As I said last11 time, they wouldn't have an increase.12 And I think if our increase was about,13 you know --14
Theirs would be the16 same. And I think that would be about17 120 million.18
Okay. Do19 you know how much the -- for the record,20 how much the property tax revenue the21 School District is projected to receive22 this fiscal year?23
It's25 46 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371 120 million less than it would be after2 the move to --3 (Indiscernible; parties talking4 over each other.)5
Right. And8 so, the increased property tax to the9 School District would be 120 million,10 which is 20 percent.11
Yeah. And that's12 just an estimate, and I'd have to go back13 and actually look at the numbers, but --14
Okay.15 That's all my questions, Madam Chair.16 Thank you.17
Thank18 you.19 The Chair recognizes Councilman20 Jones.21
Good morning.25 47 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371
Generally,2 we are -- is it safe to say that we are3 ahead of schedule by way of revenue4 enhancements that we put in from the5 sales tax and other taxes that were6 raised last year?7
The sales tax has8 been pretty healthy the last few months,9 so I think we are a little bit ahead.10 And in property tax, it's11 probably too early to tell; we haven't12 seen all the collections yet.13
In your14 plan, however, I do not see -- I see a15 provision for $25 million in reduction in16 benefit costs, which are give-backs from17 the unions, but I don't see a resolution18 on a contract.19
What are the21 potential impacts of those contract22 signings on the health of this budget, in23 your estimation?24
Just one -- it's25 48 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371 not -- we don't use 25 anymore. Because2 some of the savings have been realized,3 we're showing about 12 million.4 And what we have said to the5 unions is that we expect that, you know,6 any contract will be consistent with what7 we have in the Five-Year Plan.8 So to the extent, for example,9 that there are pay increases in a10 contract, we want other items in the11 contract that would pay for those12 increases and net us the savings that we13 show in our plan.14
Where are we15 by way of anticipated revenue cuts,16 freezes, and the like with the17 Commonwealth of Pennsylvania?18
So the Governor's19 proposed budget had a number of cuts that20 would affect the City primarily in our21 social service agencies.22
DHS, Homeless,25 49 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371 Health.2 We are kind of working through3 how to react to those cuts and how to4 build them into our budget. I think5 those departments will all be here next6 week, and they'll have a lot more detail7 on what they're doing and how the cuts8 are affecting them.9
So the two10 major areas are DHS but also the11 Philadelphia schools, correct?12
Right. Outside of13 our budget, there were obviously14 tremendous cuts to the School District,15 to institutions of higher education, and16 to hospitals.17 So there's -- the impact of the18 cuts is much bigger beyond our budget and19 for the City in general.20
To what21 degree does the School Board's cut impact22 us beyond the obvious of revenues to keep23 the schools open? They're dealing with a24 facilities management resizing,25 50 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371 downsizing, whatever you want to call it.2 How are we working with them to look at3 efficiencies, economy of scales, multiple4 land swaps that possibly could happen?5 Is there a group working with them to6 look at those possibilities?7
Right. We've been8 working with them really since the9 beginning of the Administration to look10 for ways that we can kind of work11 together to generate efficiencies;12 looking, for example, of ways we might be13 helpful on their fleet.14 We also have been working with15 them as they go through their facilities16 management to see, you know, if there are17 facilities that they're no longer using,18 what the best use for them going forward19 would be. So we have been in20 communication with them on those items.21
It would be22 my hope that you involve the District23 Councilpeople and whatever other24 Councilpeople might be interested, but25 51 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371 definitely the District Councilpeople as2 to determine some of the highest and best3 use for those facilities.4 And I think the Mayor was5 forward-thinking in look at the inventory6 of City-owned properties, whether it was7 by Health Department, by Recreation8 Department, by other municipal property9 owners. But in addition, looking at what10 the School Board may have so that a good11 school site may make a better recreation12 site, considering population shifts.13 So if we are having that14 dialogue, that discussion about those15 efficiencies, it should involve the16 District Councilpeople as well as the17 community to give some insight on that.18
And even20 though it looks like a problem, it could21 be a opportunity for us to gain land,22 gain advantage, and reduce some23 expenditures by consolidating certain24 services out of one building as opposed25 52 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371 to possibly even as many as three.2
So you will4 let the Chair know about that and invite5 us to said meetings? Is that a yes?6
