COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA PUBLIC HEARING - COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - - - Room 400, City Hall Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Tuesday, April 20, 2004, 9:50 a.m. BILL 040255 - An Ordinance adopting the Operating Budget for Fiscal Year 2005. PRESENT: COUNCIL PRESIDENT ANNA C. VERNA COUNCILWOMAN BLONDELL REYNOLDS BROWN COUNCILMAN W. WILSON GOODE, JR. COUNCILMAN DAVID COHEN COUNCILMAN JACK KELLY COUNCILMAN JAMES F. KENNEY COUNCILMAN JUAN F. RAMOS COUNCILMAN FRANK RIZZO COUNCILMAN FRANK DI CICCO COUNCILWOMAN JANNIE L. BLACKWELL COUNCILMAN MICHAEL A. NUTTER COUNCILMAN DARRELL L. CLARKE COUNCILMAN RICHARD T. MARIANO COUNCILWOMAN DONNA REED MILLER COUNCILWOMAN MARIAN B. TASCO - - - V A R A L L O Incorporated Litigation Support Services 1835 Market Street, Suite 600 Philadelphia, PA 19103 215.561.2220 215.567.2670 2 Whole - 4/20/04 - Bill No. 040255
Good morning everyone. This is the continued public hearing of the Committee of the Whole regarding Bill No. 040255. Before we start our hearings, I would like to acknowledge students from the Discovery Charter School who are up in the balcony. If they would stand, we would like to recognize them. (Applause.)
Welcome. Our first department to testify will be Fairmount Park. Good morning. Welcome. Please identify yourself for the record and proceed with your testimony.
Thank you. President Verna and Members of City Council, my name is Karen Lloyd Borski and I am the Interim Executive Director of the Fairmount Park Commission. I am pleased to appear before you today to present on behalf of the Fairmount Park Commission our recommended Whole - 4/20/04 - Bill No. 6 million operating budget for fiscal year '05. While our commitment to care for the City's green spaces continues to be our primary focus, there are major new initiatives on the horizon for the Fairmount Park Commission. Negotiations and planning continue for the occupancy of Memorial Hall by the Please Touch Museum. This project will not only expand a popular children's activity destination, but also invest millions of dollars into the restoration and stabilization of one of Philadelphia's most treasured landmarks. Scheduled to open in 2006, the Museum will greatly enhance the public's ability to visit and learn about Memorial Hall. Together with the Philadelphia Zoo, the Mann Center for the Performing Arts and neighborhood development in the Parkside area, this will breathe new life into West Fairmount Park. Plans are being made to create a Centennial District among these cultural 4 Whole - 4/20/04 - Bill No. 040255 institutions on the very same grounds where our country celebrated its centennial anniversary in 1876. The Arthur Ashe Youth Tennis Center, currently on Main Street in Manayunk, will soon have a new home in Fairmount Park on the site of Gustine Recreation Center. Operated by Philadelphia Youth Tennis, this development will not only create an ultra-modern indoor and outdoor tennis facility, but also replace the existing 40-year-old recreation center with a new building with enhanced athletic and community use spaces. Savings will also be realized in maintenance costs, as the tennis center will become responsible for the entire Gustine site. A partnership with the School District of Philadelphia may also yield an important first for Fairmount Park. Sponsored by the Microsoft Corporation, plans are underway to create a state-of-the-art, technologically complete high "school of the future" on a seven-acre campus in West Fairmount Park. 5 Whole - 4/20/04 - Bill No. 040255 Such a development would foster a tremendous environment for advanced learning and also provide great benefits for the Parkside and West Philadelphia communities, while underscoring our belief that the Fairmount Park system really is the City's largest classroom. Most notable, of course, will be the implementation of the Fairmount Park Strategic Plan. Developed over the last months with 12 a vast outreach effort, this plan will provide 13 important recommendations to the Commission 14 and City Government on the management and 15 operations of the Park system, increased 16 revenue generation and opportunities for the 17 enhancement of partnerships and volunteer 18 support. 6 million in all classes. The Class 100 request of $9,398,448 is $264,248 below the fiscal year 2004 estimated obligations, due to decreases in overtime and temporary/seasonal preparations and savings created by the Deferred Retirement Option 6 Whole - 4/20/04 - Bill No. 040255 Program, DROP. These decreases are partially offset by an increase in staffing levels from 202 on the November 2003 increment run to 205 in fiscal year 2005. The Class 200 request of $2,742,509 is $300,000 below the fiscal year 2004 estimated obligations due to the non-recurring preparation for our Strategic Plan. The mission of the Fairmount Park Commission is to preserve, protect and maintain the woodlands, watersheds, landscapes and physical infrastructure of 469 buildings and over 200 sculptures throughout its 9,100 acres, while providing Philadelphia citizens and visitors with opportunities for quiescent and active recreation. More than 60 parks managed by the Commission comprise one of the largest municipally operated landscaped park systems in the United States.
