and those people have put together? THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: This is our blueprint. That's right. We worked -- 2879 Budget - 4/12/05

So, it's the same blueprint. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: We worked on it together. This is our blueprint. Sure.

I understand. I just didn't know whether it was another -- two blueprints or one blueprint. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Oh, no. No. 10 No. No. There's only one blueprint, and this is it, ma'am.

Okay. All right. Great. I want to get more information about the juvenile justice curriculum that is being taught in schools. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Yes. May I call up George Mosee to do that for you, ma'am, since he is the deputy in charge of that curriculum for the school system and he's the one who taught the teachers, so to speak?

Okay. Good.

Good morning. Please identify yourself for the 2880 Budget - 4/12/05 record.

Good morning. I'm George Mosee, M-o-s-e-e, Deputy for the Juvenile Division in the D.A.'s office.

Okay. Good morning. Just wondering. What exactly does the curriculum entail? And how many weeks.

Well, it's a 30-week curriculum. It was developed to teach young people the ramifications of criminal and delinquent conduct. It also exposes them to American jurisprudence, and we hope that it whets their appetite for careers in law enforcement. The 30 weeks will include lectures by teachers, but will also include a video series that we're currently developing. And that series will include subject matter that relates to what it means to be a victim of crime, what it means to be somebody who abuses drugs and tries to get off drugs. It will also address some of the subject matter 2881 Budget - 4/12/05 related to what it is that we do in juvenile justice and criminal justice, some of those things that we just can't expect the teachers to be able to convey with the same expertise as the people who actually work in the system.

And will this be -- I know in your testimony you said it will be taught in middle school. And will it be for all students in a particular school?

Every 6th, 7th and 8th grade class will have the juvenile justice curriculum -- will be exposed to the juvenile justice curriculum as part of their social studies curriculum.

And you did say that a part of the curriculum includes consequences.

That's right. Consequences for juvenile -- for delinquent conduct, for criminal conduct and for violations of the school code.

Okay. And what about values, values clarification, 2882 Budget - 4/12/05 those kinds of things?

I'm sorry?

What about values clarifications? I think a lot of what people think that, you know, many, many young people just don't have a particular set of values, and that's what causes them to participate in behavior that leads them to a negative behavior.

And I agree. And what I think was necessary was for the school to have a formal curriculum that would at least allow them the opportunity to discuss everything related to violence, related to crime. And certainly values is a major part of that. And I would be remiss if I didn't point out that part of our hope is that we'll hear from young people vis-a-vis this curriculum, that we'll get feedback from them about what they think needs to be done in order to make our community safer.

So, that's 2883 Budget - 4/12/05 good. And when is it due to start?

We've already started in some schools. But we hope to have it fully implemented in every school next year.

Very good. Okay. And I'd like to know... Actually, I know it takes a while to access and evaluate. But I'd like to -- I'm sure Council would like to receive information on the progress. Okay.

Certainly.

Okay. Thank you. I have another question regarding ex-offenders or the reentry issues. Is the District Attorney's Office involved with the issue of offender or ex-offender reentry? THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Well, we are interested in it in several ways. The first is that we're attempting to -- We went to a seminar in England about juvenile reentry programs in England to see whether that would be something that we would want to consider. 2884 Budget - 4/12/05 The issue became, what was the effectiveness of their reentry program? And it was not promising. So, therefore, to date there has not been a juvenile reentry program available. We do work with the ex-offenders program. As a matter of fact, Councilwoman, people who are working for the Y.V.R.P., the Youth Violence Partnership, are ex-offenders. And they go out and talk to men and women on the street who are the subject or object of these partnership programs and try to reach them. Many of these, in fact, most of these kids, if not all of them, are already in the system. In other words, they are parolees, probationers. So, they already are in the system. And part of that reentry program is encouraging ex-offenders not to re-offend. That's the whole object of the Y.V.R.P. and the Safe Neighborhood Initiative. Between 17 and 32, we're trying to keep those people whom we have identified, as 2885 Budget - 4/12/05 best we could, with not re-offending. How we will eventually result in the successful outcome of this case is too soon to tell because of lack of funding, and lack of bringing the whole project to scale. There are so many more people we could reach if we had the funding. You can't judge any program as, quote, successful, unless we can show how this program works here as compared to either no program or a different program there. So, by bringing it all to scale, we hope to effect the reentry process. Now, here's the bottom line with reentry. It's not only ex-offenders talking to young men and young women about not re-offending and the problems of re-offending. It's the economy and jobs. And the availability of jobs, I think, is an essential component of any reentry. And that's going to be a central issue that has to be addressed.

