COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA COMMITTEE ON THE STREETS AND SERVICES Room 400, City Hall, Philadelphia, PA Tuesday, March 24, 2009, 10:10 a.m. - - - Bill 080645 - Re cellphone usage while driving. Bill 090001 - Re open-air sidewalk café... Bill 090002 - " " " " " " Bill 090008 - Held at request of sponsor. Bill 090009 - Establishing a parking regulation. Bill 090010 - " " " " Bill 090011 - " " " " Bill 090013 - Re parking for car-sharing orgs. Bill 090014 - " " " " " " Bill 090015 - Re newsstands. Bill 090017 - Establishing a parking regulation. Bill 090018 - " " " " Bill 090019 - " " " " Bill 090020 - " " " " Bill 090021 - " " " " Bill 090022 - " " " " Bill 090023 - " " " " Bill 090024 - " " " " Bill 090025 - " " " " Bill 090026 - " " " " Bill 090070 - Authorizing paving of Keely St. Bill 090076 - Revision of lines and grades... Bill 090120 - " " " " " ... Bill 009121 - Est. no-truck-parking regulation. Bill 090122 - Held at request of sponsor. Bill 090123 - " " " " " Bill 090126 - Re open-air sidewalk café... Bill 090129 - Est. no-truck-parking regulation. COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Frank DiCicco, Chair Curtis Jones Bill Green Maria Quinones-Sanchez William K. Greenlee - - - V A R A L L O Incorporated Litigation Support Specialists 1835 Market Street, Suite 600 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103 215.561.2220 215.567.2670 2 3/24/09 - COMMITTEE ON STREETS & SERVICES I N D E X WITNESS Bills: 090001, 002, 076, 070, 120, 121, 126, 129 Kristen Del Rossi, Streets................... 6 William Erickson, City Planning.............. 7 Thomas Marro, Streets........................ 11 8 Robert Black, Streets........................ 9 10 Bill 090015 (Newsstand Legislation) 11 Steve Buckley, Transportation/Pub. Utilities 12 John Rocco, Chairman, Newsstand Association 30 13 Joseph Beller, Newsstand Association......... 31 John Cunningham, JMC Consulting.............. 35 Mary Tracy, SCRUB............................ 68 Harold Jacobs, SCRUB, Logan Square Neighbors 87 Gray Smith, Architect, Urban Planner......... 93 Paul Levy, Center City District..............108 Bill 080645 (Re cellphone usage while driving) Lt. F. Healy, Spec. Advisor to Comm. Ramsey 149 Rebecca Cunningham, Accident Survivor........162 Thos. Minehart, Concerned Citizen (pro-legis)164 Prof. Thomas Gambescia, Drexel University....166 Bill Arnold, Concerned Citizen (anti-legis.) 185 3 3/24/09 - COMMITTEE ON STREETS & SERVICES I N D E X WITNESS Bills 090013, 14, Parking for Car-Sharing Eli Master, PhillyCarShare...................196 Mark Norman, Zipcar..........................203 James Callahan, Enterprise Rent-A-Car........207 - - - PUBLIC MEETING...............................222 4 3/24/09 - COMMITTEE ON STREETS & SERVICES
Good morning, everyone. The public hearing on the Committee on Streets and Services is now in session. My name is Frank DiCicco; I'm the chair of this committee. To my immediate left is Councilman William Greenlee, to my far right is Councilman Bill Green, to my immediate right is Councilman Curtis Jones. We do have a quorum. What we're going to do is, my legislative assistant, Mr. Abernathy, will read a number of bills that we feel are not controversial. We'll take those bills first and then we'll go on to the bills that we expect we'll have a lot more testimony on. So, Mr. Abernathy, please read the titles of those bills.
Bill No. 090008, 090122, and 090123 are being held at the request of the sponsor. Bill No. 090121, an ordinance 5 3/24/09 - COMMITTEE ON STREETS & SERVICES establishing a no-truck-parking regulation on the 5200 block of Marshall Street from Fisher Avenue to Duncannon Avenue, on the eastern side. Bill No. 090129, an ordinance 7 establishing a no-truck-parking regulation on both sides of North Hancock Street between Jefferson Street and Thompson Street. Bill No. 090076, an ordinance 12 authorizing the revision of lines and grades on a portion of City Plan No. 63 by relocating the northerly houseline and curbline of Harmer Street from 15th Street to 16th Street; authorizing the dedication to the City of the privately- owned widened portion of Harmer Street; and authorizing the opening of the widened Harmer Street, including a portion owned by the City; all under certain terms and conditions. Bill No. 090070, an ordinance 24 authorizing the paving of Keely Street from Henry Avenue southwestwardly to a 6 3/24/09 - COMMITTEE ON STREETS & SERVICES cul-de-sac turnaround, under certain terms and conditions. Bill No. 090120, an ordinance 5 authorizing the revision of lines and grades on a portion of City Plan City No.s 107 and 130 by striking from the City Plan and vacating the legally-open portions of 47th Street from Fairmount Avenue to Brown Street, striking from the City Plan and vacating Aspen Street from 47th Street to Markoe Street; and reserving on the City Plan and authorizing the City acceptance of right-of-ways for various purposes within the lines of 47th Street and Aspen Street being stricken; all under certain terms and conditions. Bill No. 090001, an ordinance 20 authorizing Hossein Elbanna to construct, own, and maintain an open-air sidewalk café at 3901 Walnut Street, under certain terms and conditions. Bill No. 090002, an ordinance 25 authorizing Hardev Singh to construct, 7 3/24/09 - COMMITTEE ON STREETS & SERVICES own, and maintain an open-air sidewalk café and planters at 4004 Chestnut Street, under certain terms and conditions. Bill No. 090126, an ordinance 7 authorizing Manuel C. and Maria E. Terrivel to construct, own, and maintain an open-air sidewalk café at 1801 South 4th Street, under certain terms and conditions.
Thank you. Will the witnesses who are testifying on the bills please come to the witness table. It's Mr. Morelli, Mr. Erickson, Miss Del Rossi or someone from Streets, Mr. Black. And I know I left someone out. Dlugosz, am I pronouncing it right? (Witnesses come forward.)
Okay. Why don't we begin with 090121. Miss Del Rossi, will you be testifying? Thank you. What I'd like to do is, if 8 3/24/09 - COMMITTEE ON STREETS & SERVICES there's anything other than the testimony that -- your written testimony that's being written for the record, if you have any other comments, please state them; if not, we'll accept your testimony, your written testimony. And just maybe identify yourselves for the record; that way, we know you're here, and then we'll go from there.
Good morning, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today. My name is Kristen Del Rossi, and I am appearing on behalf of David Dlugosz, District Traffic Engineer for the Streets Department. I am here today to offer testimony on Bill No. 090121. The Streets Department has no 22 objections to this bill. The no-parking- anytime signs were placed on the street on May 28, 2008. Thank you for the opportunity to 9 3/24/09 - COMMITTEE ON STREETS & SERVICES appear before you today. I will be happy to answer any questions you have for me at this time.
Thank you. Any questions for this witness? (No questions.)
Is there anyone else here who wishes to testify on this bill? (No response.)
Seeing none, ladies and gentlemen, there -- is this the only one you're testifying on?
Good morning, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today. My name is 10 3/24/09 - COMMITTEE ON STREETS & SERVICES Kristen Del Rossi, and I am the district traffic engineer for the Streets Department. I'm here today to offer testimony on Bill No. 090129. The Streets Department has no 7 objections to this bill. We will be posting this block of no-truck-parking under a trial ordinance and can have the signs placed within four weeks. Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today, and I'm happy to answer any questions.
Thank you. Any questions for this witness from the committee? (No questions.)
Is there anyone else here who wishes to testify? (No response.)
Seeing none, the titles have already been read into the record. Again, we have written testimony. Is there anything else that any of you would like to add to any of 11 3/24/09 - COMMITTEE ON STREETS & SERVICES the bills that you may be testifying to? (No response.)
Please just go around and identify yourselves for the record.
I am William Erickson from the Philadelphia City Planning Commission, and you've received my testimony, and I have nothing else to add.
Good morning, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. My name is Thomas Marro, City Plans Officer for the Department of Streets Department, and I'm testifying today in place of Mr. Morelli, who was unable here today. I'm testifying on Bill No.'s 090070, 090076, and 090120. 12 3/24/09 - COMMITTEE ON STREETS & SERVICES These bills are supported by the Department of Streets Department and recommended to your committee for favorable action.
Good morning, Chairman and members of the committee. My name is Robert Black, and I'm a construction engineer with the Streets Department. There's no change in any testimony for Bill No.'s 090001, 090002, 090008, and 090126.
Thank you. Any questions for these witnesses on any of the bills that have been just been read? (No questions or comments.)
Is there anyone else who wishes to testify on any of these bills? (No response.)
Seeing none, thank you all for coming in. 13 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. Seeing none, Mr. Abernathy, please read the title of the next bill.
Bill No. 090015, an ordinance amending Section 9-212 of the Philadelphia Code, entitled "Newsstands," to permit the placement of commercial advertising on newsstands and revise the fee for a newsstand license, all under certain terms and conditions. (Witnesses come forward.)
Okay. Just for the record, I want to go back for a minute. I have a letter that was submitted by the University of Pennsylvania in support of Bill No. 18 090001, and that was submitted to me by Councilwoman Blackwell's office, and I just want to -- a copy of this will be given to the stenographer. Thank you. What we're going to do is ask the Streets Department to testify first, and then we'll go to the newsstand 14 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. testimony. You guys can either stay there or get some other chairs or whatever makes it easier. Good morning.
Good morning, Councilman DiCicco and members of the Committee on Streets and Services. My name is Steve Buckley, and I am the director of policy and planning for the Office of Deputy Mayor for Transportation, Public Utilities, Rina Cutler, and I'm here today to present testimony on Bill No. 090015, which amends Section 9-212 of the Philadelphia Code pertaining to newsstands. Bill No. 090015, introduced by Councilman DiCicco, revises the fee for a newsstand license from $250 to $350 and provides significant changes to the amount and type of advertising on newsstands by allowing for electronic or digital media, increasing the size and the amount of advertising, and allowing commercial or non-accessory signage on 15 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. newsstands. The increase in the amount of signage, coupled with permitting commercial advertising, will significantly enhance the value of the newsstand. The Administration recognizes the challenge faced by small businesses during this current economic crisis. And while we appreciate Councilman DiCicco's effort to make available a new source of revenue for these small-business owners, the Administration does not support this legislation in its current form. Important public policy questions are raised when considering new forms of advertising in the right-of-way, including on newsstands: First, should newsstands be treated as a part of a comprehensive street-furniture program or a separate element? Second, how much and what type of advertising is appropriate in the public right-of-way? 16 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. To address the first question, the Administration wishes to see newsstands included in comprehensive street-furniture contracts. Newsstands are an important piece of the streetscape. When included in the comprehensive street-furniture program, the City can be assured of a common and an esthetically distinctive design that complements other street furniture features, which may include bus shelters, furniture, City information panels, and newspaper corrals. The City and newsstand owners can be guaranteed a maintenance program that keeps newsstands in a state of good repair and graffiti-free. The City will be provided with considerable advertising revenue to support the street-furniture program in the City's General Fund. According to at least one industry expert, newsstand advertising typically contributes 30 percent of total advertising revenue in 17 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. large-city street-furniture programs. In terms of the second issue, the amount and type of advertising in a public right-of-way is an issue that warrants more comprehensive public process than has been taken place to date with review of options and public input. , Boston, and Chicago. Advertising in the public right-of-way must be appropriate in both scope and content. Through a comprehensive street-furniture contract, the City has the ability to monitor and oversee advertising without running afoul of First Amendment protections. It is our analysis that the bill's prohibition of ads for tobacco products, alcoholic beverages, and cabarets raises some difficult constitutional issues that may be subject to court challenge. 18 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. The Administration will issue an RFP for a comprehensive street-furniture program by the end of 2009 for implementation in 2010. The RFP will include a design competition and be preceded by public-involvement process to solicit public input on design and advertising density. Based on foregoing concerns and in light of our plan to move forward on a comprehensive street-furniture program in the near future, we respectfully request that this bill not be reported out of committee. Thank you for allowing me to testify before you today, and I would be happy to answer any questions.
Thank you. Thank you for your testimony. And I should have said this at the onset: I apologize for those who attended last month's meeting that was scheduled and had to be canceled at the very last minute. I sincerely apologize. 19 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. I don't think in all of the years that I've been here that I've ever canceled a meeting that had been advertised. In any event, thank you for your testimony. Do you have any sense of where we are on the streetscape furniture legislation that has been we've been working on for a number of years now? How close are we, or are we close?
The RFP, sir? The RFP -- the Deputy Mayor intends to have the RFP advertised by the end of 2009. What she would like to do, though, is solicit some significant public involvement in this because, I guess, some of the concerns that are raised are: What is the appropriate amount of advertising? and what's the public appetite for increasing advertising on the streetscape? Obviously, these have implications for the City financially, but we just want to be sure that we're 20 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. going to balance kind of the public need here with the -- I guess the revenue that can come in from street-furniture advertising.
And that public input would obviously be before the end of '09.
Any sense of when that discussion is being -- I mean, when we may have that discussion?
The intent was that it would be -- it would begin during the summertime.
I think it's either in the Solicitor's or maybe it's in your testimony -- yes, I think it is.
The concern about running afoul of the First 21 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. Amendment protections as it relates to the prohibitions on -- of ads for tobacco products and alcoholic beverages, cabarets and stuff like that, is there a prohibition on it currently?
Currently, the City has the right to approve the advertising that goes out there, so it's a part of our street-furniture contract, the existing street-furniture contract. And basically having all of this as a comprehensive package would better permit the City to control what sort of advertising goes out there. We've had an instance recently where a movie that was advertised that, I guess, a (indiscernible) that was, I guess, of question. The advertising firm, CBS Outdoor, who currently owns it, worked with us and basically developed an advertisement that was to the taste of the City?
Again, I'm not an attorney and maybe I'm just not 22 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. understanding it. We do not currently permit advertisement for tobacco and alcohol products.
Are we not running afoul of the First Amendment already? I mean, what changes? How do we say that we cannot -- we're prohibiting uses that we're now being told we may be in violation for prohibiting. I mean, how does that change?
