This is at18 the -- I can -- without being a19 soothsayer, you're going to be the most20 popular department this time next year.21 When I tell you that all of us are going22 to be at your -- we're going to want to23 know this data so we can communicate that24 back to our constituents, both25 94 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371 businesses, nonprofits, and regular2 taxpayers alike. Sharpen your pencils,3 'cause those are the questions we need to4 know.5 People are already questioning6 whether or not this temporary real-estate7 tax will be revenue-neutral, and we need8 to have faith in the numbers, the9 calculation, the inspection process, the10 exemption process, that indeed we are11 getting the money due us and that the12 people that are doing nonprofit,13 philanthropic kind of activities are14 indeed doing that.15 And so, I need to know how many16 inspections you make.17
How18 long would it take you gentlemen to get19 that information, come back to us, and20 let us know?21 MR. McKEITHON: I would22 estimate a few days.23
A few24 days?25 95 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371 MR. McKEITHON: Yes. We would2 have to go back to our office and3 research some record.4
You5 don't have a good computer system, I6 guess, huh?7 MR. McKEITHON: We are asking8 for budget funds for our computer9 hardware and software.10
Oh.11 MR. McKEITHON: We're pretty12 bad off IT-wise right now, and that's why13 we're asking for a lot of this funding.14 But, once again, I think that,15 you know, I want to emphasize --16
If we17 were to continue this hearing until later18 this afternoon, would you be able to come19 in and provide the information that20 Councilman Jones is asking for?21 MR. McKEITHON: We could do our22 best, but I wouldn't say without any23 degree of certainty that we could gather24 that by this afternoon. I mean, we would25 96 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371 really have to go back to our office and2 research some records. It may take some3 physical detail. It's not as simple, I4 believe, as pressing a button.5 So if you will allow us, we6 could definitely attempt to get you that7 within a few days.8
Madam9 President, if I may?10 COUNCIL PRESIDENT VERNA:11 Councilman Jones.12
They need to17 take the time that they need, but they18 need to take the time and get this19 information to us.20 The confidence in this21 information is at the heart of what a22 taxpayer needs to know, that there is a23 system that is not a wild-ass guess.24 Thank you, Madam President.25 97 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371 COUNCIL PRESIDENT VERNA:2 You're welcome.3 Councilman Green.4
Thank you,5 Madam Chair.6 Mr. McKeithon, under State law,7 by what date must someone appeal a8 property assessment for the next calendar9 year?10 MR. McKEITHON: Well, under11 State law, here, in the City of12 Philadelphia, once the assessment notices13 are mailed, we give opportunity to appeal14 within 30 days, correct?15
That's16 right, but there's a State law17 requirement, a date certain by which all18 appeals must be put in place; it's in the19 First-Class City Act. By what date is20 that?21 MR. McKEITHON: They have an22 opportunity to nunc pro tunc, I believe,23 indefinitely.24
I'm just25 98 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371 asking you for the date.2
Councilman Green,3 the date is the first Monday of October4 or --5
And you plan14 to send out the assessments when?15 MR. McKEITHON: Our goal is to16 have them done by the fall of 2012, no17 later than November of 2012.18
Okay. And22 for -- so let's just make sure that that23 would comply with State law, okay.24 So before -- in order to have a25 99 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371 new millage rate apply for the calendar2 year of 2013, which is what everybody in3 the Administration has been contemplating4 and talking about, we have to pass5 millage in May of 2012. How do we do6 that when you have not sent out notices7 until the fall?8 Is this how we get back-door9 tax increase, a formula applied to values10 we don't know what it is yet?11 (Rob Dubow returns to witness12 table.)13
So in terms of14 millage rate, obviously, that's not a15 question for the Office of Property16 Assessment because they just set the17 values.18 In terms of setting millage19 rate, you know, we'll have -- we'll have20 to look at how we handle that next21 spring. I mean, if we leave the millage22 rate unchanged and then we have new23 assessments that will be at actual value,24 obviously, that would create, you know,25 100 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371 several times more revenue than we2 generate now, so we will not want to do3 that.4 So that's something we have to,5 you know, work on with Council, you know,6 the best way to approach that.7