I know. And 2886 Budget - 4/12/05 that is an issue that we're actually trying to work on. I want to ask you a question. I hope it's not out of line. But does the D.A.'s office hire ex-offenders or would the D.A.'s office hire an ex-offender. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: No and no. 9

Okay. We'll talk later. All right. Thank you. Thank you, Madam President.

The Chair recognizes Councilman Clarke.

I would actually like to follow up on that question, but it's going to take some of my time. I know you'll come back on that. You do believe in people getting a second chance. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: It depends on what the second chance is. I'm not sure.

Okay. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: You have to give me an example, and I can answer that specifically. 2887 Budget - 4/12/05 In other words, if you kill somebody I'm not so sure that I would want you to get out of jail to have a second chance.

Okay. All right. I'm not going to... That wasn't... Madam President, could you stop my clock, please?

Stop the clock, please. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Miller for a point of information.

All right. Thank you. What about the non-violent offenses? THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Well, non-violent offenders we do believe in second chances. For example, we have youth aid panels which take young people who have offended, and we try to make sure that they don't offend again by putting them out in the community with community-based programs. We also have gun programs for first-time defendants, youth offenders who carry guns but don't use them. 2888 Budget - 4/12/05 We have a program called Don't Fall Down in the Hood, which is sponsored by the Institute for the Development of African American youth, a long-term program of about weeks, where we have these young people, 7 mostly young boys, not over the age of the 8 juvenile court jurisdiction, go into a 9 program which is part of their sentence, that 10 they have to go to this program. They have 11 to go to school. They have to meet victims 12 of violent crime and gunshot injuries. 13 And by working with these young men 14 and young women, we hope that they won't 15 re-offend. There are a variety of offenders: 16 Prostitutes, non-violent criminals who 17 deserve another chance. 18 But for rapists, no. For multiple 19 serial robbers, no. For violent repeat 20 offenders, no. And for murderers, no. They 21 can get their second chance. I'm in favor of 22 that. 23 But I think we have to direct our 24 resources to the people whom I believe we can save from re-offending. And I believe we 2889 Budget - 4/12/05 have a good track record on saving people from re-offending.

Well, that's good. I just wanted to know if you have ever hired someone that's a non-violent offender. There are many people -- and I'm sure you know better than I do -- that have not committed violent crimes that are just having a terrible, terrible time finding employment. And I can't remember... Excuse me, Council President. Have we had the Personnel Department here yet.

Yes.

Oh, okay. That's something I'd like to know about... I believe the City of Philadelphia does hire ex-offenders. I don't think a criminal record keeps someone from becoming employed with the City of Philadelphia. And when they come back, I think I'm going to ask that question. Because we can do everything; we want to help people, we have to be involved, too. 2890 Budget - 4/12/05 All right. Thank you.

Again, the Chair recognizes Councilman Clarke.

Thank you, Madam President. Good morning. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Good morning.

I'd like to ask you a question, one, first about your testimony when you talked about new initiatives. And I'd actually like to get a copy of the ten-point program. I wasn't here for the entire testimony as it relates to that. So, I'm not sure about some of the -- particularly legislative initiatives. (The District Attorney hands Councilman Clarke a copy of the program.)