I -- I -- if I can get back to you with a response on that, I --
I'm not promoting that type of advertising, but I just am curious if we're saying that this is a prohibited use and we're asking that this bill be held because of some of the concerns and you're raising that as a concern, I don't understand how it changes. I'm just not clear on that. And I'd like for that to be cleared up. 23 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS.
Any other questions from this committee? Councilman Greenlee.
Okay. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Good morning. On the issue -- and I don't know if you can answer all of this. The whole street-furniture program that you talk about, as the chairman said, it's been going on for a while. I have to admit -- and this is just me -- that I had some concern about that original program because of what I thought was, in my opinion, some unfair or unequal treatment of the newsstand operators. How much has that changed, or do you know, has it changed? 'Cause if I remember right, it was kind of taking basically ownership of the stands away from them. Is that still in the works in what -- in the plan that you have now? Do you know? 24 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS.
I think it's open for discussion at this point. I think that there is some perceived benefit in having newsstands that are -- that look consistent and also could match the entire street furniture design look.
So that was -- I think there was an intent that having them look similar and also be well- maintained by the vendor would be a benefit to the City.
Well, we agree with that. And, again, I don't want to get in -- this is going beyond what this bill says today.
But I guess my question is: When you talk about benefit, was it benefit to the newsstand operators? who obviously are out there -- and a lot of 'em -- and I agree that some of the stands haven't been maintained, and I think they would 25 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. agree, but the vast majority have been. And when there are problems, they seem to be fixed pretty quickly. So I'm trying to, you know...
The Deputy Mayor has been in touch with Mr. Rocco, I believe, and I think there has been some discussion as to if the newsstands would be put into a street-furniture contract --
-- that amenities could be included within the newsstands themselves, that would be of benefit to the newsstand operators as well as -- everything perhaps from power to refrigeration, things like that, which have been given to other newsstand operators in other cities as part of their street furniture --
Mm-hmm, but what about the whole ownership? because I remember there was -- and, again, I don't want to belabor this point 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. right now, but I remember that was a big issue with certainly the newsstand owners for obvious reasons.
Has that been addressed or changed or anything, do you know?
At this point in time, I don't believe it's been finalized, but I don't believe there's been any significant desire to change that at this point.
Okay. Well, I have to admit just on the record -- I'll say it right now --
-- that I would have a real problem with that, with that plan, you know, just, you know, I -- you know, I'm not arguing with you; I'm just saying we would have a real problem 27 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. with that plan. And just -- and one of the reasons I think this bill makes sense is -- separating the newsstands is -- and I'll ask this and let me see if I make sense in my question. What other thing, when you're talking about street furniture, involves actual people operating something? If I'm making sense. You know, like we're talking -- otherwise, we're talking about, you know --
Yeah, all of that. People eventually use them, but people don't operate them. So, I mean, it would be my argument that the 28 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. newsstands are a much different entity, a different thing on that. Do you have any opinion on that?
You know, I -- I -- you're correct. I'd say that that would be the primary piece that would be operated by a private operator.
Mm-hmm. So they're different than, as the chairman said, benches and trashcans and that stuff.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It's my understanding that the spirit of this is to create some sense of uniformity and conformity to certain L&I standards; is that correct?
I'm not sure if it's L&I standards, but it's just an 29 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. overall cohesion of, I guess, elements that are within a right-of-way that would be considered a part of the streetscape.
I'd like to interject. I mean, L&I does play a role in this. The newsstands -- and correct me, Joe, or someone, if I'm wrong -- were to be of a certain size, height, width. And we went through this years ago when we tried to do something similar with a company that was actually going to provide new newsstands similar to what some of the newer stands that you see out there are today. And we had to amend legislation or the code that would have allowed for a newsstand that was higher than normally I think it was eight foot we went to nine to allow for the security gate and central air-conditioning system needs to be in place within the box so L&I does have a role in this.
So the issue 30 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. for me is uniformity and conformity to some type of standard that can be replicated around the City.
How many locations officially do we have as designated newsstand locations?
I'm John Rocco, Chairman of the Newsstand Association. And we have approximately about 120.
Excuse me for interrupting. Is that 120 within your association, or is that 120 throughout the City?
And, currently, they're licensed in a way that gives some type of ownership, not necessarily ownership, but adverse 31 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. possession, if you would, to occupying that location? How does that work?
With a great deal of work from your colleagues to your left, some years ago, before you were on Council, the standard was set as to both uniformity, conformity, and operation. And they are licensed year by year by the City so that there is that check. And if I must say, you can't just go out and do it any which way; the parameters, the heights, and so forth are all absolutely encumbered by the act itself, which this Council passed. So Council waited; it wasn't just a regulation from L&I. So each person has to have a license and that's renewed, and that prevents this willy-nilly somebody coming in. You have to get approval from the Streets Department as to where it's located, you have to get approval from L&I, you have to make sure that you got 32 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. your business privilege tax in order, you got to make sure you pay your taxes, and then your license is renewed. So it's not open season, and you can't do just what you want. And, if I may, in terms of your question, conformity and uniformity, some years ago, you may remember, they were all different colors, different shapes, some were wood, some were tin. With the help of this Council and the very real investment by each of these individuals, upwards of $20,000, so this is one of those great examples where government empowers people, and those people do the job. One of the problems with the -- if I can jump in to this business of everybody being under one umbrella in street furniture -- is that this is already been accomplished in a partnership with City Council and the newsstand operators. Those stands have been built one-by-one, and they've had to 33 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. lend each other money very often, and you're talking about close to $20,000 for each of those stands. And they are prettier much and they are much nicer. And, as I say, you can thank your colleagues to your left, who were very helpful and, also, I must say, watched us pretty closely, to make sure that we didn't overstep our bounds. So you have your uniformity, you have your conformity, you have your check and balance each and every year. And, by the way, in terms of fixing and cleaning, the Newsstand Association is out there within a day or two; we do suffer from graffiti in this city sometimes. And that's one less burden that the City would have; we take care of it ourselves, out of our budget, and that's -- you'll hear later why we're asking for what we're asking.
Further questioning on the idea of conformity: Are there restrictions by way of 34 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. advertising currently on newsstands?
In terms -- there was a certain type of advertising, and there was -- the places on the stand where you could advertise, and we're asking for some change in that, to be more realistic for the needs of the operators. So the answer is: There would be a change, but the change would be with your blessing and Council's blessing. And we're not just going to -- again, it's not going to be willy-nilly; it will be uniform. Each stand will then have what they're allowed to have according to this --
So is it your testimony that you want to increase, decrease, regulate how you advertise or change a method; is that the purpose of this? 35 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS.
My name is John Cunningham, representing JMC Consulting, and my client is the Newsstand Association. The essential change to the current ordinance is to allow digital advertising on the sidewalk side of the stand.
Only approximately four square feet of digital advertising and then some digital advertising on the top of the stand, which is in the form of an LED. On the rear of the stand, which faces the street, we're only asking for a increase of about 37 percent square footage, so it's going from 7-feet-by-2 to 7-foot-by-4, but it clearly would not be digital; it would be graphic. So those are the key pieces of 36 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. the change.
And out of these 120 newsstands, we charges you business privilege -- you pay for a business privilege license, correct?
All of the taxes -- the sales tax, the general business tax, and net business profits tax as well.
Do you have a sense of with what that 120 membership represents by way of contribution in taxes annually?
Well, what I have in a general sense is that if the ordinance is passed, we would be looking at somewhere between and $30,000 22 annually in increased taxes. 23
And that would be 24 an additional tax. And in the litany of 25 taxes, there's another one called wage 37 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. tax, because obviously, these folks do have people working for them in many instances. John may have some idea, but it's a considerable amount of money that gets paid each and every year, and this would be additional.
I think Mr. Rocco could answer a lot of those questions. If you care do so now, John?
If you care to weigh in on some of those questions about the revenues that your organization, the newsstand operators, represent and --
Well, from what I can gather, as John said, it's about 20 to $30,000. And we would probably 21 increase that with the increase in 22 advertising. 23 If you broke it down 24 individually, you have, as John 25 reiterated, or I can reiterate, you have 38 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. the net-profits tax, the business- privilege tax; it's a sizeable amount of money from 120 members here in the City. What exactly it is, I couldn't really say specifically.
Let the record reflect that Councilwoman Maria Quinones-Sanchez is also present; she's a member of this committee.
Yes, vice chair. Sorry. In this day and age, there's been a lot of discussion and talk about newspapers failing across this country; in fact, two newspapers in Philadelphia have recently filed for bankruptcy. How has that impacted your business in terms of sales as it relates to newspapers and overall the impact? Maybe not individually, but as an 39 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. industry, the reduction in income, if you will, as a result of the people going from newspapers to computer technology, reading online and what have you?
Our business has been impacted significantly. Just seven, eight years ago, if a newsstand owner was selling, let's say, 200 papers a day, he's down to 50 now; that's a big drop in seven or eight years. And I'm talking about the Daily News and The Inquirer. Our cigarette sales have fallen particularly in the last couple of weeks with the increase that took place in cigarette prices. Basically, our sales are flat, we're down. And what this bill, if it was passed, would help keep a lot of people above water, keep a lot of people at their newsstands. If we don't get this sort of help, I don't foresee as many newsstands as you see now five, six, seven years from now. So this bill would help keep us 40 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. afloat and keep us going and keep the entrepreneurship from our membership going.
If the current trend continues -- and I know you have no crystal ball -- but you're talking four, five, six years out, some of the newsstands may not be operational as a result of the decline in readership and purchasing of, you know, cigarettes and/or newspapers? What percentage of newsstands do you think may not be -- what percentage do you think will be declining?
About 18 percent? 19 And just for the record, do all 20 of -- or what percentage of the newsstand operators are owners of the stand, if you will, operate their own business? Are any of the stands owned by outside interests as a business and then put somebody to work? 41 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS.
Or are these pretty much self-operated, family-run businesses?
95 percent of the newsstands are owned and operated by the individual newsstand owners.
Thank you again, Mr. Chairman. Along those lines, Mr. Rocco, could you just go into the, I guess, demographics of your membership? I know a lot of people -- this is oftentimes their first venture when they come into the United States.
Could you maybe get into where some come from, that 42 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. kind of thing?
Point of information, if I can. I don't mean this to be disrespectful or insulting, but I'm familiar with a number of your members, and I think they're in the audience.
If newsstand operators are here, would you just please stand up for a moment. (Newsstand owners/operators in audience stand and appear to be of varied nationalities, ethnicities, races.)
That kind of answered my question. I just wanted to get that on the record, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you. you may sit down. Thank you. You can continue, Councilman.
I think that kind of answered my question, Mr. Rocco. 43 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS.
Yeah, absolutely. And on average, how many hours a day does the newsstand operator work?
About ten hours a day. And how many days a week? I guess it varies.
Five to six. One other question. And Mr. Beller touched on this, but what about the maintenance of your newsstands? And I know -- again, you and I have gone through this, so I know -- but for the record, when you get calls that there either is damage or particularly graffiti to your newsstand, how long does it usually take you to -- 44 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS.
It takes about 72 hours to get our people out there and move the graffiti and/or repaint the stand.
And you have a -- kind of a company on call; am I right?
Yeah, yeah. In the last two years, we've put out close to $15,000 in cleaning newsstands. On average, it's around $7,000 a year because of all of the graffiti that takes place.
Editorial comment: Seventy-two hours sounds like a lot quicker than I see on most properties in the City of Philadelphia. Editorial comment. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you. I just want to follow up on that same line of questioning. If this legislation were to pass and you were able to get some of the additional 45 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. advertising that you're requesting, would your association still be responsible for removing graffiti, or would any of these entities be responsible? I'm going back in history when we dealt with this years ago, when we had to change the size of the newsstands, and we had similar conversation about additional advertising. And correct me if I'm wrong, when that was proposed, there was a company that was going to supply your newsstand operator with a new newsstand maybe, and a part of the contract was that it would have been their responsibility to remove the graffiti and stuff like that. The question is: Would your association, should this legislation pass, still be the entity that would remove the graffiti?
Okay. So we're not relying on anyone else to do that. 46 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. By way of the electronic billboards that you're going to use, are they in any way connected with other networks such as emergency broadcasting or Amber Alert or anything of that nature? Or are they independent?
Councilman, it's our intention to connect that free of charge. We've been having discussions with the police department, for example, for running Amber Alerts and, you know, SEPTA-related delays and things like that, any kind of emergency management. We'll be hooking that system up to the City, the emergency-planning system.
So for the record, these things will be a part of an emergency broadcasting system that includes, but is not limited to, Amber 47 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. Alerts or major civic emergencies and things of that nature as part of a communications system, if you would.
I just want to go back. Currently on many of newsstands, there are the digital -- what do they call that --
On the front, I'm sorry. And you want to be able to add that to the back, or would it just go completely around?
No, we want to be able to add a flat screen -- it's an LCD, 24 inches horizontally or diagonally in 48 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. width.
And where would that be mounted; on the top or within the opening?
Correct. It would be one that -- it would be hanging down from a shelf.
So to see it, you would pretty much have to get -- 49 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS.
Well, as you walk up, you'll be able to see it at least five feet from the stand.
Thank you. I've been -- an issue and I had brought it up when we met in terms of the additional advertising on the street side of the street. You're requesting an extension from a maximum of 7-feet-wide-by-2 to 4. In light of the fact that you're asking us to put LCDs where you can do advertising, why the added on the street? I'm concerned about not only the visual part of it, but the fact that that begins to impact drivers; as people are going by, the sign is too big. Why the need for that in addition to the fact that we're giving 50 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. you the ability to...
Councilwoman, the purpose of that is to also help subsidize the need for revenue. The current size now is not very appealable to the advertising industry. And what we're trying to do there is just simply mirror what you see now in the current transit shelter programs, only turn it into a landscaped view as opposed to the portrait view that you see now. But it's not going to be digital. And it's in our plan to use it only in a lithographic manner.
How is that comparable from the bus shelters now; is it the same size?
And how much revenue do you generate from that? 51 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS.
That's a good question, and that's what we're hoping to try to find -- I mean it's -- every advertiser is different. And we've had estimates of anywhere from 300, $400 a month per stand. It just really depends on the advertiser and what they're willing to pay and the pedestrian count that's there at those particular intersections. So they vary.