But, I mean,8 really, what we have to do is coordinate9 the actual value, give people time to10 assess -- what you're really saying is,11 we can't release new assessments, or12 should not responsibly release new13 assessments, until the spring of 2013,14 when we know what the actual total15 aggregate value of real estate in the16 City of Philadelphia is so that we could17 appropriately set a millage rate and have18 a debate about whether or not we've19 captured increased value, whether or not20 it's revenue-neutral, rather than -- I21 mean, you're basically asking us to give22 you a blank check on some formulaic23 basis, which is the only way this could24 happen, to allow you to do tax increases.25 101 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371 Basically, we'd be abdicating our2 responsibility of setting millage.3 I can't believe that you'd4 consider that we would -- I can't believe5 you'd think we'd possibly consider doing6 what you're suggesting.7
I haven't actually8 suggested anything. What I suggested was9 that this is a complicated issue that we10 need to work on Council with. I didn't11 suggest anything specifically.12
But I don't13 understand how we're -- how -- I -- I14 mean, basically, the testimony is, we're15 going to send out new property16 assessments in November of 2012, and you17 will have already -- in order for18 everything in the Five-Year Plan and19 Budget to be true, we will have already20 had to pass a millage rate that is, you21 know, a guess, rather than waiting for22 the numbers.23
I think what I24 said -- and I'll say it again -- is that25 102 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371 this is a complicated issue, and we need2 to work on this with Council.3
Well, wake4 up, Philadelphia.5 Thank you, Madam President.6 COUNCIL PRESIDENT VERNA:7 You're welcome.8 The Chair recognizes Councilman9 Goode.10
Thank you,11 Madam President.12 Mr. Dubow, could you stay at13 the table.14 I'll take a shot at this from a15 different perspective. Do we not know16 what the aggregate assessed value is17 going to be over the next five years?18
Yes. We have in23 the Five-Year Plan the revenue we think24 we'll generate.25 103 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371
That's based on a4 couple of things. One, for '12, it's5 based on the assumption that we're not6 changing assessments this year, so it's7 just based on where the millage rate is.8 For '13, it's based on the9 assumption that we will set a millage10 rate that will produce the amount of11 revenue that's in the plan and that will12 allow us to capture the growth that we've13 seen in the market over the last, you14 know, ten years or so.15
And so, to20 some extent, we do know what the21 aggregate assessed value is going to be,22 or we're close to it.23
We know what we24 think the combination of assessed value25 104 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371 and millage will be, but don't know what2 either one of those will be.3
Yeah. And we have6 two different analyses. One that's been7 fairly public from eConsult said that8 since 2004, growth has been well over9 30 percent. The consultants that we used10 for our Five-Year Plan, IHS, put that11 same growth at around 25 percent.12 So they both put it, you know,13 a little bit above over what we think14 we'll be capturing.15
But the16 figure we're using right now is17 20 percent growth.18
And so, that21 would give us what in terms of aggravate22 assessed value?23
It dep -- we don't24 actually -- the assessed value isn't25 105 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371 going to be very different from what it2 is now.3
It will 'cause we6 only have -- we use fractional7 assessments now, and it will be a full --8
I understand9 that you have 38.5 billion and that you10 have the taxable assessment as 12.3. I'm11 assuming that's the predetermined ratio12 of 32 percent?13
So you if16 were not using the predetermined ratio17 but using the full value, it's assumed18 that in terms if it were actually19 taxable, it would be 38.5 billion, with20 20 percent growth.21
Well, since we'd be22 using actual value, you would see it23 almost triple, I guess, or more than24 that, or a little more than that. The25 106 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371 assessed values would go up by a2 little -- by more than three times.3
So give me a4 guess at what you think the aggregate5 assessed value is going to be with6 20 percent growth.7