Each of these parks falls into one of 11 different classifications as they are outlined in our Strategic Plan, dependent upon size and use, from the smallest 7 Whole - 4/20/04 - Bill No. 040255 neighborhood mini park to downtown plazas to regional parks to our largest natural watershed areas. Our major accomplishments in fiscal year 2004 include the transfer of recreation facilities to the Department of Recreation. In FY03 and into '04, the Park Commission completed the transfer of six indoor recreational facilities and all three of its swimming pools to the Philadelphia Department of Recreation. Only the recreation facilities at Lloyd Hall and Memorial Hall remain under the Park's purview. These transfers have helped to eliminate the overlapping and duplicative responsibilities between the two departments and allowed the Commission to focus on its mission of preserving open space and natural land preservation. PDR's expertise in recreational programming and facility management has resulted in improved opportunities and service within the transferred facilities. In FY04, the Park Commission 8 Whole - 4/20/04 - Bill No. 040255 established three special project crews to provide dedicated service for the upkeep of hard surface trails, our restroom facilities and playground sites. These crews were established from existing Park staff and are supplemented with seasonal employees. The restroom crew enables us to provide service to 27 outdoor restroom facilities on a daily basis from April through October. In FY03 and into FY04, the Park also provided an additional 41 temporary restroom facilities for park users. The trail maintenance crew cleans and sweeps 50 miles of hard surface trails and removes dangerous tree limbs over those trails throughout the Park system on a biweekly basis, providing a safe environment for trail users. The playground maintenance crew provides biweekly inspections and repairs to all 30 playground sites. Our goal is to reduce the number of potential injuries that may occur to children by eliminating the number of hazards at the playgrounds. 9 Whole - 4/20/04 - Bill No. 040255 In addition to this crew, 15 Park staff members have been trained in playground safety inspection by the National Playground Safety Institute and we have developed a playground safety policy for all of the playgrounds in the Park system. Our initiatives for fiscal year 2005 include implementing the Strategic Plan. As mentioned earlier, the Fairmount Park Commission began developing a Strategic Plan in January 2003 to serve as a guide for the next five years. To be completed this spring, the vision for the Park was framed by input from park users, community members, staff advocates and business and civic leaders. Existing facilities and service areas were mapped, and recommended modifications have been made based on demographics and national standards. A significant review of the Department of Recreation was also conducted to determine if and where any overlaps or redundancies exist in the delivery of services. 10 Whole - 4/20/04 - Bill No. 040255 Based on recommendations from the Strategic Plan, the Park and PDR have already begun work with the Managing Director's Office to improve coordination and eliminate redundant efforts. Plans for consolidating administrative functions, payroll processing, personnel transactions, budget preparation, and purchasing are underway and the Park Recreation Administrative Service Cluster should be operational by early FY05. Also in fiscal year '05, the Park will begin planning to assume the responsibility of maintaining the grounds and trees at 47 recreation centers, 112 playgrounds, 54 parks and 113 breezeways and cul-de-sacs currently managed by PDR. When the entire transfer of these sites is complete, the total acreage that Fairmount Park is responsible for will increase by 900 acres.
The Streets Department will also become responsible for trash collection at PDR and Fairmount Park facilities in an effort to take advantage of the strengths of all the City's departments 11 Whole - 4/20/04 - Bill No. 040255 and eliminate duplicative tasks. Caring for and maintaining one of the largest and most diverse park systems in the country is a challenging task that requires professional, committed staff and legions of dedicated volunteers who support our efforts because they love their parks. Our City is fortunate enough to have both, and I look forward to the positive impact of the Strategic Plan on our Park system in the year and long-term future. Madam President, I would like to acknowledge that several of our Commissioners are present for today's testimony, along with many members of our various friends groups and thank you for their support.
Thank you. Before we recognize the witnesses, I am told that we have students from the Elwood Elementary School with us. If they would stand, we would like to recognize them. (Applause.)
12 Whole - 4/20/04 - Bill No. 040255 Welcome. I would like to remind my colleagues that with the first go-around, everyone will be given five minutes. I am asking that we respect that rule. If you're in the middle of a question, you can finish your line of questioning. And, please, we have a very, very busy day, so I am asking everyone to please cooperate. Commissioner, you mentioned in your testimony the implementation of the Park's Strategic Plan. What additional resources has the City committed to this endeavor in the FY05 budget and the proposed five-year plan?
For the first year, Madam President, the Strategic Plan is looking at the ways that it will invest in the Park system. So the FY05 budget does not reflect any increases in investment at this time. We will spend this first year examining operational ways to improve Park delivery, and that will lead us to make some guideline decisions for the coming years. 13 Whole - 4/20/04 - Bill No. 040255
Has the Strategic Plan been made public, and if it has, can we have a copy of it?