Okay. Thank9 you, Madam Chair.10 COUNCIL PRESIDENT VERNA:11 You're welcome.12 The Chair recognizes Councilman13 Goode.14
Thank you,15 Madam President.16 Good morning, Mr. Dubow.17
I'll be very19 quick this morning because you provided20 all of the information that I needed21 within the handout.22 My only question actually is:23 Is this going to be the format for the24 departments going forward?25 53 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371
Thank you,12 Madam Chair.13 I guess on the first day of14 testimony during the Capital Budget15 hearings, we discussed the need for City16 Council to get budget detail for the17 departments that are going to experience18 significant cuts.19
And we were21 assured that we would have that, you22 know, weeks in advance, and that's why23 the hearings were, in fact, delayed.24 Those hearings begin Wednesday;25 54 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371 today is Monday, and we still don't have2 the budget detail.3
Right. And what I4 said at the time was that that was5 contingent on our getting clear6 information from the Commonwealth, which7 is still kind of rolling in.8 So that's the reason for the9 delay.10
When do you11 -- I mean, I think I'd like to talk to12 those departments, when there's full13 information available, about where we're14 actually going to cut, because otherwise,15 we're not having a really meaningful16 conversation.17
Right. I mean,18 unfortunately now, the way that the19 Commonwealth's budget process is going,20 it doesn't look like there will be full21 information until sometime in June,22 because, you know, they still seem to23 have some disagreement up there about the24 way to resolve their budget issue.25 55 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371
You know,2 we've had -- over the -- my last three3 years and over the last 25 years, a4 rather negative experience in Council5 with appropriating a certain dollar6 amount to departments and then having the7 Administration make its choices once8 there's an appropriation above what can9 be spent as to where the cuts should come10 rather than having that public debate11 about which priorities should be financed12 and which are less important, given the13 resources available.14 And I just think that we're not15 doing our job as a body if we don't have16 the information about where you intend to17 cut versus not intend to cut.18 You know, I can give you --19 there are examples of where you would20 cut, like if CBH is going to cut what21 it's doing with the diversionary court22 system when the V.A. don't pay for things23 or when we need money for Mental Health24 Court or, you know, people who are being25 56 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371 diverted because of substance-abuse2 problems from the system, that's where a3 lot of that money's coming from. If that4 money's going to be available, you know,5 we may not have money -- enough money in6 our prison budget.7 And so, like, I would argue8 that we should be making that a priority9 within the funding of CBH and other10 things and in order to avoid having to11 increase our prison budget.12 And I really think that we13 should not -- until we see the whole14 picture, we shouldn't just sort of let15 things go.16
Yeah, I think what17 we can do, and what we should and will18 do, is give you what -- the best19 information we have based on where the20 Commonwealth is now.21
And when22 will we get that? We need that in23 advance of the hearings.24
Yeah. We'll get25 57 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371 you that, you know, based on where they2 are right now.3 The thing that we can't do is,4 you know, anticipate where they may go in5 June because we don't know what they6 might put back and, you know, where they7 might cut their budget.8 But you're right, we should get9 you as quickly as we can the information10 on what we're doing based on what we have11 now.12
I think13 there was a contingency budget done last14 year, wasn't there? Or haven't we done a15 contingency budget in the past?16
Well, this is a17 little different because the contingency18 budget we did in the past was based on19 kind of -- on something that we had asked20 for; and if we didn't get it, we were21 going to -- we had an alternative22 scenario.23 In this case, we don't know24 what they might do.25 58 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371
And that's what I'm4 saying we should get you and we will get5 you. We'll get you information on what's6 in the Governor's budget --7
And then you18 can say, If we get an extra 10 million,19 this is what we'll do with it; if we get20 an extra 20 million, this is what we'll21 do with it.22
Yeah. It doesn't23 really work that way because, for24 example -- well, I don't want to -- they25 59 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371 can -- they provide cuts in specific2 places for specific things. They don't3 just say $10 million.4
I5 acknowledge that; that is true.6 Okay. So, I mean, should we be7 talking about passing a budget before8 June, then?9
Well, yes,10 because -- I mean, we don't -- they might11 not do anything. They might do12 something; we don't know. But we should,13 you know, pass the budget -- pass our14 budget when we are required under the15 Charter to pass it.16