Thank you. You talk about, you know, the unfortunate death of Fahim Thomas Childs. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Mm-hmm.

And it stimulated the legislature to fund gun court. 2891 Budget - 4/12/05 Prior to that incident, had your office formally requested funding for that? Program in the preceding years. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: We had been asking for the Supreme Court to grant us the right to have a gun court. And there was a bill introduced, but it was attached as a rider to another bill by then House Representative... Wait a minute. Connie... What's her name... Connie...

Connie Williams. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Connie Williams. Thank you. I got a voice from the back. Thank you very much. Connie Williams. Which would have proved unworkable in a disaster, and that we wouldn't have been able to work that. So, we couldn't get it then, but we have it now. So we had asked for funding for a variety of initiatives, not maybe specifically a gun court. But not having the funding to it, and the important piece was not the funding because we didn't get any real money from the initiative from the 2892 Budget - 4/12/05 legislature except for a clerk. But what we did get was the Supreme Court's intersession to give us the right to assign a judge specifically to gun court. And the beauty of the gun court, with the Supreme Court's final intersession in this process, was that we'd be able to track the effectiveness of the program. And we also wanted additional components of the program. In other words, this was not just a situation, Councilman, where we would take anybody who didn't have a record and just throw them into gun court and just process the case. We wanted specific preventative measures pre-trial, and post trial preventative measures which only the Supreme Court could grant us. And so, we went to the court. It took a long time in granting us this request. But I'm pleased to say that they saw the wisdom of at least trying it. And when the supreme court said, we 2893 Budget - 4/12/05 will assign a specific judge, and we'll allow you to assign case managers pre-trial, probation officers post trial, we can at least see in the relatively near term, are we making a significant impact on people who carry illegal guns.

So, the answer to the question is, yes, your office had formally requested of the Supreme Court -- THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Correct.

-- the ability to authorize such a court or -- THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Correct.

-- authorize your department's involvement. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Asked the court to implement the program so we could have a gun court judge.

Was there a request for funding from the legislature -- THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: No. 23

-- prior to... THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: No. 25

Never. Okay. 2894 Budget - 4/12/05 THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: There was no 3 request for funding because essentially we didn't need the funding for us.

Until you got... THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: We needed funding for the probation, the service, the... What do you call them? The pre-trial case managers. And we needed money for the post-trial probation officers specifically assigned for that purpose. And we needed a clerk or two clerks, if you want to call them that or research assistants, I think, is the proper term, to monitor the effectiveness pre-trial and post-trial of the program to see essentially does it work. Because there's no use in having a program if it doesn't work. And this is the best way to find it out.

Okay. So, no 23 pun intended, but the jury is still out, would you say, on this? THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Yes. It's 2895 Budget - 4/12/05 only been open, what, three months? January, February and March. Actually, yeah. The beginning of or maybe the middle of January. So, essentially two months and two weeks.

All right. So, we can't really determine how effective -- THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Well, I can give you figures, if you want, and tell you what we've done.

I think you referenced some numbers earlier. 200 and something individuals. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Just give me one minute.

You can give me that a little later because we're on the clock.

My memory also is it was over 200. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: I'm sorry. As of March the 30th we had disposed of 203 cases, with the greatest number of them guilty pleas.

Okay. All 2896 Budget - 4/12/05 right. Getting to my issue: Guns. In prior testimony, not necessarily in budget testimony, but from time to time you've had occasion to come here and talk about some initiatives that we, although not legally authorized to do so at this point, as it relates to guns. In my estimation, you indicated some level of support but it was rather pessimistic, in terms of you acknowledging that we would ultimately get something done. The last time we had this discussion it was essentially a situation where Councilwoman Miller and myself co-sponsored a series of gun bills that would require state authorization. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Mm-hmm.