Councilwoman, if I may. Joseph Beller. One of the things, when Mr. Cunningham discusses this dollar, I want you to understand that the intention is that all of the dollars that are raised will come to the association to be first used for the repairs that we were talking about a few moments ago and the painting and the upkeep and helping the individuals. And then in kind of an NFL kind of thing, it would then be 52 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. distributed. So all of the stands would help one another so that we wouldn't have this drop-off, because some places sell more papers, some places sell less -- well, they all sell less than they used to. So what would happen is, this would be the effort within the community of the newsstand operators to help each other first before there's any distribution. So 300 on one stand, because it's in the right location. And I think, as Mr. Cunningham said, it won't be any larger than what you see on the bus shelters now; it would just be laid out slightly differently, so it's about a 30-some percent increase in what is already legal. And, as I say, it would be used for the overall maintenance of the stands.
Yeah. I guess my issue -- and as I mentioned to the Newsstand Association when I met with 53 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. them, you know, I applaud the fact that 90 percent of the newsstands are a part of your membership, but that percent 5 represents a lot of the newsstand 6 operators that are in neighborhoods, and 7 in particular in mines. So we don't have 8 the full compliance that we have in 9 Center City because we don't have the 10 enforcement that we have in Center City. So while, you know, I also know that provisos and exemptions, you know, we're not in a position to be able to really enforce them. I'm just concerned because, right now, I have newsstands along the -- you know, I have the Frankford line, the ten stops on the Frankford line, and I have newsstand operators who don't comply, who don't have, you know, their stands as neat as they do in Center City because of the enforcement. And I'm very concerned about what that means. Some of them do advertise tobacco. So, you know, while I -- again, 54 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. I understand the need for it, the economy is bad, you know, what happens to those neighborhood stands that are not represented by the association in neighborhoods where we have a compliance issue already?
Councilwoman, we would make the effort to coordinate something with you to go down there and work with those folks, have them maybe join our organization. But if not, you know, we would help them realize what they're doing in terms of being in noncompliance and so forth. So whatever we could do to help facilitate the problem, we're there.
Well, that's an issue of enforcement again with L&I. And that's why -- you know, we legislate, and if we don't really put the money behind the department that has to do it, it becomes an issue.
And, 55 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. again, Center City is a very different situation than what I have in the neighborhood.
It would be to their advantage to have us help them help themselves because they're obviously in the same situation in terms of income.
So that's something that it might be much more palatable with this bill being passed. And, by the way, the member is under --
It's $150 to belong to the association, so it's not like joining an expensive country club. And they would get more than that back. So perhaps they would at least cooperate, understanding that their failure to do so could endanger their fellow businessmen.
What have 56 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. been your previous efforts at recruiting them, particularly those stands in the community?
We've reached out numerous times over the last years. 7 And we've done, I thought a pretty good 8 job. Some people, though, they just 9 don't want to be a part of a group no 10 matter how many times you go back and try 11 to explain to them the benefits. 12 But, for the most part, we've 13 got about 90 out of 120, so -- but we 14 will go back again and again to see if we 15 could get those last 30. And, again, you're right: It is an L&I enforcement issue, but whatever we can do to help you, we're there.
And I just want to follow up on that, if I may. I've had similar problems. Obviously, I represent a district that goes beyond Center City. And over the years, I've brought to the attention of Mr. Rocco some of those newsstands that I 57 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. thought were not being maintained properly. Some of them were still wood, when the City code said they were no 5 longer able to be wood. And I worked with L&I. It was a little slow process, to be honest with you, but eventually, the majority of those folks came along. And I think in these hard economic times, which I think Mr. Beller was trying to talk about, in these hard economic times, I think we have to not only go to those folks and talk to them about not only the esthetics but also the economic benefit for them to start to comply. Because if this bill were to come out of committee, as an example, it would obviously add additional revenues to the operators of those stands, and that could be an incentive for them to want to either become members or do it on their own; in any event, to get a better product out.
No, I'm 58 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. aware. I mean, this is a trial balloon; we don't know what revenues it's going to generate. I think this is your businesses looking and thinking outside the box about how you sustain yourself. And, you know, this is a working-class community. And, you know, I'm not against the bill; I'm just very concerned about, again, the increased signage and what do we do -- I don't think we should legislate for the few bad apples; but at the same time, it's an issue that I need the Newsstand Association to work with me on that corridor, particularly that el corridor, around that enforcement. I do have a problem with the street sign going up to four feet; I think it's too large, and esthetically, it doesn't look well. The digital stuff I'm cool with; it's just the signage. I have a issue with signage because I have a lack of enforcement across the district. 59 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS.
So I'm always going to have a pet issue with signage.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Could you describe the conversations that you've had with advertisers or potential advertising agencies? In other words, any one stand trying to sell just advertising on their stand, the revenue they can get versus being able to have advertising on being able to sell advertising across the City on every stand, and the revenue difference that's available to a newsstand operator as a consequence of selling a package of advertising versus 60 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. selling a -- advertising on one stand at a time. And I only ask this just because you may have something really to sell to people under the el and elsewhere because you're aggregating that, and it should mean more dollars. That's all. Thank you.
That's an excellent question. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: We can't hear you.
Here I go again. My mother always said I spoke too loud and now you're making me whisper. The question is really excellent, and it does go right to what I was mentioning before. Obviously, from an advertiser's point of view, some stands are better than others location-wise, and that's always the major thing. By doing it as a package, the individuals who are not in the most 61 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. desirable place will actually get a benefit by it being a package. And the other thing that we kind of like is that this association has done a marvelous job of self-regulation in terms of periodicals and the kind of things that are sold, and they will continue to do that. And it will give them some measure of control over the kind of advertising that is desirable and helpful to the City and to the people who have to look at it. And it won't be offensive to Councilwoman Sanchez.
Thank you. Mr. Rocco, the Law Department has expressed some concern about the content of restrictions in this legislation. Did my staff make you aware of that?
All right. And aside from, I think, Miss Tracy, is there anyone here who can give testimony 62 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. on those concerns? Is there anyone specifically who can discuss the impact of the advertising that it may have on children and youth aside from Miss Tracy? 'Cause when Miss Tracy comes up... (Addressing Mary Tracy) ... then you can speak to that, all right?
Yes. Okay. When you come up, then you can address that. Gentlemen, we got into a discussion -- Councilman Jones?
On including this in the overall street-furniture contract, again, the Administration's position is that this would be a good thing because of what?
Obviously, any additional advertising that's put out there, the revenue would be going to the 63 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. City at this point as opposed to the advertisers, which, again, can buy additional street furniture, can expand basically what the City can do with the contract as well.
Is there any sense to what my colleague Miss Sanchez said about the difference between a Center City location and maybe a neighborhood location? It's maybe a little more subdued and maybe a little more subtle? And is there any -- is that uniformity -- is there any consideration to what would be on a quiet block or not -- I guess an intersection in a neighborhood versus what is -- or is it going to be uniform altogether?
I think that's open for discussion. Obviously, it's part of the public involvement process. It's an idea of context as well. What may be kind of acceptable at one location may not fit into, you know, an Old City 64 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. or a Society Hill or something like that, so I think that's open for discussion.
Mr. Rocco or Mr. Beller or Mr. Cunningham, if this legislation were to pass and be signed by the Mayor, how soon would you be looking to implement these changes?
Thank you. Any other questions for these witnesses? (No further questions.)
Gentlemen, we got into a discussion here. Is there anything you would like to add, any comments, statements? Mr. Cunningham.
Yeah, thank you, Councilman. I just want to reiterate the capital investment that the Newsstand Association has made in developing uniformity and cohesion over the past 65 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. nine years. They've invested in excess of $1 million of their own money in purchasing new newsstands and building underground infrastructure, and the inclusion of the newsstands in the RFP would basically confiscate that investment, without any compensation whatsoever. And we just wanted to make sure that everyone understood that.
I have one other question. I'm going back in time here when I tried to do some legislation for you guys in the past. On the back of many of the newsstands -- and I'm not sure if it exists today -- there used to be an advertisement for the Pennsylvania Lottery; it was a 7-by-2 kind of cardboard-type of thing.
Was that a requirement by the Lottery Commission, or is that just something the newsstand operator wanted to use to alert people 66 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. that you sold lottery tickets?
Correct. Now, as you well know, we've got signage for the lottery on either side of the newsstand.
Right. But no, those big signs are just not that -- you know, it's not pushed by the State, no. 22
Okay. Thank you. Any other questions for these witnesses? 67 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. (No further questions.)
Any other statements, gentlemen? (No further statements.)
Miss Tracy, Gray Smith, and Harold Jacobs. (Witnesses come forward.)
Good morning. You can all decide who wants to testify first, who would like to testify first? (Addressing Paul Levy.) Paul, are you a part of the team, or is it just --
No, you can stay there, stay there. 68 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS.
Good morning, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. Thank you for inviting us to testify today. My name is Mary Tracy and I am here as a representative of SCRUB, the public voice for public space. SCRUB's vision is that all public spaces in Philadelphia will be healthy, vibrant, and beautiful. We are best known for our work surrounding illegal and poorly-placed billboards. And we work with our partners in the neighborhoods to address the larger issues surrounding the environment and public space. I am here today to provide testimony about this specific newsstand legislation and how it relates to regulation of commercial outdoor advertising signage in Philadelphia. There are three main points that I would like to address. The first is: This legislation, if passed, will undermine existing 69 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. sign-control legislation that has been used to protect the visual environment from the proliferation of outdoor advertising in our city for years. 6 Secondly, the citywide 7 consequences of this effort far outweighs 8 the benefits to the individual business 9 owners. 10 And, third, there is money in 11 regulating outdoor advertising, and it's 12 time for the City to demand the industry 13 pay their fair share for using our city's 14 public spaces. 15 In terms of the undermining of 16 the existing sign regulations, 17 consistency in regulations and 18 enforcement are two critical components 19 to protect the constitutionality of 20 Philadelphia's outdoor advertising laws. Carving out special treatment to accommodate a specific business interest is arbitrary and will undermine all sign regulations that have protected the City in neighborhood corridors for 20 years. 70 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. Legislative findings in 14-1604 of the Philadelphia Code are the backbone of defending the constitutionality of our regulations. One finding states that the excessive number of commercial outdoor advertising signs contributes to visual clutter and detracts from the esthetic beauty of the City of Philadelphia. Another states that the proliferation of commercial outdoor advertising signs contribute to the appearance of deterioration of commercial and industrial areas of the City and, therefore, negatively impacts upon the economic viability of these areas. Bill No. 090015 has no 18 articulated legislative findings. Therefore, in its current form, the legislation would erode the longstanding protections from commercial outdoor advertising controls in the City of Philadelphia because it conflicts with the legislative findings in 14-1604, and it fails to establish any governmental 71 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. purpose that will be served by this legislation. It also undermines the existing sign controls by conflicting with the Highway Beautification Act, which strictly prohibits commercial outdoor advertising in the right-of-way to promote traffic safety and eliminate hazards to pedestrians and motorists. SCRUB encourages this committee to examine the memorandum included in your packets, which we received from the Federal Highway Administration concerning billboards in public right-of-ways. Many of Center City streets are controlled by the federal laws cited in the memorandum, including JFK Boulevard, Market, Chestnut, Walnut, and Broad Streets. The public cost of this newsstand bill far outweighs the benefits to a few individual business owners. If passed, the legislation would be vulnerable to legal challenges from a variety of sources. The City has been 72 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. sued, and will continue to be sued, for the singular purpose of obtaining the right to place outdoor advertising in places where it is now prohibited. By carving out a special exception for newsstands, this legislation gives the outdoor advertising industry unnecessarily leverage against the City in their quest to colonize public space.
We have prepared the following recommendations in response to Councilman DiCicco's request for suggestions. The intention is to open up discussion for further refinement of the bill. We would ask that you maintain the prohibitions of non-accessory outdoor advertising on all sides of newsstands. We would ask that you eliminate the 24-inch-wide video monitor, which is not permitted anywhere in Center City. A comprehensive policy is needed to investigate the impact of electronic and digital media advertising on the health, safety, and welfare environment and 73 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. esthetic factors. We ask that you retain the existing size and location of signage on the street side by eliminating the proposal to expand signage to 7-feet-by-4-feet facing the street. We say, why don't you consider expanding the products sold at the newsstands; therefore, increasing their opportunities for income as well as additional accessory advertising. Currently, the only accessory advertising allowed are publications and the Pennsylvania Lottery. And, lastly, we ask that you limit the 6-inch band located on the top of the newsstand along the sidewalk side to intermittent illumination that will only display time, temperature, date, news, and accessory advertising. In closing, I think it's important for City Council members to understand the history of failed attempts to administer and regulate the outdoor 74 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. advertising industry here in Philadelphia. Despite legislation intended to set consistent and fair fees to cover the cost of signage regulation, the industry has challenged this authority and the fee schedule, resulting in no payment of fees from 1991 through 2000. In 2000, the Department of Licenses and Inspections initiated a voluntary fee structure of a hundred dollars a sign annually, and some billboards never even paid the City. In 2006, City Council enacted legislation setting new license fees and safety requirements for billboards in Philadelphia. Again, the industry challenged the City's authority in enacting fees, and three billboard companies filed a federal lawsuit. The Law Department, without input from Council or the public, entered into a private-settlement agreement. And before the billboard settlement agreement, 75 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. 1 million in revenue for the City annually. Now, under the terms of the agreement, they are paying $50 a sign face, generating only $90,000 in annual revenue, a 92 percent loss for the City each year the City. Over the life of a nine-year-long agreement, the City will suffer a net loss of 9 million in revenue intended to staff the Department of L&I for enforcement activities. In addition, there are 70 illegal billboards that, if approved for appropriate enforcement action, could reward the City with as much as $19 million according to SCRUB's estimates. And I've included in the packet those numbers. So I know, Councilman, you're going to say, What's this have to do with that?
We sent from newsstands to billboards and 76 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. I assumed you were going to --
-- the esthetic value or the denigration as it relates to billboards, somehow newsstands will add to that unsightly and esthetic issues that you've been addressing for a number of years. This --
The first, of course, agreed that there is a real conflict with the esthetics, and we have gone through legislative findings pointing out what those anesthetics are. Secondly, I think -- and we have an attorney here with us to speak about the real legal trials that our city will be burdened with as a result of the carving out a special interest. And I think that's a huge price -- 77 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS.
Other billboard companies. Even that ten percent of newsstand owners, you know, if they're not allowed to advertise on theirs because they're not members, I mean, there's any number --
I don't -- (Indiscernible; parties talking over each other.)