Our hope is to roll out the Strategic Plan mid-May. We are in the final draft revisions right now. I believe that there are plans underway to present to both Commissioners, Council and the conservancy in the very near future, so that we can meet a mid-May target date for presentation to the public.
Thank you. You state in your testimony that in FY05, the Park will begin planning to assume the responsibility of maintaining the grounds and trees at 47 recreation centers, 112 playgrounds, 54 parks and 113 breezeways and cul-de-sacs currently managed by Recreation. When is it anticipated that you will actually take over and do you have the amount of staff that would be able to do all of this?
It is one of the recommendations of the Strategic Plan to 14 Whole - 4/20/04 - Bill No. 040255 combine services, reduce redundancies wherever possible with other departments, and this is the beginning of that effort. It will continue through fiscal year '07, I believe, but we are beginning the process right now effective July 1.
Well, does the plan indicate the projected cost of this and how you'll be able -- or how will you be able to absorb it?
Good morning. My name is Brian Albert. I'm the Administrative Services Director at the Fairmount Park Commission. This is a recent initiative of the Managing Director's Office in conjunction with the Strategic Plan. The actual costs are still being determined at this point, and we would anticipate a revision of our '05 budget at some point, depending on costs that we assume. Certainly for '06 those costs would be reflected, but we're still at the initial planning stage at this point. 15 Whole - 4/20/04 - Bill No. 040255
Can you tell us the operational impact to the Park on your proposed reductions and temporary and seasonal workers of 30,000 and $229,000 in overtime?
Again, we thought that we could eliminate some of the temporary positions. It amounts to nearly percent, 10 and we thought that by reevaluating the season, that we have the temporary, maybe starting them later or having them finish earlier would reduce our costs in that area. We are still, again, trying to determine what impact that would have on services and we are just trying to manage those resources.
Are any of the Recreation employees being transferred to Fairmount Park?
That's not the current plan, no. While we will be assuming some services, and one of those is tree crew, we have worked closely with the one tree crew that Recreation currently has throughout the winter months with snow emergencies and other 16 Whole - 4/20/04 - Bill No. 040255 things, and there is the idea that that crew would be transferred.
Thank you. I'll come back later. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Brown.
Let me first continue with the line of questioning around the Strategic Plan and indicate that I too look forward to the unveiling of that plan, and all of us should be mindful or reminded of the fact that we have introduced a resolution calling for hearings so that we as City Council can hear about it, learn more in detail about the recommendations and how we can monitor the implementation of the plan. So we look forward to that official unveiling. And let me go on record to salute the leadership, and specifically Debra Wolf-Goldstein, for the very intimate 17 Whole - 4/20/04 - Bill No. 040255 involvement with the Please Touch Museum and it finally moving through the process at the Fairmount Park Commission. On the topic of the Please Touch Museum, could you please share with us a time frame at least that you will anticipate seeing the legislation transmitted to City Council? Because Councilman Nutter and I look forward to these hearings on this particular matter.
At our Commission meeting last week, we did approve the lease arrangements with Please Touch Museum, and my understanding is in the very near future, Councilwoman, you will be seeing legislation come down the pike. Sometime within the next two weeks the Chairman is telling me. I also want to acknowledge your calling for hearings on the Strategic Plan. We welcome the opportunity to present in that format. We're very excited about what the plan has to offer, and it will be a good format for getting word out.
So do we, because we know that I think the last plan was 18 Whole - 4/20/04 - Bill No. 040255 1980?
And all of us are set on the fact that this plan does not sit on a shelf, but that it actually gets realized, given all the work that's gone into it over the past two years. Discuss with us what is happening with the staff or the anticipated action plan for transitioning Fairmount Park staff from Memorial Hall to wherever they are going.
Plans for the move are underway. Based on Please Touch's time line, we are looking to try and have staff out of Memorial Hall by late fall, mid-fall, October and November. And plans for most of the administrative staff will move them downtown to 1515 Arch. There will be some staff changes that will take them into other places in the Park, and we do want to maintain a Park presence at our Case building on the corner of Belmont Avenue and Girard where people are used to coming for permits and such. 19 Whole - 4/20/04 - Bill No. 040255
It looks like I have one more question. The Microsoft high school, a number of us in City Council attended the public hearing around that. Give us the status to date on where that is in the process.
Negotiations are continuing with the School District at this point. We have as a Commission granted concept approval to the idea of the school, a future happening there. So the School District has entered into some negotiations with us regarding right-of-entry to the site to look at test borings and surveying, things like that. We're also in conversations regarding what that will entail from the School District to the Park to have this site, which, of course, among other things, would entail a land swap where we would not overall lose acreage to the park because --
Land swap. The 20 Whole - 4/20/04 - Bill No. 040255 idea is that we would never give up park land without having it replaced somewhere else in the park that was beneficial to the Park system as a whole.