What is it now? So8 it would clearly be well over a hundred.9 I mean, these guys are the professionals.10 It would be well over a hundred.11
So at the12 end of the day, it would not require more13 than a 1 percent tax rate.14
Well, if we are at15 9 now, and it more than tripled, I think16 we'd still be over 1, but we could be17 under 2.18
But we would19 not -- we'd still be roughly at 120 percent.21
I think we'd be25 107 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371 closer to 2, but I'd have to kind of do2 the math. It think it's a little higher3 than that.4
Okay. The5 reason I'm saying it is, it seems that6 it's not as murky as we're claiming it7 is. I mean, if you're able to put8 figures in a five-year plan, if you're9 able to calculate what the expected10 growth is going to be, of course, you11 can't do it per property and should not12 do it per property without doing it the13 right way. And that's the job of the14 Office of Property Assessment.15
But for our17 purposes, it is what it is in terms of we18 know that the rate is going to be 1 to 219 percent.20
And so, I'm25 108 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371 just saying this for the record. So that2 means that Council's job in this, in3 terms of setting the rate, is not going4 to be completely simplified because we're5 going to want to put in certain6 protections for seniors and long-term7 homeowners.8
And that's10 going to force us to look at the rate11 hard in terms of what we're bringing in.12 But at the same time, property13 tax bills that go dawn will go down based14 upon fair assessments, and property tax15 bills that will go up will go up based16 upon fair assessments, not necessarily17 based upon tax rate.18
Thank you.23 COUNCIL PRESIDENT VERNA:24 You're welcome.25 109 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371 The Chair recognizes Councilman2 Jones.3
Thank you,4 Madam President.5 A couple of quick questions6 since you're going to be in the data-7 gathering phase. One question would be:8 How many vacant properties are there in9 the City of Philadelphia?10 MR. McKEITHON: Okay. We can11 run a report on that. We'll give you12 that at the same time we give you the13 information about the exempt properties.14
And I'd like15 to know what the appraised --16 MR. McKEITHON: Total assessed17 value is?18
-- total19 assessed value of that is, and20 differentiate that by those in City21 inventory.22 So, if there are 35,000 -- it's23 40,000, actually, of vacant properties,24 10 percent owned are by the City.25 110 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371 MR. McKEITHON: Mm-hmm.2
What is the3 total number and assessed value? And4 then, if it's owned by us, what is that5 of the property?6 MR. McKEITHON: Okay.7
So I want it8 broken down in those two categories.9 MR. McKEITHON: All right.10 Now, before we go any further, I want to11 say that we haven't inspected those12 properties in quite some time; that's why13 I wanted to get out and do field14 inspections.15 And so, we'll just be giving16 you what we have prior to any type of17 field inspection.18
If we're19 guessing, we might as well guess about20 that, too.21 Can we also -- are you22 calculating the impact of storm-water23 fees that we're now going to assess24 properties with and what the impact on25 111 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371 value will be of the increase in the2 storm-water management fees?3 MR. McKEITHON: Well, we would4 deal with storm-water management fees;5 we're only dealing with the assessed6 value of the real priority, using7 industry standards.8 So the storm water fees may be9 generated based on an assessment, but we10 don't -- it doesn't work the other way11 around.12
So if a13 property that currently has a $25,00014 assessment goes to $250,000, which some15 of them testified in here, based on the16 formula, that has no impact on the value17 of the property in your assessment?18 MR. McKEITHON: We are going to19 assess property based off of industry20 standards of comparability, sales, things21 of that nature. I don't know exactly how22 the storm water fee --23
It's based24 on --25 112 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371 MR. McKEITHON: -- department2 got its value, so --3
It's on4 square footage of porous and non-porous5 surfaces and what that rain water runoff6 impact is on our system.7 And there's a -- and so, if8 someone were buying a property or9 considering a manufacturing facility in10 Philadelphia, that has an impact on11 value.12 MR. McKEITHON: But, see, the13 way we're going to value is, what would14 they pay for it? We're going to not15 consider what the storm-water issue would16 be, runoff, things like -- we're going to17 look at what they pay for per square18 foot, what it's zoned, things of that19 nature.20