Miss Tracy, before you go, I doubt very much if that would ever happen; it certainly would not be something that this Council would carve out only those people who pay dues to the membership. This would be for every newsstand in the City of Philadelphia.
Well, even by carving out those special newsstands, Councilman, what about the building owners behind them? Why shouldn't they be able to put outdoor advertising on 78 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. their buildings? Why not let them put up the huge wall wraps that we've -- you know, we have a very important historical and esthetic character here in Philadelphia which attracts visitors, tourists businesses and new residents. And so I think anything that this Council would do we need to carefully look at the impact of those actions on our ability to continue to do that.
All right. I hear what you're saying, but I just kind of get lost when you say, What about the building owners; shouldn't they be able to put out their advertising? It just comes to mind I think of the newsstand at the northwest corner of 12th and Market, which is directly across the street from the Hard Rock Café.
But it's outdoor advertising. 79 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS.
And you say limit the 6-inch band located along the top of the newsstand, along the sidewalk side, to intermittent illumination that will only display time, temperature, date, news, and accessory advertising. What are you fearful that may be part of that illumination advertising, outside of what you said would be acceptable? I don't understand that.
It's the law, Councilman. It's not necessarily the content as much as what we know the nuances of the law. We have been litigating and protecting this law for over years, and we understand how 19 critical the difference is between 20 accessory and non-accessory advertising. The Hard Rock Café, their sign is accessory because it advertises the business. Non-accessory advertising is that advertising that promotes a business that's not -- 80 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS.
Do you think it's caused any accidents at 12th and Market?
I think we're talking about accessory and non-accessory signs.
I don't care if it's accessory or not; I'm just asking you a question because I know this comes up, about how too much signage is going to create hazards for people who are driving because they're going to be distracted. Do you know -- do you have any empirical evidence or do you know whether that sign in particular has caused any additional accidents at the intersection of 12th and Market? 'Cause I know at some point, someone's going to go down -- between the three of you, I suspect that 81 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. someone's going to say too much advertising causes too many distractions, and it's going to cause accidents and all those things, whether it's accessory or not. The fact that there's outdoor advertising and the size of that sign, do you think that has in any way affected the public safety, anyone's public safety as a result of that sign being up there?
And I think it actually is a very good sign because in a minute, in a second, you can look up there and say, "Ah, there's the Hard Rock Café," and that's really the purpose of an accessory sign, is to be able to quickly identify where you're going and 82 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. what you're doing. You know, if you had a huge blinking sign that changed every six to eight seconds selling you anything from mattresses to swimming pools. That is a distraction, and it's very hard to --
But would it be acceptable if that flashing sign that was advertising mattresses and whatever else you said were being sold in that building?
We're actually working with -- (Indiscernible; parties talking over each other.)
I'm asking you a question, I'm asking you a 83 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. question: Would the flashing sign that you spoke to that would advertise products that are being sold in that building, would that be acceptable?
No. I think it would be a non-accessory sign if flashing signs aren't allowed at this point in that corridor. So I think we have to -- you know, we have to look at the laws and we have to comply with the laws, and we have to hold everybody to the same standard.
But we do make laws and we amend laws; that's the purpose of government bodies.
But when we amend the laws, shouldn't we amend them so that they're constitutionally correct and are not going to set up the City for lawsuits from other interests that want the same treatment?
Well, there is some truth to that, and that's stuff 84 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. that we deal with, and maybe there are -- we do things often that wind up in court because someone feels as though it's a violation of their rights or it goes against the Constitution or the City Charter. And then we go through that process, the legal process, and the decision is made. But, you know, you have to -- people have ideas all the time. Some of those ideas are good ideas, some of them are not so good ideas, depending on who you talk to. But, you know, we would be stagnant as a government if we didn't talk about current events, the way things are changing, changing of events in the way people live and do things. I mean, they're doing things today that they never even would have thought about doing 50 years ago.
And we have an industry that employs a lot of folks who support their families, who are in a 85 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. very difficult situation. And not unlike the stimulus package that's coming out of Washington, this could be a stimulus for the newspaper industry in the City of Philadelphia.
I understand, Councilman, what the good reasons are for looking at this bill, but I also think, as representatives of the entire city and all of the neighborhoods and of all the people and the constitutionality of our laws as, you know, there needs to be a responsible approach as to what the end-result of this will be. And I think you only have to look to California and Los Angeles and the legal entanglements that are going on in that city every single day and the high cost, taxpayer cost of, defending their laws against an industry that is very litigious. And I think it would be irresponsible to damage a law that has been well litigated and preserved simply 86 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. to help -- when there are other -- there are ways we could help the newsstand owners rather than changing our own laws that have so well been borne in the City.
People make decisions based on what their needs are, and sometimes they get help in areas where they would not normally look for help, to accomplish their needs, including your industry.
Well, your advocacy and your position that you have taken about outdoor advertising in general. A few years ago, you came to an agreement with an outdoor advertising company that enabled you to continue to fight your fight. We all make exceptions. Mr. Gray, did you have something you wanted to add?
The name is Harold Jacobs. I am a retired attorney. I am speaking on behalf SCRUB and Logan Square Neighborhood Association. I want to throw a little light on the legal problem that you are about to create. I want to read to you part of the petition on the zoning appeal that was submitted by an outdoor billboard company in a pending case right now. And this is what they said: "This challenge involves federal questions over which the Philadelphia Zoning Board of Adjustment has no 21 jurisdiction, and appellants explicitly reserve and preserve the right to raise federal questions in federal court." What they are saying is: By allowing exceptions to the outdoor 88 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. advertising -- and they're speak about the bus shelters, the advertising there -- it creates a discrimination in the use of free-speech rights, and it's discrimination against all billboards. Now, insofar as the bus shelters are concerned, that doesn't hold much water because the bus shelters serve a public purpose. But if you allow advertising on the newsstands, there is no public purpose; it's a private enterprise. And you are opening the door to the complete destruction of the billboard regulations and the outdoor non-accessory sign regulations in our city.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm an attorney also. I don't practice in the area of billboard law, so I'm at a disadvantage. And I haven't looked up any cases, but I can think of 89 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. numerous public purposes that could exist for us allowing advertising on the outside of the building. Number one, we could conclude, as a body, that we fins it more attractive than just green painting, that it adds to the streetscape. That's a public purpose. That it enhances the view of the City. The other public purpose is, it will create revenue for the City of Philadelphia in the form of business- privilege taxes as these billboard owners -- or as the newsstands owners are paid. And those are just two off the top of my head. I'm sure there are, you know, innumerable public purposes that exist as a consequence of permitting this activity, including the public purpose of trying to help a constituency that is, you know, pretty working-class, that support their families with these businesses. There are many public 90 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. purposes that exist, and I just wanted to put that on the record. Thank you.
Well, I would say public purpose is a very broad idea. And there are different degrees of public purpose. And I would say that the public purpose of a bus shelter is very much more direct than some of the things that you've mentioned.
My only point was that we can argue about the degree of public purpose or whether or not we're making that conclusion correctly that there is a public purpose, but --
But there is -- we believe potentially there is a public purpose; that's my point.
You're running a risk -- yes, you're right about there are degrees, of course, but you are running a serious risk, I think, by creating this 91 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. problem.
Again, I'm not an attorney, and I kind of try to look at things in a very practical way when you talk about the public purpose. I know it's been very difficult for me for me over the years to try to get honor boxes removed from a private property. A homeowner wakes up one day, and there's an honor box chained to a pole on his or her property, residential property. And we're told that we just can't remove them because it's protected by the First Amendment because it's a public service. So if I am someone -- or if someone out there does not have access to a computer, and his or her only means of knowing what's going on in his or her community or in the world is to purchase a newspaper, doesn't that constitute a public service? And I'm not going to get into a legal debate 'cause I'm certainly not an 92 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. attorney, but from a practical standpoint, it tells me that newsstands, if didn't sell anything but newspapers, serve as a public service.
Well, based upon some of the comments that were made, we can say that every billboard serves a public purpose because they provide revenue.
I said that? They do provide revenue but I didn't say that -- (Indiscernible; parties talking over each other.)
All right. But I'm not in favor of every billboard at every location, as I think Miss Tracy could testify to. There are some places that I think they are not appropriate, but beauty is in the eyes of the 93 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. beholder. Mr. Gray, do have a -- do you care to speak?
My name is Gray Smith. I'm an architect and urban planner, and Mary Tracy and SCRUB asked me to look into some of the more excruciating details of the bill, particularly the physical aspects. And in doing so, I discovered some of the weaknesses in the bill, which I think makes it impossible to pass now until those are corrected. And we did -- Mary and I did meet with Councilman DiCicco at an earlier date to discuss some of our concerns, and I have added some alternatives here that might be helpful to the newsstand owners.
I'm going to talk 94 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. about: some defects in the proposed bill; some excesses, I believe, in the proposed bill; the difficulties the bill has in contradiction to the Zoning Code; the future of newsstands, which should be of everybody's concern; the bad precedents that the bill might establish; and, again, some alternatives that might be helpful. As far as defects in the proposed bill, the terms "electronic" or "digital media" are not defined anywhere in any part of the City Code, so they have to be defined if you're going to include them as approved. By the same token, "video monitor" is a term that's not incorporated anywhere in the definitions of any code in Philadelphia. And, of course, in this code, the size of the video monitor, the width of it, is required, but the height of it is not limited anywhere in the bill. And, as mentioned earlier, the 95 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. bill is not being developed in coordination with a street-furniture program, which I think is an essential and comprehensive approach that should be taken rather than this separate approach. With respect to excesses that are in the proposed bill, I did calculations. The bill increases the allowable sign area on newsstands that's now allowed from 38 square feet to approximately 56 square feet of signage on these tiny little buildings. The type of advertising. Currently, advertising is limited to that for newspapers, magazines, and the Pennsylvania Lottery; that's accessory advertising. This bill will allow any type of non-accessory advertising for virtually any product or service except tobacco products, alcoholic beverages, and cabarets. Therefore, casinos, racetracks, tattoo parlors, massage parlors, and law firms can advertise on these as well as many, many other 96 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. products and services. And let me mention something about the Hard Rock Café. If my memory serves me right, Councilman DiCicco, the sign at the Hard Rock Café went through a whole lot more hoops than this type of signage. It had to be approved by the Art Commission, it had to be approved by the Historical Commission; and I'm not sure, but I think even City Council had to pass a bill to approve that sign; if not, it did require significant zoning variances. So it was not the same type of sign, and it certainly is not one that could get over-the-counter approval.
Mr. Smith, I was not suggesting that it was not a procedure that needed to be taken undertaken to approve that sign; I was just making the point that I think it came out of either Miss Tracy's comments or the Streets Department. Someone mentioned something about distractions, 97 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. which always comes up in these arguments when we talk about signage. And I just --
I know you will, and you've brought it up in the past. And I just was curious if anyone can show any evidence that since the Hard Rock Café guitar sign has been in place that there's been an increase in any traffic accidents at that intersection.
That sign is an anomaly; it's not typical, by any stokes, so --
No, no, it's not whetter you can just put them 98 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. up. It is up, it is legal. And the argument is by folks in the anti-advertising community for the most part, for the most part, is that these are not only esthetically unpleasant, but they create obstructions, they create opportunities -- not opportunities. They create an environment where it makes the streets less safe because they become distractions for drivers in particular. I wonder if any of the stuff -- the flags on Broad Street that advertise Red Cross Week or the Phillies. I mean, at some point, we do live in a world of advertising, and I think people have gotten used to being able to drive and glance over to see a building or even a good-looking lady on a nice day and still be able to drive without getting into an accident. I mean, that's what I'm getting at. It's --
I've been 99 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. hearing this argument for years now. 3
All I'm saying is, 4 with respect to the Hard Rock Café sign, 5 that sign was excruciatingly regulated 6 and studied. 7 The signs that would be put on 8 the street side of a newsstand will get 9 no regulation whatsoever as to content, 10 as to appearance, as to its distraction 11 and characteristics of distraction. 12
I will 13 agree that we have a disagreement about 14 that. 15
I just want to know about the distraction, 'cause that seems to always come up in these arguments.
Well, there are scientific studies, and I'll leave that to SCRUB to present those in more detail. 100 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. But with respect to contradictions that this bill has with other regulations in the City, newsstands are exempt. Even though they're little buildings, they are exempt from the Zoning Code in Philadelphia because they sit in the public right-of-way. And so they're not regulated by anything in the Zoning Code. And there's lots of stuff in the Zoning Code that would regulate things like signage. And enforcement of the newsstand ordinance and regulations is a Department of Streets responsibility; and, frankly, they don't do a very good job of enforcement, even in Center City in spite of the Councilwoman's suggestions. The one right across the street from this building at the corner of Market and the square, on East Market, has girly magazines posted all over it and cigarette ads posted all over it and have been for years in spite of so-called 101 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. enforcement in Philadelphia. So now we're talking about adding significant additional items to be enforced by somebody -- the Police Department, L&I, SWEEP, the Streets Department, none of which are doing their job now; can we expect them to do it in the future? With respect to non-accessory signage, non-accessory signage is prohibited in all residential zoning districts in the City, some of which of these will be sitting right next to, and most commercial zoning districts in the Zoning Code. There will be no such restriction for newsstands, although they're right next to the same commercial and residential districts. So anybody that owns a building in those commercial residential districts could look out and say, You know, if they can do it, why can't I do it? And you're just opening a can of worms when you do 102 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. that. None of the non-accessory commercial advertising signage and electric, digital, or video media on newsstands would be required to be reviewed by the Art Commission, even though every building generally on Chestnut Street and Walnut Street and Market Street is governed by the Art Commission. You can't put a sign up, even an accessory sign up, without an Art Commission review and approval; yet these will be void of that kind of enforcement. And, again, we're talking about the Zoning Code prohibits flashing, intermittent, revolving and/or animated signage within 150 feet of a residential zone and 300 feet away if it's facing a residential zone. This proposed bill has no such provision that prohibits electronic or digital media, which may very well be flashing, revolving, animated, or whatever. 103 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. As such, all of the good protections that are found in the Zoning Code simply do not apply to newsstands, and none of the regulations that are similar, included in this bill, are in the current newsstand regulations. What is the future of newsstands? Whereas, products for sale in newsstands can be a variety of items beyond newspapers and magazines, the revenue from the proposed commercial advertising could become the primary source of revenue for a newsstand proprietor. In fact, the way the regulation reads as to the operation of a newsstand today, why even sell any products under the circumstances that the bill reads? The only legal restriction is that every 30 days, the proprietor of a newsstand has to open up and sell a few printed items, and he can close for the other 29 days of the month. Better to just function as a four-sided billboard 104 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. sitting on the street and not bother to sell any newspapers. Again, this is a bad precedent. If you propose this and accept this, then the following other physical components that you find on public sidewalks can be considered for similar legislation, allowing non-accessory advertising.