I recall a bump in the road with regards to a piece of Federal regulation around that. So you're saying we've gotten over that bump?
We are in negotiations right now with the Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources. DCNR is sort of the enforcing agency for Federal policy on that line, but Fairmount Park Commission itself would also have a policy where we would want to retain land if land was used for another use.
Okay. With regards to the restroom, trail and playground maintenance section in your testimony, and you've established three special crews to provide dedicated service to trails, restrooms and playgrounds, what did we do with these items previously?
Good morning. My 21 Whole - 4/20/04 - Bill No. 040255 name is Sam Curry. I'm the Interim Director of Operations. Prior to implementing the three special crews, we did it within districts. We handled restroom cleaning, we handled trail clearing and playground repair and inspection within the district. But at that point, we weren't able to do it as timely and as efficiently as we can do it with the three dedicated crews. These three crews are dedicated to making sure that the restrooms are open and cleaned daily, that the trails are swept biweekly, and the playground safety crew inspects and repairs the playgrounds biweekly. So we're making the playgrounds a lot safer, the bathrooms a lot cleaner and the trails a lot nicer for the trail users.
So can we surmise from that that the staff reconfiguration has moved to an improvement in those areas?
Playground 22 Whole - 4/20/04 - Bill No. 040255 safety policy, is that universal now, is it applied universally across the Fairmount Park system and where are we in terms of making sure all of our playgrounds are up to standard?
Yes, it does. The policy covers the entire Fairmount Park playground areas. There are some playgrounds that we have gone in and inspected. We've removed some pieces of equipment that are hazardous that we felt were beyond repair. We've made repairs to some of the equipment, and some playgrounds are designated for capital improvements.
So if you had to give yourself a grade on where the City is with regards to the application of the playground safety policy, what would it be?
What grade would I give Fairmount Park's playground policy in the work we've done?
So let us 23 Whole - 4/20/04 - Bill No. 040255 know then which of those playgrounds are not where they should be in terms of a playground safety policy, because I'm sure that might be of interest to our District Council Members.
I don't know if I have that information in front of me right now. We do have several that are scheduled for capital improvements.
The Chair recognizes Councilman Nutter. Five minutes, sir.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Ms. Borski, I understand that you laid out that the Strategic Plan for the Park 24 Whole - 4/20/04 - Bill No. 040255 will be completed sometime in mid-May; is that correct?
Good morning. I'm sorry. But I take it from your testimony that there must be a draft of the plan already that you're working from?
Some of the things that I mentioned in my testimony, which is this idea of consolidation and transferring of responsibilities with other City departments to reduce duplicative efforts. Specifically, we can point to trash removal along with Streets Department and the idea of Fairmount Park assuming turf maintenance and tree maintenance responsibilities at rec sites, as well as the Fairmount Park sites we do already. They would be some highlights. 25 Whole - 4/20/04 - Bill No. 040255 But the plan in its current form still needs to sort of bring its priorities to the surface, and that's what the draft is doing. And, actually, as I also said, I'm not sure if you were quite here yet, we do plan to bring that to Council in the very near future.
Right. No; I did hear that. What does the Strategic Plan talk about in the context of funding? I thought one of the major issues that we were seeking to grapple with was what is the real need from a funding standpoint to run a first-class world-class Park system?
Well, it does two things. It certainly identifies revenue generation and new revenue generation as a sort of key component of bringing up the standard of the Park system, and it does also look at operational review to sort of streamline current financial practices within the Park.
Does it make any recommendation or speak to the issue Whole - 4/20/04 - Bill No. 040255 of the need for increased funding from the City for the Park system? Wasn't that part of the point?
Councilman, it probably will, but that language is not really there now. Like I said, in the draft forms, things are still in a sort of very general state in terms of saying park systems can always do better with more, but it does not to date identify specific areas.
Well, I thought that was part of the goal of the Strategic Plan in the first place. I mean, is the Park working on the draft or is the consultant working on the draft?
The consultant in conjunction with the Managing Director's Office and the Park staff are all looking at it.
Well, is there a recommendation in the report that would propose the need for additional funding for the Park system?
I mean, at this 27 Whole - 4/20/04 - Bill No. 040255 point, I can't point to sort of a line item that says what that is, but, yes, they will definitely make recommendations for increased revenue from all sources, and one of the ways I think that they will look at the Park system is being able to generate more on its own. They point to percentages that would say that we could generate -- a Park system could generate up to 30 to 40 percent its operating revenue.
I understand you want to maximize your revenue generation. I think I'm asking a slightly different question. I'm asking you, how much money does it really take to run a 9,100-acre Park system at the level of service that citizens of Philadelphia should expect? That's the question. I thought that was the question we were trying to answer by going through a Strategic Plan.