We did not have that at this time. We are now, unfortunately, due to the levels of violence in the City of Philadelphia have a bill introduced, particularly one gun a month. And a number 2897 Budget - 4/12/05 of other initiatives that the state is seeking as it relates to gun violence. I would like to ask you, given the fact that now we at least have on the record a bill, we at least have a number of legislators willing to support that bill, and we at least have a Governor who prior to him becoming Governor, as the Mayor indicated, he was willing to support one gun a month. What will you, as the District Attorney, beyond saying that you support the initiative, plan on doing? What will you do, in a tangible sense. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Two things. First of all, I didn't express pessimism as to any gun bill. What I think I said, Councilman, just to correct the record...

You said here -- I mean, you -- not to paraphrase, but you basically said, good luck. It ain't going to ever happen. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Well, no. 24 What I said was, I wrote you a letter and I said that I doubted that Council has the 2898 Budget - 4/12/05 authority to pass gun legislation.

We knew that. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: All right. Well. Okay.

That wasn't what we were seeking. We were asking the Pennsylvania legislature -- THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: That's right. I did.

-- to give us the authority. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: That's right.

And you basically said, it's never going to happen. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: We'll, I'd be interested to see if it does happen, frankly. But I'll tell you what I have done, and I'm prepared to make a copy available. In 1999, I testified on House Bill then 46 and 402, which was, by the way, Dwight Evans' Bill. It was called the Firearms Trafficking Prevention Act. It was the straw purchaser 2899 Budget - 4/12/05 and one handgun a month bill, for want of a better term. I brought my testimony. I testified in full support of the straw purchaser prohibition and the One Handgun a Month Act that was in those two bills. And essentially, as I mentioned the in my testimony to you previously, I think it was Blondell Reynolds Brown. Maybe it was yours, but I thought it was her public health.

We had a number of them. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Whatever. I was here whatever time you asked me. And I said that the people up in the legislature told me that it had no chance of passing. I am willing, happy... In fact, I've already written and spoke to Dwight Evans and Jewel Williams and Representative Myers, and said, I will come up and testify again to my desire to have one handgun a month, plus a straw purchaser ban passed by 2900 Budget - 4/12/05 the legislature. I still don't know if Council -- If the legislature, Councilman, is going to pass those acts. I think they will pass the armed career criminal bill. And I do believe they'll pass the other bill which I referred to is the raising the level of crime from a first degree misdemeanor to a third degree felony for carrying an unlicensed gun in Philadelphia. And that would also be added as a prohibition against anybody getting a firearm. It would be --

This is my problem. And I know the bell rang. This is my problem. With all of the legislation that is being discussed, it costs money. You earlier made a statement that all -- essentially, all crime fighting initiatives cost money. But we have before us a bill that, frankly speaking, doesn't cost us any money. If you limit the number of weapons that will be available, you know, it's not a real cost 2901 Budget - 4/12/05 to that. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: I agree with you.

For some reason, you know, people don't feel the need to push that at the level. And I'm glad to hear you say that you are willing to go and testify at the state hearing -- THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: I'll be happy to go back.

-- as to this particular bill. Can I ask you today -- And I understand if you don't want do give a public commitment at this point. Can you also initiate discussion with other District Attorneys throughout the Commonwealth because this is -- although the City of Philadelphia is getting the headlines as it relates to the level of violence. There are also both second and third class municipalities in the state that have similar violent crimes. 2902 Budget - 4/12/05 And we believe that if the -- if everybody takes the responsibility from their perspective peers -- We plan on interacting with Council members throughout the municipality -- I'm sorry, throughout the Commonwealth. I understand that there are a number of advocates who are working with advocates across the state, legislators working with legislators. I would like to ask, would you be willing to interact with District Attorneys across the state to lobby and get support for this legislation. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Sure.

At a minimum, to get the ability for Philadelphia to have it, and hopefully somewhere down the line, maybe the state. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Be happy to do that. I've done it before. I'll be happy to do it again.

Okay. Thank you. 2903 Budget - 4/12/05

Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman Kelly.