Why don't --17 well, I mean, budgets have been passed in18 June before, with no repercussions.19 My question is essentially:20 Why wouldn't we just pass the budget on21 the Governor's budget and your chosen22 cuts? And then, if we get more money,23 you can come back to City Council and ask24 for increased appropriation authority.25 60 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371
So then I'm4 confused about why we've been delayed in5 getting the information because --6
So, for example, we9 knew overall levels of cuts, but what we10 needed to know was, for example, if11 there's a cut in DPW, if that cut will be12 made in a specific way, it requires us to13 react in a specific way.14 That's the kind of detail that15 we need from them and that we're getting.16
Okay. So17 when can we get -- when will we get18 material to review for Wednesday's19 hearing?20
Public25 61 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371 Health, DPH.2
We'll get back to3 you today with when we can get you the4 information. We just need to do that.5
Thank15 you.16 Are there any other questions17 from members of the committee?18 (No further questions.)19 COUNCIL PRESIDENT VERNA:20 Seeing no one, thank you.21 Our next department...?22 MR. McPHERSON: Is the Property23 Assessment Office.24
I'm following up to25 62 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371 our discussion.2 We will get you information3 today on State budget cuts and how we4 intend to handle them.5
When6 will we get the testimony for Wednesday?7 We do have a 48-hour rule.8
Good18 morning. Welcome. 23 MR. 24 My name is Richard McKeithon. 9 They are Veronica Daniel, Administrative10 Services Director; Mike Piper, Real11 Property Assistant Administrator; Jean12 Machiz, Real Property Assistant13 Administrator; Tom Dougherty, Acting14 Information Systems Group Manager. 18 We are here to testify on19 proposed 2012 Fiscal Year Operating20 Budget. OPA is primarily charged with21 discovering, listing, and valuing all of22 the real property in the City of23 Philadelphia in a fair and equitable24 manner. 6 There are 577,798 parcels of7 real property in the City of8 Philadelphia. 20 As you know, OPA was in21 existence for less than a full year in22 Fiscal '11, since it was officially23 created on October 1, 2010. 7 The additional resources will8 be used for 89 new employees and for9 information technology equipment and10 software that is capable of handling the11 technology used in sketching, modeling,12 imaging, et cetera. 3 For 2010, the City's taxable4 market value was $38,584,769,215. 7 The OPA's disadvantaged8 business participation rate for Fiscal9 Year 2010 was 36 percent for Class 20010 expenditures. 17 In summary, the Office of18 Property Assessment continues to strive19 to reach its ultimate goal of valuing all20 real-property parcels throughout City of21 Philadelphia in a fair and equitable22 manner and at a hundred percent of market23 value. 11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371 1. 6 2. 9 3. 12 4. 16
Thank17 you very much, sir.18 You mention in your testimony19 that you are requesting 89 new positions20 for Fiscal Year 2012. What are the21 position titles, and are there current22 civil service lists for them?23 MR. McKEITHON: Well, the bulk24 of the positions are evaluators; those25 69 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371 are actually individuals that go out and2 value the properties.3 In addition to that, we have a4 position for a database administrator, an5 abatement coordinator, I believe a couple6 of supervisory positions, but the bulk of7 them are actually evaluator positions.8
Are9 they civil service positions?10 MR. McKEITHON: Well, the11 evaluator positions will be civil service12 positions. The database administrator,13 the abatement coordinator, the actual14 modeler will be exempt positions.15
Is16 there an existing civil service list for17 the evaluators?18 MR. McKEITHON: At this time,19 we're in the process of working with20 Human Resources to establish that. We're21 in the early phases of that process now.22
On23 of your detail, you're requesting24 $400,000 for camera system imaging. Can25 70 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371 you explain why you need these funds and2 the services you will receive?3 MR. McKEITHON: Certainly. My4 vision about the camera system or the5 database system that we're currently6 using, it's customary to have an image of7 every parcel throughout the City. When8 you pull up a particular record, you9 should be able to have an image of that10 particular parcel, and that's what I want11 to establish here, in the City of12 Philadelphia.13 Currently, we don't have that14 in our system. And so, I think it's very15 necessary because, one, one of the first16 things you do when you actually look into17 the value of property or get some18 information on the property, you want to19 see it.20 And so, we currently don't have21 a mechanism for that; we don't have any22 images, only the ones that we may have23 recorded over the recent years. But as a24 whole, our system doesn't have images,25 71 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371 and I wanted to establish that file for2 our system.3