Hey, why not put some ads on honor boxes? Hey, if you're going to put 'em on newsstands, First Amendment, put 'em on honor boxes, First Amendment. Tree and flower planters. If I'm putting a flower planter out in front of my place, why not put a sign on it advertising something, anything. Private trash receptacles; that was brought up earlier. Food and other vendor carts and stands. I mean, they do advertise their hot dogs, but now, hell, they can start advertising Ford Fairlanes. Food and trash Dumpsters. How about trash Dumpsters? We got thousands 105 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. of trash Dumpsters, and I know Councilman Green knows about that. Why not put advertising on all of the trash Dumpsters -- non-accessory, of course, 'cause we don't want to advertise the Dumpster itself. Bollards. And how about horizontal street surfaces or horizontal sidewalk surfaces? You're walking down the street, you're looking at the sidewalk; why not put a sign right on the sidewalk and benches and all the other kind of street furniture that we're talking about. All right. Now, I've been pretty negative here, but I have some suggestions that might be helpful after looking at the restrictions that are in the current newsstand ordinance. One is that they should be able to expand the items that they sell. No 23 doubt, the limits that they have are really too restrictive. How about selling SEPTA tokens; some of 'em do 106 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. already, even though they're not allowed to. How 'bout stamps? How 'bout batteries? Even soft drinks. Disposable cameras. Disposable cellphones; those make a lot of money. Long-assistance phone cards. Those are all items that they can't sell now, according to the current newsstand regulation. Expand that list of items so that they can sell those. How about even an automatic teller machine. Condoms in there too, but that's a possibility.
Right, okay. I mean, I think they should be able to sell those things. I mean, after all, if they're only selling 50 newspapers a day ---
Point of 107 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. information, Mr. Chairman.
Some of the members are nodding that they already sell of these items that you're mentioning; is that correct?
Well, they better watch out. Well, there's no enforcement, so it doesn't matter. They're not supposed to sell these items according to the restrictions that are in the current bill. I would suggest that if you want to improve the bill, you add some of those items to allow them to sell those. That would help them with their income and with your tax revenues. And, finally, they should be able to expand on-premises advertising, be able to advertise the products that they sell except for tobacco, of course, within the current sign limits, though. In conclusion, this bill needs lots of work to fix it; most essentially, 108 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. I believe the removal of the non-accessory advertising provision because that's simply a provision that allows newsstands to be billboards.
Thank you. Any questions for these witnesses from the committee? (No questions.)
Is there anyone else who wishes to testify? Is Mr. Levy still here, or did he leave? Oh, there you go. Thank you.
Okay, Councilman, just one thing, if you could, for the record. Several people wrote letters that they asked me to present to put on the record, and they're a part of that packet as well, if you would please include that. Thank you.
Good morning. My 109 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. name is Paul Levy. I'm president of the Center City District. I have copies of my legislation. In the interest of time, I will shorten it. But I am here on Bill 090015, and I want to start by talking about graffiti by simply saying -- and I've attached to my testimony a series of pictures of stands throughout Center City that, unfortunately, are marred by graffiti. And I want to say this is not the fault of the newsstand operators; graffiti is, unfortunately, a fact of life in the downtown, but all property owners within the downtown are paying an assessment to us to have them regularly cleaned and free of charge. We clean all signs and all public furniture that's owned by the City. The problem is that the newsstands and the honors boxes are privately-owned but technically not real estate and, therefore, are not subject to 110 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. our charge, nor to any other charges of this sort. For a brief time, we did work with the Newsstand Association on a fee-for-service basis to remove graffiti, and we ceased to do that after a demonstration period. Quite simply, the pictures that are attached to my testimony are not the issue that we want to project in our prime business district in the center of our growing hospitality industry. So my point of departure in this bill is very simple: The Center City District is not in principle opposed to providing newsstand owners with expanded rights for commercial advertising, but I have three significant reservations: One, the CDC would support this expanded right if there was a specific requirement that graffiti be removed from all newsstands, just as it is from every surface in Center City, and that there be strict penalties for failure to comply. 111 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. I understand the good intentions of the Newsstand Association, but the frequency at which graffiti is put on objects in Center City means, even at 72 hours, which is not a frequency we're seeing them remove graffiti, it stays in the public right-of-way. And newsstands, like honors boxes, for some reason, are a huge target for graffiti. So they are frequently marred with graffiti despite the best intentions. As been said by several people, including Councilwoman Sanchez, whatever you may legislate, both the Department of Licenses and Inspections and the Department of Streets are incredibly short on enforcement staff, so you can say in legislation what you would like them to do, but their ability to perform has been incredibly limited, and there has not been a lot of enforcement. Before anyone objects that putting a very strict requirement for 112 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. graffiti removal in the legislation and with very strict penalties, before you say that it's an unfair burden, I want to remind you that you're licensing these newsstand operators to locate for-profit enterprises rent-free in Philadelphia's densest business district, where they're filled each day with thousands of shoppers, visitors, and office workers, and the impression people form is formed by the things they see in the public environment. My second concern is, there does not seem to be a provision in this bill to require operators to upgrade their newsstands. Over the last decades, members of the Newsstand Association have retained a designer and improved some of the designs of their newsstands, and the new newsstand design is one that's very attractive and that I support. But the last time we counted -- and I may be slightly out of date -- only 37 out of the 104 newsstands that are in 113 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. the boundaries of our district were upgraded to the design. It simply has not happened at the frequency and the speed we would like to see.
At a minimum, it ought to be a requirement for every newsstand operator to upgrade their facility immediately as a precondition to getting the right to advertise. We have old, deteriorated wood newsstands, we have rusted newsstands. There is one I look at each day at Seventh and Chestnut, right next to my office, that's rusted, falling apart one block from the Liberty Bell. And this leads to my third concern, which was partially addressed by Steve Buckley this morning: How this proposal would fit into any comprehensive approach. Again, the theory of street- furniture contracts is that advertising companies are licensed to sell commercial advertising in the public right-of-way in return for providing amenities to the City 114 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. it could not otherwise afford such as transit shelters, benches, public toilets, and increasingly in some cities shared bicycles In the Street Administration, newsstands were carved out from the street furniture competitive bid process; I served on that committee, so I'm intimately familiar with it. But as a result, at the end of that administration, no contract was awarded. As a result, the current provider of transit shelters in Philadelphia is now in their fourth or fifth year of one-year renewals. This is citywide on all transit shelters. With a one-year renewal, no 18 transit shelter provider has any incentive to do major improvements to them, so they are etched with graffiti, they simply cannot afford to make the capital costs So where we sit today for reasons beyond anyone's control in this room is, we have very deteriorated transit shelters that are 15 years out of date and 115 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. graffiti-covered newsstands. I think we've got to solve both of these issues. Now, to conclude, from my perspective, there should be a sense of urgency about addressing this issue of street furniture, because in a recession, the last thing you want to do is have the public environment deteriorate further; that just sends, I think, a really negative message But I worry that any bid process for street furniture in this environment will not yield us very good bidders, because this is a very challenging time. But I am not sure in that environment that it makes sense to dilute any potential revenue stream to the City from street furniture by licensing newsstand operators to sell advertising and then allow them to keep all the revenue for their own benefit So I heard and have worked with the Newsstand Association. They have lots of good intentions, and they have fulfilled some of them, but if you don't 116 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. legislate them as requirements, promises don't get fulfilled Thank you for the opportunity.
Understood. Thank you, Mr. Levy. Mr. Rocco or Beller or Cunningham, would you please come back to the witness table, please. (Witnesses return to witness table.)
Paul, don't leave. We may have some questions for you.
And this may come up when they come up. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Levy, with all due respect, I think on your point two, you sort of have it, in my personal opinion, backwards. You say don't let 'em do anything till they make repairs. I think the point is, they need the money to make the repairs. That's what we're trying to -- that's why we're trying to give 117 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. them the ability to --
By absolutely requiring in this bill that if they have this right, they are then obligated; you do not have that in this bill.
Okay. You didn't -- but that's not what you said. You said earlier you tell 'em to make the repairs before you give them the ability.
If they don't have the ability to make revenue, I think that's a part of their problem.
Councilman, I mean, I respect the design that they have developed.
But if the argument 118 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. is that they need this revenue in order to finance those improvements, then make it a requirement in the bill so we get a public benefit. I would be interested, you know, in hearing an updates of how many of the newsstands in Center City -- my count is about two years old. How many newsstands in Center City have been replaced and how many of the 104 that we counted are still the old, wood and deteriorated ones. My suggestion to you is: Give them a right, give them an obligation.
I agree. There is an amendment to the bill and I think it addresses some of your concerns, and I don't know if you've seen it. It says: "All newsstands, including any security gate or other approved attachments, shall be painted and maintained so as to prevent rust, rot, graffiti, and other deleterious 119 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. conditions. All such deleterious conditions shall be removed or remedied within 72 hours" -- it used to be five days -- "of their appearance." The question is: How do we enforce it?
Which is my next -- which is why I asked these gentlemen to come back up. Mr. Rocco, presently, when your association removes graffiti, do you have an outside contractor that does that, or do you do that within your organization?
And why do we still have as much graffiti on -- and rust? Maybe they're not dealing with rust; do they just deal with the graffiti?
They deal with graffiti, and they also repaint the stands when they're in disrepair. 120 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS.
But I know -- and I know the one at Seventh and Christian, 'cause I still can't, for the life of me, ever figure out how that was ever allowed to be there 'cause the sidewalk's about inches when you look 8 at the face of the newsstand and the 9 curb. 10 Why do we have these problems -- 11 why are they still existing if we're 12 doing it within 72 hours? 'Cause the rust I see is not new rust; it has been there for a while.
There are certain locations that seem to be hit more so than others, like 15th and Ranstead, 11th and Walnut. No matter how many times we go out there, we repaint them, we get the graffiti off, it comes back. We try to be diligent about this, we try to be proactive, but it just seems as though no matter how many times, the graffiti comes back.
I 121 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. understand the graffiti issue, but I'm talking about the general maintenance of many of the newsstand; whether there's graffiti on it or not, they're rusted, the paint is -- and I don't know if you have that copy up there, Paul, but if you could show him some of the pictures we're talking about. I mean, some of this stuff -- the one on the upper right-hand corner; I mean, you could tell by the little platform that the newspapers are left on in front of it, I mean, that stuff is old, that's not new. The graffiti may be new but other conditions -- the rust and the fading of the paint -- that's not new stuff; that's been around. And this may not be -- this stand may not be within your organization.
Right, right. One 122 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. of the primary goals of this bill is to make sure that we can get people who have the older newsstands transferred over to the newer newsstands. This bill would allow the incentive to take place.
And I guess I'm going to make a suggestion that maybe you and Mr. Levy -- and I don't want to put any more work on the district, but maybe you and Mr. Levy ought to have a discussion. It seems that the Center City District folks have a stellar record when it comes to attacking graffiti and other things that deface public buildings within the Center City District. Now, obviously, this wouldn't apply to the neighborhoods, but you may do better, depending on what the costs are, if the Center City District is willing to contract, because they're out there doing that all day long anyway, and they'll see it.
Let me respond on the 123 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. graffiti issue. I absolutely agree that there are sites in every one of our neighborhoods that are repeatedly hit, and the way you address those is not by coming back every 72 hours, but to be there immediately after they're hit. Because graffiti is about notoriety.
And the minute the person who puts it up sees their name gone within 12 hours, the game's over. So the only way we succeed in Center City is that we have a routine route of cleaning every single building about every three weeks that has graffiti on it, but if there is any corner that is hit, we're back there the next morning, if it's really bad, to get rid of it right away, 'cause graffiti attracts graffiti. So the intention is good, but I think that we need a requirement, and we need a funded requirement. And I'm not 124 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. looking for the business.
We'd be glad to do it, but someone needs to be funded to do this on a regular basis because we are talking about prime locations in the downtown. The second issue again -- and I respect the work of the Newsstand Association, but they do not represent all of the newsstand operators in the downtown. And they can create an incentive; but just if you create an incentive and people choose not to do it, then we're still in the same condition. So I would like for you, if you're going to pass this bill, to tie this right to an obligation both to improve the newsstand, 'cause the designs they came up with are excellent, and an obligation to clean these with incredible frequency. This is the center of our hospitality industry, this is the center 125 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. of our business. Just as in every neighborhood corridor, this has that same vitality.
You know, I agree, and I think that the amendment -- and I'll talk to Brian about it -- we may be need to tighten that up a little bit, and I think we can either add something to that or just create another line to the amendment that may address some of those questions. But, again, I don't know what you're paying, John, in terms of the maintenance contract that you have. Is it a contract or is it --
-- when you just call? How long does is that contract for?
It's up? Again, it's a business decision. (Indiscernible; parties talking over each other.)
We've worked together before, and we have no 8 reservations about working together again.
And you might want to look at that, 'cause they're out there hours. I mean, they 13 can eliminate that within 24 hours, I 14 think we could safely say. Maybe not 15 within 12 but I think within 24. 16 And, historically, he is 17 correct: If you let graffiti last longer 18 than 24 hours, it becomes that much more 19 difficult to discourage people from 20 coming back and doing another hit. 21
Thank you 22 very much. Thank you for letting me go 23 first, Councilman Jones. 24 On a serious note, Mr. Levy, you mentioned that at one point, you guys 127 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. worked on a pilot where you were doing some other removal. Can you speak to that? What happened and why that arrangement --
Yeah. I think at the time we were using a type of equipment that we can clean them at nighttime and not during the daytime. So there was a concern that, obviously, they didn't want us really doing major work on their stands at the time they were operating. I think we have ways now we could clean them while they're operating in the daytime. So, again, I want to emphasize that I am not here trying to negotiate in Council; that's really their decision, what they want to do, but we have the capability to do this, but they have a free business --
Was there a financial arrangement at that time, when you did the pilot?
Yeah. We had worked 128 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. out sort of a handshake -- did we have a letter agreement? We may have had a letter agreement, yeah. And it's certainly something we could do again, or someone else could do it; I want to emphasize that. But I think it needs to be a part of the bill 9 that there's a requirement, not just an intention.