And ultimately I think the Strategic Plan will look to provide those numbers, but in its draft form now, they have not. They haven't really gotten into 28 Whole - 4/20/04 - Bill No. 040255 specific numbers at all. They'll talk about benchmarks, they'll talk about what other cities do best, but they haven't sort of culminated into that final piece. They can look to number recommendations.
your testimony talks about the transfer of recreation facilities to the Department of Recreation.
Thank you. It says, "Only the recreational facilities at Lloyd Hall and Memorial Hall remain under the Park's purview." I thought that was -- maybe that statement is true in terms of major buildings or facilities, but the Park system still has a variety of what any of us would consider to be 29 Whole - 4/20/04 - Bill No. 040255 recreational facilities under its jurisdiction, right?
They were identified as our indoor rec centers, that the transfer started last year and is completed now. And with the exception of Memorial Hall and Lloyd Hall, that's the case.
But you transferred some outdoor recreational facilities in the most recent transfer of assets, didn't you?
Parkside Evans is an outdoor recreation facility. You transferred that from the Park to the Department of Recreation.
That's correct, but the relationship is still for the Rec Department to take care of the actual building facility and Fairmount Park still maintains the grounds.
And Rec is going to do the programming as well, right? 30 Whole - 4/20/04 - Bill No. 040255
Because I want to talk to you about a number of other facilities in my district and I know you've had some contact with some of my constituents about places like Daisy and Boyce and Arrow.
And whether or not they should stay within the purview of the Park since they are active recreation sites that you've historically had, but I think the question still remains whether they should be with Fairmount Park or with Recreation. We can continue that discussion. Thank you, Madam President.
You're welcome. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Miller.
I have a couple of questions about the street tree removal program. What is the process and criteria for the removal of street trees? I know under NTI, I think we've been a little bit more aggressive about removing street trees, but if you have 250,000 trees, I don't know how you keep up with this.
I can answer that, Councilwoman. In FY02, three years ago, we developed a heavy-duty street tree removal program with help from NTI, and at that point, we had approximately 8,500 hazardous trees lining the streets. Each year we remove approximately 4,000, but we anticipate an additional 2,000 to 2,500 trees decline and die as the year progresses. So we kind of take a lot -- remove a lot of trees, but others die and take its place. We have figured out a number that we probably remove a total of 1,500 trees per year. Presently we are in -- FY05 will be the fourth season. We have greatly reduced the 32 Whole - 4/20/04 - Bill No. 040255 backlog of hazardous trees on the streets of the City of Philadelphia.
We perceive the current backlog to be about 2,000 trees. We anticipate over the next year, as trees decline and die, to increase that by approximately 2,000 trees. So by the end of the year, it will be 4,000. If we can remove close to 4,000 trees, our backlog at that point will be at a manageable number of several hundred. And then you have to anticipate the following year more will decline and die. So it's an ongoing task, but I think that we have reduced that hazardous backlog greatly.
Well, that's very good. How do you keep up with -- I notice in the five-year plan you're talking about putting together a geographic information system for asset management that doesn't exist 33 Whole - 4/20/04 - Bill No. 040255 now. So how do you keep up? How do you know what trees are dying? Is it by complaint driven, by people calling or do you survey?
Actually, both ways. If we get a call, we would go out and inspect it. We do still receive calls for not only tree removal but tree pruning, tree planting also. We also go out and inspect certain areas, especially with the pruning. We do 14,000 street tree prunings per year. We don't get quite that many requests, but we will go out and inspect complete blocks. So as we go out, we also make indication of trees that are dying, declining that we should be removing. So we get it twofold, one by inspection that we do and also by requests through citizens, through Council, through others, et cetera.
In previous years -- I guess what is the criteria for the removal of a street tree? I know that one time someone said that a tree is 34 Whole - 4/20/04 - Bill No. 040255 determined to be in certain categories, like imminently dangerous and this and that, sort of like a building, a structure. Can you tell me what those are again?
Yeah. I can help you out there I think a little bit. Each tree, we send a professional arborist out to inspect each and every tree that there is a request for removal. If there is an indication that the tree is declining or dead, then the tree would be listed for removal. If it is hazardous, it has a crack in it, it could be alive, but there's a large crack, then, of course, that would be imminently dangerous and we would remove that tree. Other than that, it really depends on the tree health. We have to go out and take a look at the tree, inspect the tree, and each tree is an individual and we make that decision upon inspection.
Is there a routine list? When you plant a new tree, is there a routine time frame that you go back to 35 Whole - 4/20/04 - Bill No. 040255 prune?
Actually, we try to do that within the first few years. It's really a benefit to the tree. It structurally enhances the tree. We take out the branches that we do not want. It's also a little less costly to do it at that point, and it's great for the health of the tree if we go back and do it within two to three years.
All street trees, yes, between the curb and the sidewalk come under the jurisdiction of the Fairmount Park Commission.
Okay. Thank you. 36 Whole - 4/20/04 - Bill No. 040255 Thank you, Madam President.