Thank you,21 Madam President.22 COUNCIL PRESIDENT VERNA:23 You're welcome.24 The Chair recognizes Councilman25 113 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371 Green.2
Thank you,3 Madam President.4 So, just following up on my5 previous line of questioning, I had a6 couple of thoughts.7 If someone -- if the entire8 City receives assessments in November and9 it's legal for them to appeal after they10 receive them or it's legal for us to send11 them and have them apply past the date to12 appeal, which I understand you're going13 to look at, when would, you know, those14 30 or 40 or 50,000 appeals be heard by?15 MR. McKEITHON: Well, we're16 going to have an appeal process in-house17 first, where individuals can contact us,18 and we're going to get through those as19 quickly as possible.20
Right.21 MR. McKEITHON: Now, there's22 another level, which is with the actual23 board.24
Right.25 114 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371 MR. McKEITHON: And I can't2 speak for when they'll schedule them.3
Sure, but4 when you're appealing your assessment --5 MR. McKEITHON: Mm-hmm.6
-- can you7 pay what you think it's worth, or do you8 have to pay, when due, what the original9 assessment notice said?10 MR. McKEITHON: Once again,11 that will be a question for the Revenue12 Department. I -- we level the13 assessments; we don't deal with how you14 pay what you pay -- what the terms are15 for any types of payment.16
Is there17 anyone here from the Administration who18 can answer that question?19 (Rob Dubow returns to witness20 table.)21
I don't actually22 know the answer to that question. We can23 actually check with Revenue and get back24 to you.25 115 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371
I think6 this actually is a point of information.7 My understanding is that the Revenue8 Department expects you to pay the bill on9 time.10
And then13 if you win your appeal, you apply for a14 refund. That's always been my15 understanding. I'm pretty sure I'm16 right.17
Councilman,18 I believe you are correct. And what that19 means is, we'll be sending out all of20 these notices without enough time for21 tens of thousands of people who are22 likely to appeal. They will be required23 to pay an amount to the Revenue24 Department because the appeal process25 116 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371 will not be over by the time the taxes2 are due, and then we will be requiring3 people to -- and basically, they will --4 if they win their appeal, they can get a5 refund.6 So for tens of thousands of7 Philadelphians, because we're trying to8 rush this -- well, I mean, it just seems9 like not a good process.10
If we get to next14 spring and it looks like the timing is15 pushed back so that we wouldn't give16 people time to appeal, we'll have to17 discuss, you know, what our options are,18 which would be -- the primary one would19 be not doing the assessments next year20 and then looking at, you know, where we21 set the millage. And if we reduce the22 millage back to where it was, what we do23 in terms of budget to keep it in balance.24 But we'll have to look at that25 117 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371 when we get to it next year.2
So did we3 get a number for the aggregate value of4 real estate in the City of Philadelphia5 based upon market value today?6 MR. McKEITHON: Yeah. It was7 38 billion.8
And is it11 your testimony that the aggregate value,12 after you complete full value --13
Including20 tax-exempt. So is it your testimony,21 then, that the aggregate value of real22 estate, after we go to full value or23 market value for all properties in the24 City, will be 56 million plus 20 percent?25 118 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371
Which allows3 us to capture the value that we don't4 have in the current market value of real5 estate.6
It will be a little7 different from what we testified to8 earlier is that since we're only really9 doing fractional assessments now, so just10 looking at taxable, that 38 billion would11 probably be more like something like12 something over a hundred billion, but13 that there would be an increase over that14 of 20 percent.15
Sorry. So16 my question was: What was the aggregate17 market value -- not assessed value -- in18 the City today?19
So that has25 119 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371 nothing to do with the millage that's2 applied to it, correct?3