Thank you, Madam President. Madam District Attorney, I hope to make your day today because first of all I want to commend you and your staff, I think, and especially your Nuisance Task Force in closing down one of the notorious bars in Burholme. I know that your man Scott Sigmund has been working with the Burholme Civic Association to make sure that that facility doesn't ever reopen. And I just want to pass it on to you that I think that Nuisance Task Force is doing a very, very good job. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Thank you, sir. I appreciate that. I'll tell Mr. Sigmund of your kind remarks. I'm sure... Is Michael here? Where's Michael? Oh, there he is in the front row. Mike Erdos is right behind you, 2904 Budget - 4/12/05 sitting next to Joe Whitehead in the red and blue tie. He's the chief of that unit. I'm sure he'll go back and tell Mr. Sigmund. I'll tell you something. I wouldn't wanted to be on the other side of Mr. Sigmund on anything.

That's true. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: He is phenomenal. But I have to say, he's also typical of all the men and women in the office and all the men and women in that unit in particular. It's a great unit.

I also want to follow up on Councilman Clarke about guns. I want to again commend you for your efforts working with the Police Commissioner, and my good friend Joe Mamanna, in trying to get guns off the streets of Philadelphia. I think every gun that we take off the street of Philadelphia is going to make us a much safer City. And I hope that maybe that program can continue. I know it's -- I think there's a time limit on it. 2905 Budget - 4/12/05 THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: No, there isn't, as a matter of fact. No. Mr. Mamanna and his -- the gentleman who owns City Blue whose name just went out of my head, they have agreed that, unlike the previous program which was funded by a cash gift for "X" amount of time and it ran out of money and the program ended. And I just want to say, just so that Councilman Clarke understands, that I contributed $1,000 to that gun buy-back program myself. So, the money ran out --

Well, I know Councilman -- THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: No, no, no, no, no. I'm not saying that.

I know Councilman Clarke -- THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: No, no, no, no. 23

I know Councilman Clarke will probably -- THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: No, no, no, 2906 Budget - 4/12/05 no. 3

-- try to outdo you on that one. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: No, no, no. 6 No, no. No. 7

There's no doubt. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: I have a foundation, so I could do that. But I just want you to know that Mr. Mamanna and the gentleman who owns City Blue... I apologize. I just can't dredge up his name. They have said to us that they're willing to let this go a substantial period of time to see if they can effectuate a positive change. And that's why they instituted a sliding scale of reward, depending on the caliber...

And type of gun. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: As an example, Councilman, the last time we had the money the Commissioner noted that people would go to gun stores and buy a $30 gun and turn it in for $100 cash. They weren't doing 2907 Budget - 4/12/05 that any more. So now they have a sliding scale, depending on the type, the caliber of gun, they'll give you a sliding scale of reward based on how powerful, how modern and how lethal, if you'll excuse the expression, that weapon is.

Okay. I have a question on child support unit. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Yes, sir.

You mentioned you collected $191 million last year. How does that compare to previous years? THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: I'll give these out to you. Councilman, I don't know how it compares with other years. I'm not prepared to do that today, but I'll get you the information. The important thing is, Councilman, that we have about 125,000 open cases in the court system of Philadelphia of child support. And we collect it in a variety of ways. First of all, we have people... For 2908 Budget - 4/12/05 example, looking at... Okay. Let's say, a Sam Smith. We have a person who owes child support. We will comb all the court records to see if there's any case that Sam Smith has filed against anybody. And if Sam Smith has filed a case against anybody: An accident case, a worker's compensation case, somebody dies and leaves Sam Smith money, we file an order against that person's name, so that -- It's a non-distribution order. So that whenever that money comes forth, we get the money that is owed to the child first to give to the children before he gets whatever...

Before he gets... THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Yeah. And we also get -- We also collect it in a variety of other ways. But it's a very effective unit. And I think you'll be pleased, when we give you the numbers, to see how diligent the unit and the court system is working with our assistance in collecting child support payments. 2909 Budget - 4/12/05 Many of our clients are welfare recipients, and they have no effective way of collecting child support were it not for us.