Thank you. Commissioner, you mention in your testimony that plans are being made to create a Centennial District among cultural institutions. Would you share with us your concept of what this district would be?
Currently we are looking at calling something a Centennial District that would span from the Art Museum to the Mann Center for Performing Arts. It would, therefore, include the zoo, the Mann, the upcoming Please Touch Museum, existing horticultural centers there, as well as the Japanese House and Garden, and look at that area in a more cohesive fashion to maybe even be considered a zone in Fairmount Park where you could enhance the maintenance and care of the area through some sort of contributing effort of the entities that are in it and also the Park itself as the landlord of that piece of ground. There is a study currently underway 37 Whole - 4/20/04 - Bill No. 040255 to do that. We are very excited about what the potential is to look at areas of the Park in terms of a zone that can have attention focused particularly on its care, maintenance and upkeep.
Thank you. The gentleman to your right, I'm sorry, I don't recall your name.
Brian, in your testimony you indicated that at some point the budget would have to be revised. At what point would that be? Would it be before we consider the budget or after we consider the budget?
I think I was alluding to during the fiscal year 2005. Say, for example, we took over the street tree crew from the Department of Recreation. Obviously the dollars would need to follow as well. I would anticipate that that would need to be part of, say, a mid-year transfer ordinance. How much would be required to be transferred would depend at what point in the 38 Whole - 4/20/04 - Bill No. 040255 year that happened. I hope that's clear.
I just wanted to clear that point. Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman Clarke.
I'd like to go back to the street tree issue. There's nothing, in my opinion, worse that when we have a wind storm, that we read about a person that's killed by a tree that's fallen, and I know that in my community on Bells Mill Road many years ago a large tree came down and struck a person driving a vehicle and killed them instantly. As I drive through the City, I see in the -- not necessarily street trees. I'm talking about park trees -- that, in my opinion, are very unstable. Yesterday driving on Germantown Avenue on the east side of Germantown at 39 Whole - 4/20/04 - Bill No. 040255 Hillcrest, there's an embankment there and there's some large oaks. I believe they're oaks. And their root system is showing, and it jumped out at me that here's an accident waiting to happen. What are we doing as a Fairmount Park Commission, especially the trees that are on our property, assuring that we're going to not have future fatalities with these falling trees?
Good morning, Councilman. It's a difficult situation that the Park finds itself in, because this is sort of the situation that occurs anywhere where you have a park boundary, a hillside, Lincoln Drive, Kelly drive, West River Drive and throughout the entire City. It's a vast area. If we come upon or someone tells us that there is a potential hazard of a tree either at that location on Germantown Avenue or along Lincoln Drive and we go out and inspect that tree, we need to remove that tree, one way or another. Because we 40 Whole - 4/20/04 - Bill No. 040255 certainly do not want that tree to hurt, especially kill, anyone. Some of these areas are very difficult to get at. We may go in there and make the tree safe to a point where it wouldn't fall, but if we are aware of a situation like that, we will try to rectify that situation.
Thank you. Could you please take a look at -- because I would hate like heck to have something occur -- Germantown Avenue between Bells Mill and Hillcrest on the west side of the street. It's terribly undermined there, and the tree must be three or four feet in diameter. And if that fell, even a part of it, it would be, I believe, fatal. Thank you.
If I just may, sometimes the trees may lean. They're actually leaning for light. But we will take a look at it and determine the hazardness within that tree.
This one looks dead, because it has no vegetation at 41 Whole - 4/20/04 - Bill No. 040255 all on it at this time of the year. Thanks, Madam Chair.
You're welcome. Sir, I don't know whether the question was asked, but what is the backlog for tree removal?
It was asked. I will go back over that. We presently have a backlog of about 2,000 dead or hazardous street trees. We've reduced that greatly from 8,500 three years. We started in FY02. We anticipate by the end of FY05 to have that number down to a manageable several hundred number, keeping in mind that additional trees will continue to die and it's sort of a never-ending fight.
That's good to hear. Thank you. Again, the Chair recognizes Councilman Clarke, if he ever gets the chance to ask his questions.
No problem, Madam President. I'm a very patient 42 Whole - 4/20/04 - Bill No. 040255 gentleman. Thank you. Good morning.
I actually have a couple of questions and I'll come back on the next round and ask the remainder. First I want to ask about trees to follow up on that. In substantial portions of my district, I actually have problems with trees in alleyways, and I have yet to find out who is responsible for the trees and who ultimately will be responsible for removing them if they're dead and dangerous. And the other question, I want to talk about dogs on leashes. If you could do the tree one first.