That has nothing to4 do with millage, but it has to do with5 assessments. The assessments are still6 fractional. That number would still go7 up when we went to full value.8
No, no. I'm9 asking what the assessment -- I'm asking10 what the market value is, not the11 assessed value.12
Right. But I'm13 telling you, even the market value, we14 don't capture full our value there. Even15 that will go up dramatically when we do16 the actual value -- when we finish the17 actual vale initiative.18
The market value,21 under the current assessment process, and22 the current process is including exempt23 and taxable, is 56. But that doesn't24 capture what the actual value is. That's25 120 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371 why we're going through this process.2
Well, it3 doesn't capture the actual value of each4 property because some, as we've seen from5 Inquirer reporting and otherwise, is6 higher, and in many areas is lower, than7 the market value assigned to it by the8 Office of Property Assessment.9
And in aggregate,10 it is lower. The aggregate is lower than11 the actual value, even aside from the --12
And that's13 the question: What is the aggregate14 going to be? Is it going to be 2015 percent more?16
It will be -- there17 will be two parts of -- it will be more18 for two reasons.19 One, aside from the 20 percent20 issue, even without that, the way we do21 assessments now, we're only capturing a22 fraction of value.23
No, we're24 capturing the full value and we're25 121 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371 applying --2
No, we're not.6 We're not capturing full value; that's7 part of the problem.8 In addition to the 339 percent -- I guess the number I used to10 hear may have changed -- is that, on11 average, we're getting about 70 percent.12 So if you just equalized13 everything, you would be at 70 percent of14 where values are at now.15
That was --18 (Indiscernible; parties talking19 over each other.)20
No, that was before23 not capturing the 20 percent in value,24 so --25 122 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371
-- what5 you're saying is that it has been the6 policy of the BRT to make the market7 value at 70 percent of actual value.8
Okay. So11 when you look at 70 percent of -- same12 question, just worded a different way.13 When you look at 70 percent of14 the actual value, after we get the new15 assessment, will that be 20 percent16 higher --17
So you adjust that25 123 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371 up and get to your number.2 (Indiscernible; parties talking3 over each other.)4
No.19 So I really don't know where to20 go from here because we really -- we seem21 to be setting in place a process or a22 motion that is unrealistic to begin with,23 'cause there's no way we can get through24 assessments for the -- by the time the25 124 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371 taxes are due. And I just don't know how2 to ask any more questions about that.3 I just want to make it clear to4 the public what's happening here, that we5 are going to -- if the Five-Year Plan is6 going to be realistic, as submitted to7 PICA, we are going to have to next year8 vote on a millage, or a formulaic9 millage, that will be -- which, without10 having information about what full value11 is in the City or how it's going to12 affect different neighborhood and areas,13 which is the stated purpose by the14 Administration for the delay in going to15 actual value for the last two years.16 That's all I have to say, Madam17 President.18
Thank19 you.20 Are there any other questions21 from members of the Committee?22
The25 125 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371 Chair recognizes Councilman Greenlee.2
Just very3 quickly, and I don't want to belabor this4 time frame, but I have to say just for5 the record that I agree basically with6 what Councilman Green said.7 But on these new positions you8 want to hire Mr. McKeithon, the9 evaluators and whatever, what time frame10 do you have for hiring them? I mean,11 when ideally would you like them in12 place? 'cause I know you said you're13 still evaluating -- you're still going14 over the qualification possibilities.15
Excuse me. We're16 really working with Personnel, and17 Personnel is actually working very18 diligently with our department and has19 prioritized some of our needs.20 We're already anticipating that21 we will get results somewhere in early22 fall.23
So the24 results of the testing.25 126 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371
Yeah,3 early fall. So that would mean the4 people would be hired when?5