You4 also mention in your testimony that the5 City has 577,798 parcels of property.6 Can you tell us how many of these are7 tax-exempt and their market value?8 MR. McKEITHON: We'll probably9 have to -- we'll have to get that for10 you. We can --11
I12 think somebody in the back of the room13 may have the list for you.14 MR. McKEITHON: Okay.15 (Witness comes forward.)16
Good17 morning. Please identify yourself for18 the record.19
Good morning, Madam20 President and members of Council. I'm21 Michael Piper, Deputy Administrator of22 the Office of Property Assessment.23 To answer your question,24 currently, there are 24,724 properties25 72 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371 that are fully exempt --2
24,724, and there5 are 16,003 properties that are partially6 exempt, and a market value of7 $38,558,902,478.8
All9 these billions are too fast for me. Do10 you mind again?11
Does13 your office review these properties to14 ensure that they're not being used for a15 taxable purpose?16
We do. We do17 routinely audit properties in which18 there's any doubt in which, you know,19 we -- you know, if we're not sure, for20 instance, a church is having services or21 a property that's receiving an exemption22 because they've been granted one based on23 the idea that they're having classes24 because it's a school, if it's not25 73 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371 obvious, we do.2 MR. McKEITHON: And let me add3 to that, if I may.4 In the future, my plan is to5 actually conduct an audit of all exempt6 properties every three years. So every7 exempt property would, on a rotational8 basis, get a request to send in9 information verifying the fact that they10 should still be exempt.11 And so, one of the conditions12 of getting additional employees will go13 to that effect.14
I15 guess I sound very naive, but I'm going16 to ask the question anyway.17 With the hospitals that we have18 in the City -- and I won't mention any19 one of them -- they seem to expand for20 blocks and blocks and blocks.21 Tell me, if you will, which one22 of those buildings would be exempt.23 Would the hospital itself be exempt?24 MR. McKEITHON: Well, it's all25 74 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371 in the use. Typically hospitals are2 exempt.3
All4 right.5 MR. McKEITHON: But it depends6 on how they're structured. I have seen7 some that are non-exempt. It depends on8 how they are structured.9 We have the Law Department look10 into exemption applications, and they11 have different guidelines on what12 qualifies you for exemption, but it all13 depends on how they run, how they're14 operated for profit, and things like15 that. There are many different variables16 that go into play.17 So the hospital property -- the18 actual hospital can be exempt, but some19 the other parcels that they own may not20 qualify. It depends on how they're being21 used.22
How23 about for physician services? Supposing24 with the expansion that they make, if one25 75 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371 of the buildings is being used for2 physician services, is that also exempt?3
Typically, the way4 that would work is, once the evaluator5 inspects the property, if the report6 indicates that the physician, for7 instance, conducts or administers8 services in a portion of the property9 that the nonprofit organization owns, and10 that doctor, that physician, is an11 employee of the hospital, typically, that12 part of the property would be exempted.13 If the physician, however, was14 a for-profit entity working for him or15 herself, typically, it would not be16 exempted.17 MR. McKEITHON: And see, we18 have to get into those details once we're19 reviewing the applications and exactly20 what they have filled out and how the --21 in accordance to the law, so...22
But23 if they have a retail store in any one of24 the buildings, the retail store should be25 76 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371 paying taxes for that portion of the2 building, would they not?3
That portion of the4 building would be taxable, yes, correct.5
And6 with the churches, is it only the house7 of worship that's exempt from paying any8 taxes?9 MR. McKEITHON: Well,10 typically, once again, churches are11 exempt, but that doesn't necessarily mean12 that all church property is exempt.13 We have a process, and Mike can14 explain it, but it's all in the use of15 the particular property.16 Exemption depends on use.17 There are categories for exemptions such18 as religious, charitable, et cetera, but19 it depends on how that entity is actually20 using that property.21
I22 would love to see that one. We do have23 an awful lot of properties that are24 exempt. I think it's something that we25 77 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371 should definitely be looking into.2 Does your office review these3 properties? You did say that you review4 them to ensure that they are not being5 used for a taxable purpose?6 MR. McKEITHON: Our goal is to7 audit all of them at least once every8 three years.9 We have a process that they10 apply for exemptions now, but I think we11 need -- my goal is to have an annual12 process, a rotating process, where they13 would have to at least attempt to give us14 information that they should still remain15 exempt at least once every three years.16