The other question. You asked the question, and Mr. Rocco hasn't had an opportunity to answer, and I'd like for that information to be shared. What other -- in addition to the ones that you showed, what other upgrades have happened in Center City? Mr. Levy spoke to, there are very few of the 100-and-something stands in Center City that are upgraded. Mr. Rocco, can you update --
I have to disagree. Out of the 120 stands that are out there, 90 percent of them in Center City; of 129 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. those 90 percent, we have almost 50 percent that have been upgraded. Currently, we've got 44 new newsstands, and we're building 5 more. We should have approximately 48 or 49 by June 1st that will be upgraded, so...
Let me get this straight 'cause I'm trying to get an assessment of this. You're saying that 50 percent of the 100-and-so stands in downtown have been upgraded?
Councilwoman, there's not that much difference because what I was -- I said clearly that my numbers were two years old, and that was 37 out of 104 in a somewhat smaller area. So if, in those two years, they've done another 13 or 14, I mean, I commend them for that. But, again, what you've just heard is, only half of them have been upgraded. I would like to see us -- if 130 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. you're not going to have this as part of the comprehensive streetscape program, which is obviously the direction it sounds like you're considering, then you might require them to all look the same and make it a requirement. They have worked very hard to come up with a good design. Make it a requirement of every newsstand in Center City. That, I think, would achieve a uniformity as well. But 50 percent over 10 years gives us another 10 years to get it done, which I'm a little bit more impatient than that.
And, again, this bill will give us an opportunity to accelerate that pace of building more newer, modernized newsstands.
But this is a pilot. So I guess my issue to Mr. Levy's point is, if we were to grant you advertising rights, can you give us something firmer than "We're going to 131 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. upgrade 'em?" Can we talk about a time period? What do you foresee in terms of upgrading the rest of the stands?
Right now, we're doing about 7, 8, 9, somewhere in there, per year. I think we can increase that by 50 percent with this new program, with this bill.
Of the 104 that are downtown, how many are not members?
Yeah, 104 is within the boundaries of our district. If his number is 120, that would be consistent.
Okay. Of the 120, how many are members of the association?
Councilwoman, again, if I could add. Not to belabor this point. This is a voluntary association. 132 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS.
They do a very good job of persuading people. But as we all know, you can't persuade everybody to do everything. You're legislating, you have that opportunity.
Mr. Levy, I just wanted to ask one more thing 'cause when we talked about the City -- it's the Administration's position that it's though going to develop a whole street program on this. What is your interpretation of this, and how do you see -- should the newsstands be separate from that or incorporated to that? What's your perspective because of all of the work you've done in Center City?
Well, I mean, I'm not a lawyer, so I cannot offer you any opinion on legality. I think there are positives and negatives. I think this group has worked very hard to develop a uniform design 133 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. that's attractive, that happens to -- the colors happen to correspond with the colors we've used on light poles and all the rest, so there is a coherence there. And they make an argument for being carved out. I will tell you: The more you allow advertising revenue in an area or opportunities, the less value you could get from other advertising. That's the challenge. And the full value for the -- any outdoor advertising contract citywide is the value derived in Center City, 'cause that's where the highest density is, that's the highest rates paid by advertisers. So what you need to balance here is the objectives you believe you can help them achieve in terms of upgrading newsstands. But by allowing more advertising in the downtown, you do dilute the revenue stream in the highest revenue area within the city, which then helps pay for bus shelters and other 134 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. things throughout the City. It's a balancing act; there's not a right answer here, but I think that's what you need to consider.
But that's revenue primarily that goes through the City.
In your response about diluting the revenues, it would be the revenues that would go directly to the City, which may not benefit the newsstand. I mean, they have a better opportunity on their own to generate more revenue than --
Look, I'm fully in favor of each one of us making as much money as we can in life.
But my point was simply that the street-furniture contracts in this city and other cities have sought to provide amenities like bus 135 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. shelters, people are talking about bike racks and other amenities across the entire city. And they've done that by selling advertising. The real value in the advertising in this city is in the downtown and a few commercial corridors that are really high-density. So you need that revenue stream derived from commercial advertising on transit shelters or anything else in the downtown to spread those amenities far and wide across the City. My only point is: If you allow one other entity to have advertising, it benefits them, it could dilute the revenue stream the City gets to provide things citywide. There's not a right answer here; I'm not arguing one side or the other; I'm just telling you my opinion on the --
Yeah, I wasn't suggesting you were arguing; I was just kind of trying to pick your brain 136 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. and get a sense of how it may impact. What we're trying to do is create additional revenue for them. If they're a part of the comprehensive plan, it may actually reduce them. They'll get something but not as much.
There's no doubt. It's not a comprehensive plan, and if they're not part of it, they don't get the revenue.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. A couple of quick questions. These renditions of newsstands, how many are there? Or is there one uniform?
And what is 7 the difference between the 20 and the 23? 8
Well, if you want 9 magazine wings, that's an added cost. If 10 you want a curved roof, that's another 11 added cost. If you want a lottery 12 window, that's another added cost. 13 So there are -- 14
How much revenue annually do you anticipate gaining through this advertisement? What is the projection?
Well, it's difficult to pin it down exactly, 138 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. Councilman, but we're looking at approximately $150,000 --
-- in the first year. Again, to be distributed equitably amongst all of the members.
And this would be in addition to any other revenues derived product sales, the newspapers and other things?
So is it unreasonable to say that you -- you know, if we were to say that within a 24-month period that we would expect the balance of the facilities to be done that this would not be an unreasonable expectation if we consider that it's a low-end capitalization of an advertisement unit LCD, high-yield by way of potential profit, thus being able to finance new structures in a first year, more or less two or three. So would it be unreasonable to 139 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. impose that condition, as Mr. Levy pointed out, upon the approval of a bill 4 such as this? Would that be a hardship? And if so, why?
First of all, the plan itself calls for to at least purchase one out of the first year's revenues outright for one vendor that can't afford it for themselves, to purchase it outright. In other words, take the revenues and purchase the stand for $25,000.
Let me clarify. That's for your entire association, 150,000?
So what I wanted to know is, what is the per-member revenue per year, roughly?
$7,000. So within a three-year period, we should 140 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. have their --
Again, we're only talking about the members; we're not addressing the issue of the non-members. And I think that's where Mr. Levy was going. And I think I'm in agreement with that -- I don't know about the rest of the committee -- that if we're going to do something here, we need to figure out how we can make this pretty much mandatory for every newsstand, especially those in Center City.
Well, that's the spirit of my questions, Mr. Chairman, that we, as a city, and the visitors and the shoppers in Center City should derive something from this too other than by tax 141 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. dollars. But by way of esthetics, we're talking about conflicting views by way what is pretty and what is acceptable. But one thing that is not acceptable is what has been pointed out by way of the condition of some of the stands that are rusted and have been allowed to be graffiti bulletin boards. So my support obviously would be for something that ties it into the construction of new structures over some set period of time.
It almost -- it sounds to me, Joe and Mr. Beller and John, I think we're almost going back to where we were a dozen or so years ago, where we were trying to have a uniform look to all the newsstands; am I right? I mean, it's pretty much where we're going, right?
It seems to 142 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. me, at $7,000 per year per member, that you have the ability to dedicate some of this revenue stream directly from the association or otherwise to help people get financing who are otherwise not creditworthy 'cause the money comes through you guys first the way you're going to do your general thing. So you could put together a program that would pay for and finance these things, and it would cost, you know, maybe 2,000 a month, including interest and principal -- I mean 2,000 a year, including interest and principal, for people to get these, and they'd have $5,000 extra income that would pay it off on, say, a 10-year amortization, according to my iPhone. And so, you know, there's a real possibility to get this done. And, obviously, if we make it a requirement, more people are perhaps, you know, going to have to be drawn into being a part of the association because they can get 143 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. financing through your purpose or another purpose. The only suggestion I would make to the chairman, and I will -- obviously, I'm happy with any way you resolve this situation, is that perhaps it would make sense to just have a requirement in a certain number of years, whether it's three or four or five, that you will not receive a new license that year unless you have a certain kind of newsstand. Thank you.
Councilman Jones and I had a sidebar about that issue. There are a number of recommendations -- thank you, Paul and others -- as it relates to this bill. And I know that one of my colleagues has some concern about a portion of the signage, which is something I think we can deal with. So what I'm going to do is, we're going to hold this -- with the 144 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. permission of this committee is to hold this bill. We're going to go back and work out some specifics on the timeline for uniformity; I don't know if it's one years, two years, three years, whatever it is. I think the tighter we make it, the better off we are, but there are, obviously, financial considerations that need to be addressed. You guys, the members of the association, shouldn't be treated any differently than the others. If we're going to put the burden on you to comply and make these newsstands the more modern newsstand that we see today, it should be for everyone. And then the other issue is for you all to talk to Paul. And if you can work something out, fine; if you can't, that's fine. But I think working with the Center City District on the removal of graffiti and maintenance is very important.
Mr. Chairman, one 145 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. of the things that plays right into that dovetails with the concerns that you're talking about is that the advertisers themselves want the upgrade because you can't put the kind of things that we're talking about that we've described that the bill allows, you can't put them on the old stands.
So there's that added incentive. And the revenue will help, and the fact that the revenue would increase as newsstands come on line, so to speak. So there would be that push, and we may be able to arrange financing through even the advertisers.
So a realistic time 146 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. limit because the --
Going back in time again. The last time we went around with this, the advertisers were going to front the money, if not pay for it completely.
And then you, the association, would pay off the debt, as they went.
Well, my feeling is, Councilman, that if you were to proceed with this bill, we would have new newsstands out on the street, the remaining 30 or 40, within a period of three or four years. We're doing very well as it is now without this.
But if we were going 147 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. to add an enhancement to this --
Well, we're going to define that in the legislation so that there's no way it falls through the cracks and somebody could escape.
Mr. Chairman, we've heard a lot of good testimony today from people on both sides of the issue. I think we understand where you intend to go with this. And, personally, I would be comfortable -- I would prefer to pass it out of committee and then let you work on the changes with amendments so that -- because we've heard fully from everybody and --
Thank you, Councilman. (Committee members confer off the record.)
We'll vote this bill out, and then we'll work on the 148 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - NEWSSTANDS LEGIS. amendments. And we all need to get together on this discussion. If you need to use my office at some point, whatever is convenient for all of you, we should work on it. And we'll also take under consideration some of the issues that were raised by SCRUB as well, all right?
Thank you. Thank you all. Mr. Abernathy, please read the title of the next bill.
Bill No. 080645, an ordinance amending Chapter 12-1100 of the Philadelphia Code, entitled "Miscellaneous Regulations and Penalties," by adding a new section 21 prohibiting the use of handheld mobile telephone by a person operating a motor vehicle or other vehicle on a City street, under certain terms and conditions. 149 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - DRIVING W/CELLPHONES
Good morning. Please identify yourself for the record and proceed with your testimony. LT. HEALY: Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and Committee on Streets and Services. My name is Francis Healy and I'm special advisor to Commissioner Ramsey, and I'm here to testify on his behalf regarding Bill 080645. The first and foremost, the Commissioner would like to extend his gratitude for allowing the Police Department to voice opinion on this very important piece of legislation. With that being said, let me say at the outset that the Police Commissioner and the Philadelphia Police Department fully supports the amendments offered by Councilmembers Green, 150 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - DRIVING W/CELLPHONES Greenlee, as well as Councilman Rizzo. There is no debate: Cellphones and driving do not mix certain. While distracted drivers have always created certain dangers, now drivers can surf the Internet, send and receive e-mails or faxes, communicate via a cellular device, and even watch television, all activities requiring cognitive engagement. From my own experience as a police officer, I've witnessed drivers using cellphones serve from lane to lane, run red lights and stop signs, and pass school buses, completely oblivious to the tragedies they could have created I also have actually all seen drivers so involved in an argument on a cellphone that they hadn't realized they had come to a complete stop in their running lane. I'm certain we've all seen the same scenarios over and over again, but there are even reports that equate the dangers of drunk driving to that of driving while on a cellphone. 151 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - DRIVING W/CELLPHONES In a study in 2006, a study published by the Journal of Human Factors in Ergonomics Societies, researchers from the University of Utah found drivers that talking on a cellphone are more likely to crash due to being distracted by a conversation than by being under the influence of alcohol. 08 percent blood alcohol level, which is legally drunk. Forty participants were used, 19 of them were men, 15 were women. They 20 followed a simulated pace car that would 21 brake intermittently. The average age of 22 the participants was about 25 years old, 23 and 87 reported percent they had used 24 cellphones while driving in the past, and 25 all of them were social drinkers at one 152 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - DRIVING W/CELLPHONES point (indiscernible). Researchers found that the drivers on the cellphone drove more slowly, brake more slowly, took longer to recover speed loss following a braking episode, and were more likely to crash. In fact, in the study, three participants actually collided with the pace car while chatting on a cellphone. In essence, the conversation itself distracted the drivers from the road conditions. In contrast, drivers in the alcoholic condition, which was the number 3 scenario, exhibited more aggressive driving, following closer to the car immediately in front of them, necessitating braking with greater force. As a result, the study concluded that the data suggests the impairments associated with cellphones and driving may be just as profound as those associated with driving drunk. Indeed, drivers who use cellphones are more likely to jeopardize 153 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - DRIVING W/CELLPHONES public safety simply due to the fact that more people are talking on their cellphones than actually while driving drunk. So it's obviously that the time has come to legislatively address the issue of driving while talking or texting on a cell phone. It is a safety issue plain and simple. For that reason, the Philadelphia Police Department fully supports this amendment and applauds the efforts of the Councilmembers in sponsoring this legislation. But I must admit the Philadelphia Police Department supports this legislation, but I note that the Law Department has opined in the past that it may be preempted by State law.
While I'm not aware if there's any similar laws in the Pennsylvania Vehicle Code, I understand that there have been several bills introduced in Harrisburg similar to the one presented to date that would 154 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - DRIVING W/CELLPHONES restrict such use. So even if this ordinance is preempted by State law, its passage can still send a strong message to Harrisburg that the time has come to legislatively address the issue of driving while talking or texting on a cellphone. If the leaders in Philadelphia can see the inherent dangers and come together to legislate change for the safety of its citizens, maybe now our state representatives will finally come together and do the same. This concludes my testimony.