As soon as we get6 the results, we'll begin processing them7 immediately.8
So as soon as the10 list is certified, we'll already be in11 place. We're already doing things now,12 you know, things that we can do ahead of13 time, establishing, you know, packages14 and things like that.15
It still19 sounds like a tight time frame to me, but20 again, I won't belabor it. Thank you.21 Thank you, Madam President.22 COUNCIL PRESIDENT VERNA:23 You're welcome.24 The Chair recognizes25 127 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371 Councilwoman Blackwell.2
Thank3 you, Madam President.4 I only rise to say, obviously,5 Council does not understand or agree or6 understand how they intend to do it the7 way they want to do it. And, certainly,8 before we pass a budget, all of this --9 this that affects everybody in our city10 needs to be worked out. And certainly,11 we would expect that to happen.12 This is such an important issue13 to not have info or to say it's somebody14 else's decision or to say we'll see. You15 can't tax people based on "we will see."16 And certainly, all of my cheatings feel17 this way.18 So we would hope that when they19 return to this Council, because,20 obviously, they need to before we can21 consider passing this budget, then we'll22 have more answers.23 Thank you.24 COUNCIL PRESIDENT VERNA:25 128 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371 You're welcome.2 The Chair again recognizes3 Councilman Green.4
Thank you,5 Madam Chair.6 I actually have a budget7 question. And that is, your vacancy8 allowance in your department is $100,000.9 Based on the fact that you don't have a10 test for the 80 people, when do you11 realistically expect to be able to make12 your first hire?13 And then do you expect to be14 able to -- do you expect to or even want15 to hire the 80th person off the first16 test, or do you want to hire a little bit17 and then do another test and see if you18 can get a different pool of more19 qualified -- you know, of higher-quality20 candidates than the previous test at the21 bottom of the list?22 And so, could you walk through23 -- because, obviously, July 1st, you're24 not going to have 90 new employees.25 129 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371
Right. When our2 budget was first created, we were really3 not sure of what the test schedule would4 be like. So the vacancy allowance that5 you see was based on what we thought was6 going on at that moment.7 But in the meantime, you are8 right, we won't be to hire until about,9 you know, early fall.10 When that test is given, I11 mean, it's our hope that because of the12 change in the specs that the exam will13 produce a list of highly qualified14 candidates. We're hoping that with some15 outreach in the communities, and we will16 be reaching out to City Council and some17 other areas to help us to get the word18 out about this position and about the19 qualifications so that we can get a good20 pool of applicants then.21 With that said, we are hoping22 that we can at least hire a good number23 of those people, because once an exam is24 given, you know, it doesn't just25 130 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371 disappear; it's out there for two years.2
When do3 you -- I mean, you'd have to have at4 least -- in order to have a really good5 pool of 80 candidates, you'd have to have6 hundreds of people taking the test7 probably, right?8
I agree.9 MR. McKEITHON: And we're10 realistic about the fact that we may not11 get 80 at one time; we'll get them as12 they come in.13 We're hoping we can take14 advantage of things like the market has15 been down for the last couple of years16 and --17
Absolutely,18 which is why the change in standards is19 so surprising.20 MR. McKEITHON: And so, you21 know, we're looking to take advantage of22 any good talent that's out there, that's23 available right now.24 But we know there's -- you25 131 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371 know, chances are you're not going to get2 80 at one time.3
So how many4 will you have hired by, say, December, or5 January of next year?6 MR. McKEITHON: I'm hoping we7 will have hired at least -- I can't say8 now actually 'cause you never know, but9 I'm hoping we will have hired at least a10 third or maybe a half.11
Okay.12 Let's --13 MR. McKEITHON: We'll have to14 see what --15
So none will16 be hired until early fall. So can we say17 that the start date will likely be18 October 1st for the first batch?19
I would guess24 that that's a good guess because we are25 132 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371 basing it on the process of changing the2 specs and the exam.3