When17 do you expect to complete the18 reassessment project, and when will we19 have use for the data?20 MR. McKEITHON: Our goal is to21 complete the reassessment in the fall of22 2012. We're working hard towards that23 goal each and every day. So that's --24 that's our response. That's our goal, is25 78 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371 to have it completed by the fall of 2012.2
Once3 the citywide reassessment project is4 completed, what will be your reassessment5 policy going forward?6 MR. McKEITHON: Every year, I7 believe that it -- once a reassessment is8 completed, you have to maintain it. And9 so, every year, we will expect portions10 of the City will continue to collect data11 on a rotational basis.12 There are standards in our13 profession that dictate that you should14 do field inspections for every parcel at15 least once every four years or so, and I16 fully intend on doing that.17 I'm not looking to just18 complete the reassessment and then let19 things go back to where they are now. I20 intended to maintain the reassessment and21 look at these values each and every year.22
Thank23 you very much, sir.24 Councilman Greenlee.25 79 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371
Thank2 you, Madam President.3 Good afternoon, it is now, to4 everyone.5 Mr. McKeithon, first of all,6 just to follow up on what the Council7 President just asked, so just so I'm8 clear, the idea -- your goal is to have9 all of this completed by fall of 2012, so10 the bills that go out, first the11 assessment notices go out the late summer12 of 2012 would be included in that. So it13 would be for the bills --14 MR. McKEITHON: Well, the15 notice --16
-- that17 would go out in late 2012 for FY '13. Is18 that right?19 MR. McKEITHON: The assessment20 notices I'm looking to get out -- my goal21 is to have them out by fall, meaning22 possibly November of 2012. And then from23 that point, bills would be generated by24 Revenue and sent out.25 80 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371
So it2 would be a little bit later than we're3 doing it now then.4 MR. McKEITHON: I -- I -- is5 that --6
'Cause7 usually they go out in, like, late8 August, right? 'Cause it's --9 MR. McKEITHON: Mr. Dubow will10 respond to that.11
Yeah, Councilman,14 the idea is that the bills -- Revenue15 would be sending the bills out in16 December of 2012. So people, if they17 wanted to, could pay them before the end18 of the year, but they would be for FY19 '13.20
Okay.21 But just so I'm -- I'm not trying to22 nit-pick the timeframe here, but --23 'cause usually, as Mr. Piper, I think,24 started saying, the notices go out -- the25 81 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371 assessment notices go out, what, late2 August, so it gives the people the chance3 to appeal them.4 Is that --5 MR. McKEITHON: Well, that's6 how --7
I mean, I8 know we're talking about the future here.9 MR. McKEITHON: Right.10
But I'm11 just trying to get the procedure down,12 sort of.13 MR. McKEITHON: They'll still14 have an opportunity to appeal.15
Uh-huh.16 MR. McKEITHON: Once we get17 notices out, typically, most18 jurisdictions will give you 30 days or so19 to appeal, so they'll still have an20 opportunity to appeal.21
Mm-hmm.22 MR. McKEITHON: And then, based23 on those decisions, I guess their bills24 would be -- I don't want to speak for25 82 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371 Revenue, but I guess their bills would be2 adjusted.3
Okay.4 I'm just saying it sounds like a tight5 time frame. If it's fall by the time you6 have the numbers ready, you know, people7 have to have the chance to appeal. And8 if there's appeals upheld, for example --9 you know where I'm going with this?10 MR. McKEITHON: Right.11
It12 doesn't sound like you'll have the chance13 to get the bills out in December, right?14 MR. McKEITHON: Well, once15 again, we're working as diligently --16
No, I17 understand, I understand.18 MR. McKEITHON: -- as we can to19 get to the fall of 2012.20
Yeah, an21 I understand. I'm just saying that22 that's a little bit different time frame23 than we've been working on; am I right?24
Just a little. A25 83 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371 couple of months. I would agree that it2 is tight.3
Mm-hmm,4 okay, all right.5 The civil service positions you6 talk about, particularly evaluator, now7 that test hasn't been actually set up yet8 so that -- am I right?9
I'm Veronica13 Daniels, the Administrative Services14 Director.15 That exam has not yet been16 scheduled. We are actually working with17 Personnel to change the specs of that18 exam --19
Okay.24 That's where I was going, 'cause I know25 84 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371 for, say, Evaluator I, I think the2 requirement's always been a bachelor's3 degree; is that right?4
Is that7 being looked at as possibly being8 changed?9
Okay. I11 know one of the big criticisms, if you12 will, whether it was fair or not, was13 that we needed more professionals.14 If you're lowering that, what15 would be -- is that going against that16 argument?17 MR. McKEITHON: Well, we are,18 as opposed to just making it a mandatory19 bachelor's, we're looking at the CPE20 certification, which is what our industry21 professionals would normally have.22