I'll try to handle the tree. Vacant lots, alleys, rear yards of abandoned properties, tree removal and lot clearing comes under the heading of the NTI and the Community Life Improvement Programs. Fairmount Park manages two tree maintenance crews, one for the NTI and one for the Community Life Improvement Program. 43 Whole - 4/20/04 - Bill No. 040255 Both of these crews have the duties of going in and removing alley trees, vacant lot trees and abandoned property trees. One of the problems we have is access to some of these locations, and that sometimes is the difficulty. If we can get at it, we can do it.
It's easier that way, because we get all our information through NTI. We keep all our information. When we complete a task, we give that information back to NTI so they can record that the work is done.
Is there a particular individual in NTI? I mean, NTI is pretty expansive. Is there someone that I can call over there and get some expeditious response? 44 Whole - 4/20/04 - Bill No. 040255
A lot of the information we get out of either from NTI or from the Community Life Improvement comes out of the Managing Director's Office, Tom Conway.
Tommy? Oh, okay. Thank you. Dogs. This is a little personal. Every now and then I get enough energy to go jogging, and from time to time, I find myself jogging out up in Valley Green. And it seems like every time I go out there, I get attacked by a dog, who is supposed to be on a leash, but the person just feels it's okay to just have the dog run loose and the dog rushes me, and more often than not, the dog is just bluffing, but I'm running. It's difficult enough for me to run, but when you have to stop and then you got to start up again, it's extremely difficult, and I want to talk to you about the leash law. First, what portions of the park are individuals required to have their dogs on leashes? Is there a distance in terms of the leashes, 10 foot, 20 foot? I mean, they have 45 Whole - 4/20/04 - Bill No. 040255 these new things where they stretch out like 50 feet. So you really have to be a substantial distance away from them to be safe from a dog, particularly on the pedestrian path such as Valley Green.
Councilman, again, it's a difficult situation, but, yes, we do have dogs on leash laws that cover all areas of Fairmount Park. And the basic length of a leash is six feet, no longer than six feet, and it's usually posted in most park areas on our information signage. Enforcement is a problem, trying to be places everywhere at the same time to cover this. Our park rangers are told to inform people that have dogs off leashes that it is a requirement of the Fairmount Park Commission to make sure that their dogs are on leashes. So we do have a policy in place. It's just very difficult to enforce it all in areas, but we do try to inform the public that this is the policy.
On Valley Green in particular, you tend to have a park 46 Whole - 4/20/04 - Bill No. 040255 ranger or a police officer ride down the road on a pretty consistent basis and I have yet to see them stop a person and say, Put your dog on a leash, let alone telling them not to use those 40-, 50-foot leashes. Is there something you can do to reinforce that? I mean, I know it's personal, but I have to assume that I'm not the only person being attacked by a dog.
It's not just personal. It is our policy. It is our regulation. And if we see that happening, we should enforce it, not only with the park rangers, but also park staff. And we will reinforce that with in-house that that is our policy and what we should be doing.
Do you know off the top of your head what the penalty is?
$25? Okay. I'll come back. Thank you, Madam President.
Thank you. 47 Whole - 4/20/04 - Bill No. 040255 The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Tasco.
On of the budget detail, a CLIP crew is identified as part of the Fairmount Park staff. What jobs and responsibilities do these employees perform?
CLIP crew is Community Life Improvement. It's a tree maintenance crew that provides services. We just spoke of removal of trees, pruning of trees. These could be street trees, alley trees, backyard trees, hazardous park trees or hazardous recreation trees. The CLIP crews work in the Northeast section of the City of Philadelphia.
Are they working solely in the park or are they doing trees on the street?
If the City proposes to expand the CLIP program to the other seven councilmanic districts, how will this impact on your department? Are you aware that they want to expand the program?
If they would expand the CLIP, the Community Life Improvement Program, how would it affect -- presently we have one tree maintenance crew that works under the jurisdiction of CLIP. We manage the crew, but it's funded through the Community Life Improvement Program. If it was expanded throughout the City, we can only do what one tree maintenance crew could do at that point. We would make every effort to look at all requests. And we also have the NTI tree maintenance crew, which services similar situations in the other sections of the City of Philadelphia. So, actually, we have two NTI/CLIP tree maintenance crews. One crew tends to work towards the Northeast, the other one works in the other sections of the City of 49 Whole - 4/20/04 - Bill No. 040255 Philadelphia.
Well, how many people do you have just doing tree trimming, tree removal that are not associated with NTI or CLIP?
Each district has one tree maintenance crew, and there's five districts.
And then were these people who are assigned to the CLIP program, were they employees, current employees, of the Fairmount Park staff and then deployed to CLIP or were they hired to do CLIP?
The Community Life Improvement tree maintenance crew and the NTI tree maintenance crew were both hired through the NTI funding through the Managing Director's Office, and it is -- they were placed under our jurisdiction because we had to staff the arborists to oversee that part of the project.
So you have not been given any additional dollars to 50 Whole - 4/20/04 - Bill No. 040255 hire additional people to handle the quality of life program if it expanded to other districts?