Thank you, Lt. Healy. I just had a question. I understand the Law Department is not here, 'cause I did a similar bill several years ago, and we never got it out of committee because we were convinced by the then-Law Department that it would be superseded by the state, by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. 155 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - DRIVING W/CELLPHONES If this bill passes, comes and out of this committee, will the Police Department begin enforcement? LT. HEALY: We would consult with the Law Department whether or not enforcement would be appropriate. Whether or not we can enforce it or not, like I said, at this point, really, it's not the most relevant aspect of this. What it really does is send a message. There's pending legislation in Harrisburg, I believe, and once -- what happens is, there's no legislation directly on point that covers this in Harrisburg. So you could argue theoretically maybe both sides of the fence. The Law Department, they speak for the City on legal matters, and I would defer to their judgment on that matter. But without having a specific law on the state records, it's a little vague sometimes. So once that's 156 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - DRIVING W/CELLPHONES clarified at the state level, it would absolutely be preempted. But until that point comes, I think this legislation sends a strong message that needs to be done now.
Yeah, and I agree. I'm in full support of it. I've been using hands-free devices pretty much after the first cellphone I got, and that's what caused me to do the legislation years ago. And I think there may have been another county in the Commonwealth that did pass legislation that would have prohibited it. And I think, again, because the State superseded us, I don't know if they ever -- LT. HEALY: I believe there's a town, Hilltop Township, I believe, after a tragedy that occurred.
So I don't know if there was ever any enforcement up there or if anyone on the other side challenged the legality of the bill. 157 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - DRIVING W/CELLPHONES And, again, I just wanted that for the record. I support this and I'll vote it out of committee and I'll vote in favor of it. I'm just curious as to where we go from there. Councilman Greenlee.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Lieutenant, thank you for your testimony. And certainly, not surprisingly, since we're one of the sponsors of the bill, I agree totally with what you say about it. But just on the point Councilman DiCicco raised -- and I know he had raised this bill earlier, you know, in previously years. And we do have a opinion from the Law Department that says this is enforceable. They say, as I think most lawyers say, it certainly could be challenged, but they think there is a defense for this bill. You know, I won't go into the whole reading of it. 158 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - DRIVING W/CELLPHONES But we feel confident that -- you know, we also know, just as was threatened in the previous bill, somebody's going to sue. Well, somebody sues on lots of things. But we think, obviously, it's a public-safety issue, and what you said earlier, this is certainly worth pursuing. And, you know, I appreciate that Councilman DiCicco brought this up a couple years ago. You know, I wish he had gotten this opinion a couple years ago; then we wouldn't be here right now. But it is -- I think it is certainly defensible. And for the safety of the people, we need to go forward as hard and quickly as we can. LT. HEALY: I have to agree. And there's a lot of issues that have come up, and Mayor Nutter is taking them aggressively; firearms being one of them.
Mm-hmm. LT. HEALY: Just because there's preemptions that exist, it doesn't mean 159 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - DRIVING W/CELLPHONES they're not worth fighting against.
And, again, in the Law Department, they give a hard reason why they think it can be defended. So, again, you know, the lawyers disagree; there's five lawyers, there's seven opinions. But in this case, we think we have a -- certainly a strong enough argument to pursue it. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you. I will distribute in a second the memo from the Law Department on this issue, and we can enter it as a part of the record. But I want to make these points. There is a specific section of the Vehicle Code which says that local 160 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - DRIVING W/CELLPHONES localities can use such temporary or experimental regulations as may be necessary to cover emergencies and special conditions that exist in the locality. As a consequence, we are proposing some legislative findings, which my staff will distribute shortly, which cover that. In particular, Philadelphia has been named one of the most walkable cities in the United States. And this is not a violation of the State Motor Vehicle Code that we are implementing. What we're doing here is putting in place a City ordinance that protects pedestrians, protects bicyclists, roller-bladers, skateboarders, everybody out on the streets of the City of Philadelphia. Also, specifically, the Law Department says that driving with a mobile phone is not addressed at all in the Vehicle Code and, therefore, there would not be preemption at this time 161 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - DRIVING W/CELLPHONES because it's not specifically mentioned. However, if they do propose -- if they do pass a statewide ban, obviously then, there would be a clear preemption of the Code. Also, the City is allowed to adopt ordinances under 61-09 of the Vehicle Code that are reasonable exercises of police powers; and moreover, explicitly allows the adoption of experimental regulations to cover special conditions. The City has broad latitude to determine that particular circumstance in Philadelphia such as cellphone use while driving or protection of pedestrians that warrants special protection of the public against the dangers cellphone use creates. So the conclusion ultimately is, there is very little case law on this, and they think there are many grounds on which they can defend this legislation. Thank you.
Thank you. 162 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - DRIVING W/CELLPHONES Miss Cunningham.
Miss Cunningham, please pull the microphone a little bit closer and speak directly into it. Thank you.
My name is Rebecca Cunningham. I'm here to testify for the bill for usage of cellphones while driving. I am actually a survivor of texting and driving. I was coming home from Fairmount on September 16, 2007, and I had my friend's cellphone, and I texted her boyfriend to let her know that I had her cellphone and I would bring it to her. And I was not paying attention and went over two lanes and hit one of the lane posts straight on. I was told many times by many doctors that I'm lucky to be alive. Unfortunately, others have not been so 163 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - DRIVING W/CELLPHONES lucky, and I think that that's why this bill should be passed. I had two surgeries to repair my ankle. I had a broken wrist. I had bruises on my ribs. I had cuts and bruises all over my face and my arms. And I needed hardware placed into my ankle, and then I needed a bone graft this past February. I'm in full support of this. I haven't used a cellphone while driving since. I think it is very dangerous and it takes all of your attention off the road, and you need all of your attention to be able to drive because chances are, the person next to you isn't paying attention at all. And you need to be on point at all times.
Hello. My name 164 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - DRIVING W/CELLPHONES is Thomas Minehart, and I'm a resident of Philadelphia. First, I'd like to thank Councilman Greenlee and Councilman Green for introducing this legislation. I also want to thank them for the opportunity to speak on the legislation's behalf. As a resident in Philadelphia, I feel like this bill is a pragmatic solution to a problem that has only grown with the demand of cellphone technology. Simply put, cellphone use while driving is not safe. It creates a distraction and can result in careless driving. I'm no exception to this notion. Like everyone else in this room, I have driven while talking on my cellphone. In doing so, I admit that I have made lackadaisical mistakes. Luckily, I've never been in an extent due to driving while on talking on my cellphone. However, I cannot deny the fact that it has hindered my ability to drive attentively. 165 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - DRIVING W/CELLPHONES Philadelphia, like all major cities, presents a unique problem in regards to cellphone use while driving. Driving in a major metropolitan city such as ours presents more obstacles than driving elsewhere: Pedestrians, bicyclists, delivery trucks idling in loading zones, and congested eight-lane highway are only some of the examples that present the necessity for attentive driving. I know this firsthand, as I was raised in Reading, Pennsylvania, where I -- such obstacles are not nearly as dramatic. I have no specific incident to advocate on this bill's behalf, I have no 18 emotional ties to the bill. Thankfully, none of my friends or family members have been killed or injured as a result of cellphone use while driving. Instead, I'm here before you as an average, everyday citizen merely speaking on behalf of this progressive legislative that addresses a problem. 166 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - DRIVING W/CELLPHONES It's a simple solution that will encourage safer driving. Accordingly, my hope is that the Councilwomen and men of Philadelphia find a practicality in this bill when considering their vote. Again, I thank Councilman Greenlee and Councilman Green for the opportunity to speak.
Thank you. Any questions for these witnesses? (No questions or comments.)
Thank you, Lieutenant. Mr. Gambescia. (Witness comes forward.)
Hi. My name Stephen Gambescia. I'm on faculty at 167 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - DRIVING W/CELLPHONES Drexel University. I'm an associate professor of health services administration. And I'm presenting testimony today in support of this bill -- not in terms of Drexel in general but in terms of my experience in practice and health-policy issues. I want to thank the sponsors of the bill for giving me an opportunity to testify in support of this. I've read the bill, and I'm going to present four points that would support this. I will not read all of the testimony that I have, but I have handed that out, in the interest of your time, and I know some of this information has been covered. First of all, we've already heard, number one, that it's just common sense that if you're using a cellphone, it's problematic while you're driving, and it puts a risk to you as a driver and to others. The second one is that national highway safety organizations and highway 168 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - DRIVING W/CELLPHONES safety researchers have come out very strongly when they take a look at the epidemiological data and also behavioral data, which I'll explain a little bit, and have said that you really cannot use cellphones while driving; they're very distracting the. The third one is that the City of Philadelphia really does have the right to pass this type of legislation, that the state legislature does not have carte- blanche authority to preempt when it comes to a public health and safety issue. And the fourth one, I think, is very interesting, is that the principles of protecting public health and safety do not need to meet this test of beyond reasonable doubt, that it's prudent that we can do things in public health and safety when the testimony is more likely to happen or something that's common sense in terms of that. The first one, commonsensical data. If you take a look at AAA and other 169 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. " In fact, they even say, "Don't even use a hands-free cell phone," and I'll talk about that a little bit So I'm not going to reiterate all of that information; it's very available. It's just common sense. When we got our driver's license, we probably all remember that; that's an exciting time. Remember the civic mantra? "This is not a right; it's a privilege. " But the corollary responsibility we have -- that, again, common sense -- is that when we get behind the wheel of a car, that we are of sound mind, body, and all of our senses. Common sense tells us that when you're talking on a cellphone, it's going to drain your senses and distract you. The epidemiological studies. I know the officer here talked a little bit 170 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - DRIVING W/CELLPHONES about those. Some of those studies are going to come at a basic level from survey data. So there's survey data with large numbers of people that say, What do you when you're driving? And, yes, there are other things that people do that are distracting -- maybe change the radio, eat, drink, put makeup on. Certainly that happens But what's coming up clearly is that cellphone usage is rising to the top. In 2007, that data showed us it was number three. In 2008, it's now number two. So that sort of information is rising. Now, more direct epidemiological information that we're talking a look at. The National Highway and Safety Administration equipped 100 cars with video cameras and sensors. They followed 240 people who were driving those vehicles. Two million miles they went, something like 42,000 hours, and they reviewed all of these tapes. And they identified an actual crash. They also 171 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - DRIVING W/CELLPHONES took a look at near-crashes and what they call critical incidents. Again, I have the statistics there. Their conclusion is: The number-one issue is using a cellphone while driving. And it's even problematic if it's a hands-free cellphone as well.
Another phenomenon -- and we just heard from the young lady here that talked about this that -- I didn't have a chance to take a look at her age, but what we know is that teens are not only talking on the phone incessantly, they're also text- messaging people. And as more teens become older and go into the driving population, we're going to see this more and more. Older people tend not to use cellphones; some of them do obviously. But see, as that (indiscernible) moves through of teens, then we're going to see that population. So I think it's important that we get a hand on this right away. 172 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - DRIVING W/CELLPHONES Here's a really interesting study. Carnegie Mellon University took a look at brain scans of individuals, and they subjected them to listening to a cellphone, hands-free or otherwise. And the conclusion that they just came out with is that when they did this comparative brain scan data, they showed that the cellphone usage was the same as somebody being intoxicated. " So it's very problematic. And, again, that's the sort of epidemiological data that we have there. We know that since 2002, in the State of Pennsylvania, when an officer comes upon a crash, he or she now has to document, was a cellphone being used? Very similar to what you do -- were you wearing your seat belt? In 2000, you as legislators, public officials, were faced with this early on. I know this bill has come up before, and the reason why nobody was 173 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - DRIVING W/CELLPHONES going to act on it is because there wasn't enough information available. One of the reasons was that they didn't have to document that. So now in Pennsylvania, they have to. So now, when we compare 2002 data with 2005 data in the State of Pennsylvania, we see this dramatic increase in not only the crashes but also the injuries and also the fatalities. The State of New Jersey has similar data, and I presented that in the written testimony. So let me shift then to the third point, which has to do with the issue of preemption. You may hear detractors and you may hear testimony today that says, No, you cannot do this. And understandably, I understand this concept that you don't want this patchwork of legislation coming up. It's very confusing, and can you enforce it, and I understand that However, the issue of preemption 174 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - DRIVING W/CELLPHONES that the detractors bring up is very selective. When you can say that the higher government can preempt the lower government if it has a compelling reason. However, if you take a look at public health and safety legislation -- and I think Councilman Green was sort of alluding to this in terms of the Law Department -- what you have is that local authorities historically have been able to claim compelling reasons to protect public health and safety. Why? Because you're in the best position to see how you can protect public health and safety. So preemption is not simply state over local, but local can supersede the state. The other thing -- and this is sort of editorial -- is that I would say as in the short run, the legislation that we have in this state is stalled. In the long run -- again, a little bit editorial here -- is I'm not very optimistic that we're going to see the General Assembly do 175 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - DRIVING W/CELLPHONES anything in this area. They haven't had a real strong track record over the years when it comes to health and safety. What is a real opportunity here is you, as public officials, if you pass this bill and a couple of other municipalities, then maybe that will go a long way to stimulate them to pass something at the state level.
And I want to segué into the final comment here, because I think they go hand in hand, which is: Let's not just wait for the carnage to build up and for us to come back as public health researchers to show you year after year after year that more people were injured and more people have died, because I think that's a fallacy when it comes to a public health principle. The public health principle isn't guided on that we have this litmus test of beyond a reasonable doubt. What it really says is we can act to be prudent and act if we have something that is likely to 176 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - DRIVING W/CELLPHONES occur. And I think sometimes even in public health, we don't make that statement So I think the municipality of Philadelphia has, first, every right to pass a ban on the use of handheld phones to reduce driver distractions. I think this is common sense, I think it's good public health policy, and I believe that we have compelling reason to show that you can pass a bill like this So thank you for allowing me an opportunity to present here. Again, I have more information in written testimony, but at least wanted to get some starting points off.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I also want to echo your comments about the initiative set forth by my colleagues to try to strike a candle in the darkness. 177 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - DRIVING W/CELLPHONES But if we, as a local jurisdiction, wait around for the Commonwealth to send help to save us, we need to put a sign on the gates of Philadelphia that says "Abandon all hope" if we judge it by the gun legislation that we begged them based on the issue of public safety. We've had to take local initiatives that, in fact, were struck down by court, but we made the moral point of saying that this is an issue near and dear to us. By way of your research, by way of the component about being intoxicated, this dealt with reaction time, the idea of being distracted was similar to being intoxicated based on reaction time, red light, green light, other hazards that may be coming from other vehicles; is that what the basis of this is?