And what23 is that? Could you -- CPE is...?24 MR. McKEITHON: Certified25 85 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371 Public Evaluator.2
Okay.3 MR. McKEITHON: So that's a4 professional credential that's5 specifically for property assessment6 versus just someone having the bachelor's7 degree in any particular field. We think8 that this would just be equally, if not9 more, credible to have something in that10 particular field.11
So you're12 looking for something specific toward13 evaluating.14 MR. McKEITHON: Exactly.15
And how16 do those CPEs -- you don't necessarily17 have to have a bachelor's degree; is that18 --19 MR. McKEITHON: No. But we do20 require, in addition to a CPE, some level21 of experience, years of experience,22 knowledge of the real-property field and23 things like that.24
Okay.25 86 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371 Last question. On Evaluator IIs, I don't2 know if you've looked at that, but that's3 always been an advancement position,4 right?5 Are you still looking at that6 the same way or hiring somebody -- would7 that be new hires necessarily or both or8 --9
In the past, the10 Evaluator II was in a career advancement11 position.12
The way that the14 positions will be structured in future is15 that the department could hire an16 individual based on their experience at17 either level.18
Either19 level. It would still be the opportunity20 for advancement possibly? I mean, would21 they just --22 MR. McKEITHON: Definitely,23 yeah.24
Mm-hmm.25 87 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371 MR. McKEITHON: I want to2 create an environment where if I get a3 good candidate and they have experience,4 knowledge, et cetera, good credentials, I5 can hire them at an EV II.6
Mm-hmm.7 MR. McKEITHON: And also have8 the flexibility to hire someone at an9 EV I and they work their way up to an10 EV II.11
Mm-hmm.12 MR. McKEITHON: So this would13 give us more flexibility and, in my14 opinion, be more realistic with the15 real-world environment.16
Okay.17 Thank you. Thank you all.18 Thank you, Madam Chair.19 COUNCIL PRESIDENT VERNA:20 You're welcome.21 The Chair recognizes Councilman22 Jones.23
Thank you,24 Madam President.25 88 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371 Just so I can put my arms2 around this, did you say the number and3 value of -- well, first of all, good4 afternoon.5 MR. McKEITHON: How you doing.6
The number7 and value of tax-exempt properties was8 38 billion?9
Yes, the market10 value of the exempt properties is 3811 billion, correct.12
And what is13 the -- and I guess a simple way to put14 this is: What is Philadelphia's real15 estate that is taxable worth?16
Excuse me. Just a17 second, Councilman, because I'm looking18 at something here, and I want to make19 sure I gave you the right number.20 Councilman, I beg your pardon.21 The exempt market value total is22 17 billion -- not 38 billion, but23 $17,521,033,504.24
So do I25 89 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371 understand the figure to be 38 billion of2 taxable property?3
No. The 17 billion4 is the exempt portion, and the 38 billion5 is the taxable, that's correct.6
I14 have made notes of what you testified to15 earlier.16
And18 you did say "38 billion, 588 thousand."19 What figure is it really?20
I'm going to give21 it to you -- and I apologize, Madam22 President. I'm looking at ten different23 columns here.24 The exempt market value is25 90 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371 $17,521,033,504.2
And8 you did say that there were 24,7249 properties that were exempt?10
No, no,19 you're -- no, for clarification purposes,20 I thank you.21
How much is24 Philly worth -- real estate, taxable?25 91 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371
Hold on a second.9 Let me get my calculator.10 MR. McKEITHON: We'd have to do11 the math on that. We can get that for12 you.13
Let me say14 this. I'm getting scared here. It looks15 like more than half of our exempt16 property -- half of our value is exempt.17
I agree. We do18 have a lot of exempt properties in the19 City of Philadelphia.20
All right.21 I need you to -- you're in an exact22 science. I'm in the "about" business; I23 can estimate, guesstimate. I need you to24 calculate that for us --25 92 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371
And let me6 further ask, you said periodically, you7 send out inspectors to check to see if8 indeed a tax-exempt property is being9 used for said purposes, correct?10
What is the12 frequency of those inspections and the13 percentage of properties annually that14 you do inspect?15
That's also a16 number I'd have to get and calculate17 based on what it is we've done in the18 past.19 But, of course, as20 Mr. McKeithon said, you know, what we're21 doing is developing a plan to inspect all22 of them within three years.23
What I do24 need to know is, what did we do last25 93 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371 year? If it ain't measured, it ain't2 managed.3 And I'm asking you: Last year,4 how many properties did we inspect? What5 was the results of those inspections?6 How many were found to be operating under7 the said purposes? And how many were8 not?9 MR. McKEITHON: We can get that10 for you.11
No, you14 don't have somebody who can --15 MR. McKEITHON: No, we'd have16 to go back --17