Not directly. We only handle tree situations. The Community Life Improvement Program also runs outside of Fairmount Park. So if they expand it on that end, I really don't have a handle on that. I know that we manage the tree maintenance crew, but there are other vacant lot clearing crews, there's anti-graffiti crews. There's other crews that also work under the Community Life Improvement that are outside the jurisdiction of Fairmount Park.
My question is about the trees. Granted, there may not be the demand in some communities as in others, but if you have two people that are assigned to the Northeast, how do you plan to expand to accommodate the new program, or have you been asked? 51 Whole - 4/20/04 - Bill No. 040255
Good morning, Councilwoman. There is no increase in funding. I don't know whether we have been asked to do so. Obviously we would need an increase in funding to do so.
Has there been any discussion with your department about the expansion of the CLIP program to other Council districts?
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Blackwell.
Thank you, Madam President. I know that there has been question with regard to Microsoft School, and I'm following up on that. As you know, it would include both districts, Councilman Nutter's and my own, and 52 Whole - 4/20/04 - Bill No. 040255 we are interested in the progress in that regard with the Park. I understand it was already okayed, the land was already okayed, through the Commission?
Okay. Now you're waiting for the School District, or what's the next step?
Well, negotiations will continue with the School District. There is also the idea of actually what the school would look like. So there are design considerations for the site that would need to come back before the Commission. And we do need to clear the hurdles of exactly what this transfer of land would look like, what the Park would get in return for "school of the future" on the site. One of those things I addressed with Councilwoman Brown was the idea of an appropriate land swap where we are already identifying other acreage that would be beneficial to the Park. 53 Whole - 4/20/04 - Bill No. 040255
You say that the Park is already involved in that discussion about other land you're interested in?
Would you keep us informed? And we're happy to help to facilitate this issue in any way we can.
You're welcome. The Chair recognizes Councilman Nutter.
Thank you, Madam Chair. In the same area, Ms. Borski, and I heard the earlier response, with regard to the land swap, where is the other land?
One of the parcels we are looking at is one that's come before 54 Whole - 4/20/04 - Bill No. 040255 Council before, the 11-acre tract. We refer to it as Waddington. It is at Algon and Krewstown. It is contiguous park land in the Northeast.
We are currently trying to purchase that land from the Waddington family.
It's a tract of land that we are currently in the course of trying to purchase from the Waddington family.
Waddington? I just couldn't make that out. Okay. And what does that have to do with the school?
Well, this idea of using park land for another use would require that we have a replacement of equal or greater value of land within the Park system as a whole.
So are you 55 Whole - 4/20/04 - Bill No. 040255 saying that the Microsoft School proposal is contingent upon you getting land from another party that has nothing to do with the transaction?
No. No. Just it would be Fairmount Park policy always to be able to identify other land in the course of using this sort of creative reuse for park land, and that is one of the tracts that we've identified.
I understand that. I'm just trying to understand why the two things end up in the same conversation.
Our conversations with School District are still continuing on what will be required of them.
I understand that. And then in the next breath you said and you're looking at a land swap because you don't want to have X amount of acres of park land go to a school use without either replacing it acre for acre or even more. 56 Whole - 4/20/04 - Bill No. 040255 What I'm trying to understand is, what does the one have to do with the other? Does the school issue have anything to do with this other tract of land, which, based on those boundaries, is that somewhere in the Northeast?
It's in the Northeast, bordering the Park system up in Pennypack.
Well, I guess the more direct question is, if that proposal for whatever reason doesn't come to fruition, does that have any negative impact on your negotiations and a final agreement with the school system?
I don't think so. I don't think that's the only parcel of land we're looking at. That's just one of them.
So let me make sure I'm absolutely clear. Your discussions and negotiation with the School District about the Microsoft School are separate and apart from any thought, proposal, idea, policy pursued of another piece of 57 Whole - 4/20/04 - Bill No. 040255 property even though you would like to get another piece of property around and about the same time that you're concluding a transaction with the School District, but one is not dependent on the other; is that correct?
One is not dependent on the other, but they -- yes, one is not dependent on the other.
Do you want to add something to it? It seemed like you're eager to get to the microphone.
I'm sorry. My name is Brian Albert. I'm the Administrative Services Director at the Fairmount Park Commission. I think it's just in principle, we would like to have land of equal size, but it's not contingent upon any particular site.
But currently that 58 Whole - 4/20/04 - Bill No. 040255 site is in the works, so it's a good one to identify for this, is my point.
I understand that. It just gets us extra discussion about two items that have nothing to do with each other, but if we're talking about the Microsoft School and you tell me you'd like to get another piece of property to replace it, then I'm led to believe that the one is contingent on the other. If it's not, then I don't know what it has to do with the other issue.
Fairmount Park as a result of previous studies would have a sort of catalogue of many pieces of property that would be potential acquisition sites.