Yeah. What cost is involved in providing the service? In other words, does Sam Smith -- Do you have to go after him? And does he provide -- at least, to reimburse you for your -- for the cost involved in collecting money from him? THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: There's a $10 10 cost for filing a complaint for child support. That's it.

That's it? Compare it to the cost of running it. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: The $10 is just for filing the complaint. Our costs are reimbursed in part by a Federal grant.

But my point is, Sam Smith, does he -- do you tack on anything to charge him? THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: No. 24

Nothing? Okay. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: We are just 2910 Budget - 4/12/05 interested in him paying to support his children. That's all we care about, support your children.

But he doesn't pick up any of the costs that you have to incur -- THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: No. The Federal Government --

-- in providing the service. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: No. The Federal government pays two-thirds of our costs to do that.

Oh, okay. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: So, we don't pass it on to the... We're just happy if the man supports his children.

Right. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: That's all we care about. And it's mostly men. That's why I'm saying man.

Right. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Madam District Attorney. 2911 Budget - 4/12/05 Thank you, Madam President.

Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman Nutter.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Madam District Attorney, in a similar way that Councilman Kelly did... This was on my second go-around list... I also have had just in my office staff a wonderful experience with... As wonderful experience as you can have, given the nature of the work, the Nuisance Task Force, and Mike Erdos who has been very, very helpful in any number of situations. And I just wanted to -- similarly to Councilman Kelly, recognize him for his work, and the work of the office that I do have a fair amount of contact with. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Thank you, sir.

Sure. There's been a lot of discussion with regard to the recent surge in violence 2912 Budget - 4/12/05 and certainly gun violence with... And we are presently seemingly on a path of almost a homicide a day. I don't know if you've articulated directly on this issue, but I'd certainly like to get your perspective on this recent violence wave. And you've talked about your ten-point plan, of course. But beyond a plan, I'd just like to know your thoughts about what's going on. THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Yes. My thoughts are that gun-related violence in the City of Philadelphia and elsewhere around the country is the greatest public health menace that we face, absent the overthrow of the government or a terrorist attack. As a matter of fact, it has been likened, and I would agree with this, to urban terrorism. And this country is awash with guns. We're a gun-loving country. It may be because of our history. But if you look at our homicide figures compared to the rest of the civilized world, 2913 Budget - 4/12/05 and this is excluding wars, you know, and rivalries that go back centuries and things of that sort. Our homicide rate is higher than any civilized country in the world. I believe that it comes from a variety of consequences. I've traveled to Harvard. The author of a book called Private Guns, Public Health. David Hemminway works for a friend of mine who's the Dean of the Harvard School of Public Health, as does Dr. Deborah Prothrostith, with whom I've also met, and Dr. Alvin Pusant, who's featured in the Philadelphia Inquirer this morning, talking about gun violence. Violent offenders don't care about the laws. They don't care about City Councils. They don't care about D.A.s. They don't care about anything. They're angry and hostile, and they act out angrily and hostilely and at random. It's not really predictable. And I believe that I've said on many occasions, and I repeat today that because I go into so many schools and so many 2914 Budget - 4/12/05 communities, as you undoubtedly know, I see that the precursors to violence are evident to us. You show me a child, a baby who is exposed in utero to alcoholism, abuse, a physical and psychological abuse, drug abuse, and then is brought up born into a family which is awash in family violence, sexual assault, television violence, violence outside his or her window, abusive, unloving, uncaring, unnurturing parents, who neither read nor hold, nor cuddle, nor love, nor nurture their children. Those kids will start off in school developmentally delayed and emotionally scarred. And they carry out that emotional scar and that anger and hatred and resentment, and they demonstrate it in schools. So, you can see markers. It's not a predictor. COUNCILAN NUTTER: Right.