And then4 that will likely be half that we'll hire5 then.6
I mean, you10 can't bring in 80 people at once, you11 know, in a practical matter, right?12
So the14 additional funding for the 90 new15 portions is about $4.5 million. So16 that's roughly $450,000 a month.17 So in July, they won't be18 hired; August, they won't be hired;19 September, they won't be hired. There's20 a million-and-a-half dollars too much in21 Class 100 in your budget to begin with.22 In October, half are going to23 be hired. Let's just give you24 two-thirds. We can take another25 133 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371 million-5 easily out of your budget. And2 still, you will have all the money you3 need to do the hiring that you've just4 testified you're going to be able to do.5 MR. McKEITHON: Well, once6 again, we said this was a guess. I mean,7 we can't say for sure exactly. I mean,8 this is a guestimate.9
Well, I10 understand, but we can only -- I'm only11 going to -- I mean, we should not12 appropriate on anything other than your13 best guess, and it's clear that you won't14 have people there before October 1st.15 MR. McKEITHON: I'm very16 optimistic that we'll have them all17 there. I have to --18
By October19 1st?20 MR. McKEITHON: -- to conduct21 myself in that matter.22
Okay.23 MR. McKEITHON: I don't want to24 lose candidates because I'm not prepared25 134 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371 to --2
Well, you3 could always come back to City Council if4 the -- and request additional5 appropriation.6 But based on your testimony, it7 seems to me you don't need the full8 $4.5 million. There's significant money9 there that can be put towards, I don't10 know, keeping the pools open another two11 weeks or other things like that.12 So thank you very much for your13 testimony.14
Thank you,17 Madam President.18 Very quickly. What do these19 positions pay?20
The Evaluator I24 begins at 34,000.25 135 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371
And are we2 sure we have people in this region or3 even that we can recruit that will want4 to serve in a position at that?5
Which is why6 we're changing the way that we hire.7 Part of the process, part of the due8 process and the changing of the specs,9 that's what we discussed earlier, was10 allowing us to hire not just as an11 Evaluator I at the first step; it would12 also allow us to hire at an Evaluator II13 level hire.14 But we can hire anywhere along15 that range.16
But do you17 know what you'll be able to recruit at18 that level of salary? In other words,19 what --20
I can say it's21 difficult.22 MR. McKEITHON: Right. There's23 no way we can really know for sure. It's24 a goal. I mean, there's no way to know25 136 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371 that there are individuals. It may be,2 it may not.3
At this4 point, how many people do you want to5 hire at Evaluator I and how many people6 do you want to hire at Evaluator II of7 the 80 positions?8 MR. McKEITHON: We can't say9 that there's a set number. Typically,10 they will trickle in evenly.11 I would expect a lot of people12 will come in between a I and II. But,13 you know, we don't really want to take a14 chance in saying that a lot of -- three15 individuals might come in. We just don't16 know.17
Well, will18 trying recruit an Evaluator II be more19 helpful in recruiting it and getting more20 people in at an earlier point in the21 year?22
I can say that in23 past experience, I have had people who24 did not take the job because they25 137 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371 couldn't start at a II. You know, we've2 had that problem.3 So the beginning are salary of4 $34,000 can be a challenge for us.5
And so,6 you're equally reciting for both7 positions at the same, or what final8 decisions have you made in terms of9 classifications?10
We are -- what11 happens is, when we give the exam, the12 exam will be given at the beginning13 level.14 But based on personal -- a15 candidate's personal experience, it will16 allow us to hire within the range.17
So your18 budget may change in terms of who you're19 hiring anyway.20
Thank25 138 4.18.11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - Bill 1101371 you.2 Are there any other questions3 from members of the committee?4 (No further questions.)5 COUNCIL PRESIDENT VERNA:6 Seeing none, thank you very much.7 This committee will stand in8 recess until a quarter of 2.9 Thank you.10 (Lunch break taken.)11 * * *12 (Proceedings resume.)13
I14 would ask all Councilmembers to please15 come to the Caucus for the continued16 public hearing of the committee of the17 Whole.18 * * *19