Well, the Carnegie Mellon study gave brain scans of individuals. And what they did is, when 178 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - DRIVING W/CELLPHONES they -- the stimulus is the handheld phone, and see the changes in the brain scan. And then they compared that with somebody who was intoxicated and compared that with somebody who wasn't -- you know, did a scan of someone who didn't have any stimulus to them. So they're not actually in the car in that particular study.
No, I mean, the comparison is in reaction time. You're as much distracted by the second martini as you may be by the second call that comes on the phone. So that distraction taken away from many obstacles, that's the comparison.
Right. I don't know whether we can -- and, again, the science of it, I don't know whether we could say it's the reaction time as much as the way the brain is. I think you could make that leap from the brain scan to the reaction time, but they didn't actually monitor that as what they were 179 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - DRIVING W/CELLPHONES looking at.
Thank you very much for your testimony. I don't have a written copy of your testimony; do you have any extra written copies? (Copy of Mr. Gambescia's testimony handed to Councilman Green.) Thank you. So I want to thank you for your testimony. And I just would like you to state for the record your expertise in the area of public health.
Sure. Again, I'm associate professor of health service administration, College of Nursing and Health Professions, at Drexel University.
And specifically, my area has been in health 180 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - DRIVING W/CELLPHONES promotion. This area is called "unintentional injury"; that's how we would categorize that. And specifically in health policy.
Okay. So it is your testimony today that passage of this bill will protect the public health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of Philadelphia?
Okay. Thank you very much. Those are my only questions.
Thank you. Mr. Gambescia, I'm not sure if you have the answer to this, and I'll be very brief. Other cities have imposed bans on cellphone use within their city as opposed to their state. What -- how do they notify people of that? I mean, if I'm driving -- if I'm not a Philadelphian and I'm coming from other points, coming 181 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - DRIVING W/CELLPHONES from the south, driving through Philly on I-95 via the expressway, and on my cellphone, and this law passes and we're able to enforce it, and I'm subject to a ticket, do they have notification of the boundaries of these cities coming in? Do you know of anything?
And this has to do with -- and, again, you know, being very objective here. The problem when you have this patchwork issue. I'm not aware of any flashing signs, although New Jersey does -- I have seen the signs, the data, but I understand the concept of your question.
In terms of municipalities, they're just using sort of mainstream media to get the word out, but I guess you could say that about 182 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - DRIVING W/CELLPHONES almost any kind of driving regulation, that you go into a municipality. Some of the things we can sort of take for granted; you know, I know there may be a school zone somewhere, but we don't see it as we switch the municipalities about all the other regulations that we have in terms of driving.
But their signage is up. I mean, "no left turn on this street" or "no right turn" or what the speed limit is, "yield."
I'm just trying to figure out, does that open up some more opportunities for challenges for people who are saying, "I didn't know it was" --
Yeah. Well, I guess what you have with driving is -- and, again, it's -- 183 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - DRIVING W/CELLPHONES
-- if other cities have done something 'cause I'm sure they've encountered the same problems.
What they've done is just made it -- obviously started with the nucleus of the people, and then it spreads and what you have you. I think what we've maybe done -- I know it's statewide of how that word has spread very quickly when we knew that New Jersey was doing it.
Okay. Well, New Jersey, again, it's the entire state. So literally, when you cross over into New Jersey, there's signs talking about "buckle up," 'cause that's a law in Jersey and also about cellphone use. Councilman Greenlee.
Yeah, very 184 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - DRIVING W/CELLPHONES quickly, Mr. Chairman. Thank you. And you raise a good point. We can certainly look into what some of the other cities have done, you know, after this bill goes through committee. And, you know, maybe you can't put up a sign every place somebody enters the City, but maybe at some of the key points, you know, some sign like that. You know, it's certainly something we can look into, maybe work with the Police Department, the Streets Department, that kind of thing.
Yeah, I just forgot to ask you, Mr. Chairman, to please allow the memo from the Law Department to be a part of the record and also the PowerPoint presentation that's been distributed to committee members become part of the record.
So noted. 185 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - DRIVING W/CELLPHONES Any other questions from this committee? (No further questions.)
Is there a Mr. Arnold here? Thank you, Mr. Gambescia. Mr. Arnold, would you please come forward. (Witness comes forward.)
Good afternoon. Mr. Arnold, please identify yourself for the record and proceed with your testimony.
Yes. My name is Bill Arnold, and I'm a self-employed insurance agent living and working in Philadelphia. I have been using a handheld for over ten years without incidents, and I invite any Councilmember or their aide to come and sit in my car while I do my work during the day to see exactly what I'm 186 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - DRIVING W/CELLPHONES talking about.
A real-world situation, not something for somebody that wanted to get results from a study because they want to get some more government money. It is important to both me and my customers that I pick up as many calls as possible without callbacks. This is also true, for example, if my wife or the school nurse calls me. It's very simple: You just pick it up and say, "Hi, dear. I'm over here." It's not hard to do. I've been doing it for over ten years. I haven't had any tickets in the last three years, and I don't have a -- I don't have a -- an accident that was chargeable. The accidents that I get into are from people that are just not on cellphones mostly, that are, you know, run into me. And they're frequently uninsured 187 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - DRIVING W/CELLPHONES So I think this whole thing has been overblown, the dangers of it. So somebody got to speak up in the world of reality, so I figured I'd come here today and do that for you. Yes, there are many times when I have to pull my car over for a conversation that requires careful listening or thinking and speaking, but a simple "Could you come over in 12 minutes?" type call can be handled while 13 driving. 14 A hands-free phone can be a 15 potential danger too, as you heard. This bill, as it's now constructed, will not solve that problem. Educating people is the key. I do support a bill against text-messaging. I saw an 18th District police officer driving the other day and he had something in his lap, and I thought that was dangerous, but I didn't get a chance to tell the lieutenant about it, as he apparently went out the door. 188 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - DRIVING W/CELLPHONES I spend several hours a day in my car as a businessman. I can tell you, I'm far more worried about the loss of business in this bill than I am about the risk of being hit by another driver. We have to weigh the small risk versus the larger loss of convenience and business. I'm sure many other small businessmen feel the same way. This is not the best moment to be cutting commercial lines of communication. Thank you. And do you have any questions for me?
I'd like to yield to my colleagues first, and then I'll --
Yeah, very quickly. 189 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - DRIVING W/CELLPHONES You know, I guess the easiest way to say it, Mr. Arnold, is that we strongly disagree with each other. But you talk about reality. Did you hear Miss Cunningham? That was pretty reality, wasn't it? And a few weeks ago, she would have come in here with even more reality; she was on crutches and a boot.
Okay. But she also talked about her not paying attention when she's on the cellphone; talked about that too. And also, did you hear Lieutenant Healy's testimony? Now, I think police are about as much out there in reality as anybody I can think of. And he said he has seen and he has many instances about where this is a problem. I'm glad you've gone through ten years doing that, I'm glad you're here in one piece. But, sir, reality is, just 190 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - DRIVING W/CELLPHONES walk out in the street and you see people on their cellphones --
-- that are not paying attention. And I just can't believe that it costs that much in your business or anybody's business. When the phone rings, you pull over to the side as soon as you can, and you answer the darn phone. A few years ago, you didn't have to worry about that 'cause you didn't have a cellphone, and the world kept on ticking. So it will keep on ticking with this.
And you can still use a hands-free device, exactly. So, again, I don't want to get in a big debate, but we just disagree.
This is just a start; the hands-free comes later, as the 191 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - DRIVING W/CELLPHONES good doctor or whatever told you.
Just very quickly for the record, and it's a part of the PowerPoint presentation. PennDOT tracks crashes that are caused by cellphones. Between 2002 and 2005, the number of cellphones -- cellphone use causing accidents increased by percent, and fatalities of crashes 16 that were caused by cellphones increased 17 by 57 percent, which is consistent with 18 the testimony we heard from the gentleman 19 from Drexel. You did mention that you have been in a number of accidents?
When you're out in 192 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - DRIVING W/CELLPHONES the City, they're going to hit you, so you can't avoid it.
None of which were your fault. Were you on the cellphone during any of those accidents?
Nobody was on the cellphone. You can watch the cellphone drivers. They frequently drive slow, as he testified, the gentleman over here testified. They drive slow, and you can watch out for them especially if they have a handheld cellphone. You can watch them and you can just, you know, keep your distance.
Councilman 193 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - DRIVING W/CELLPHONES Jones.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. A couple of things: Do you live in Philly?
I'm glad it's not the 4th District. I just wanted to establish that. But the other reality: What kind of business are you in?
Insurance debit agent. When I first came to government, one of the sad tasks I had to do was look at a traffic study on Ridge Avenue as to the number of people who had been struck by vehicles, some of them in 194 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - DRIVING W/CELLPHONES hit-and-runs. In that process, I learned a lot about what the devastating loss is to an individual based on vehicular homicide or losing a life. And for you to compare your business profits with the potential of losing a life just doesn't seem like an apples-to-apples comparison to me, and that's a reality I think you need to kind of examine. Go to one of those funerals, go to one of those people that wished they could have not texted because they took a human life, and see what the reality is post-homicide. And I'm saying to you, for you to lose a couple of dollars and us to lose some tax revenue is well worth that cost to me. And if there was any doubt to where we are going to be on this vote, you have solidified it with your testimony, at least in my mind. I thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you, 195 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - DRIVING W/CELLPHONES Councilman. Any other questions for this witness? (No further questions.)
Anyone else who wishes to testify on this bill? (No response.)
Bill No. 090013, an ordinance amending Section 12-918 of the Philadelphia Code, entitled "Parking for Car-Sharing Organizations," by adding locations, all under certain terms and conditions. And Bill No. 090014, an ordinance amending the provisions of Section 12-918 of the Philadelphia Code, which regulates the provision of on-street parking restricted to vehicles 196 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - CAR-SHARING PARKING owned by car-sharing organizations. (Witnesses come forward.)
Is there anyone here from the Parking Authority? (No response.)
Thank you, gentlemen, for waiting. I know it's been a long day. But, nonetheless, I'm sure you found it entertaining or interesting. We were hoping -- we thought we would have somebody from the Parking Authority here. So proceed with your testimony, and then we'll take it from there.
I guess, for the record, my name is Eli Master, and I'm the acting executive director of PhillyCarShare. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, as you know, my name is Eli 197 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - CAR-SHARING PARKING Master. On behalf of the board, staff, and thousands of Philadelphia businesses and residents who share the cost-savings and conveniences of our services, I would like to thank you for your considerable support of PhillyCarShare. I would also like to particularly thank you, Councilman DiCicco, for your longstanding leadership on car-sharing issues. Yours and the committee's and the Council's efforts have been integral to our success and have enabled us to become the nation's largest regional car-sharing organization as well as the national model first mentioned by other cities looking to create car-sharing in their communities. I'm grateful for the opportunity to testify today in support of Bill No. 21 090014, which introduces a fair competitive environment for publicly- owned car-sharing spaces. I'm also here to testify today on Bill No. 090013, which designates 198 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - CAR-SHARING PARKING PhillyCarShare pods at 200 Moore Street, south side; 1100 Catharine Street, on the north side; and 700 McClellan Street, on the north side. As you may know, (indiscernible) have already gained the community support with the well-established current administrative and legislative process. As many of you already know, PhillyCarShare serves the residents and businesses of nine out of the City's ten Council districts by providing the nation's least expensive and barrier-free access to care-sharing. We currently maintain approximately 400 cars in our fleet, every single one of which is, and always has been, repaired in Philadelphia. Our collision repairs are done in South Philadelphia. We support local businesses through our Key to the City promotional program, ninety percent of our vehicles are leased from companies within the region, our insurance agent is 199 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - CAR-SHARING PARKING within the region, our first office was in West Philadelphia space that had been vacant and unimproved, and all of our banking is conducted at a local bank. I don't mention these local credentials because they make our vehicles drive better than our competitors; they don't. However, I do mention them because they attest to the superior economic impact that accrues to the City and is its residents from each PhillyCarShare reservation. Here's how. Because our rate structure is designed to promote the typical trip, like a run to the food store, a visit to a relative, or a work-related site visit, by using PCS, our members enjoy lower rates on the overwhelming majority of their trips, saving money for themselves or their companies, a critically important result in this economy. By using PCS, the majority of members' costs is recycled into the local economy, supporting spending and jobs 200 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - CAR-SHARING PARKING here in Philadelphia. By using PCS, a member directly supports almost 60 Philadelphia jobs at PCS, with at least 90 percent living in the City and an unknown number of indirect jobs at our local suppliers and vendors. And by using PCS, a member supports one of the most diverse workforces in the City. Eighty-five percent of our staff is comprised of women and/or minorities, 82 percent of our management is comprised of the same. Non-white minorities represent 54 percent of staff 45 percent of management. PhillyCarShare is very proud of these statistics, particularly because they are evidence that the often-maligned focus on proximity and diversity can be -- and in the case of car-sharing in Philly -- is the most competitive strategy. With regard to competition, please don't get me wrong. We're not opposed to it; in fact, we support it. 201 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS.
- CAR-SHARING PARKING To be sure, for years, as the only car-sharing organization interested in serving Philadelphia, we enjoyed our hundred percent market share. However, we are proud to point out that despite this monopoly, we did exploit it and, instead, maintained the nation's lowest prices. In the process, we broke the ground, proved the viability of car-sharing in Philly, and attracted other entrants into the market. But today, despite well-funded competition, we still maintain the best rates in the nation, and we still believe that a competitive market for car-sharing increases consumer choice and access to innovation. Consistent with our proven commitment to affordable car-sharing and our pro-competition philosophy, we believe that, particularly where there are public resources in involved, the concept of competition should be maintained. 202 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - CAR-SHARING PARKING More specifically, we support the strategy underlying Councilman DiCicco's Bill No. 090014 because it directs the appropriate administrative authorities to create a set of criteria under which PCS and our competitors can fairly compete for parking spaces based on our ability to serve the broadest definition of the Philadelphia market. Even by removing my PCS hat and thinking only as a local resident, I still support the bill, as it provides incentives for PCS to continue to serve diverse neighborhoods while simultaneously providing incentive for other entrants to begin to serve those neighborhoods. For a resident, the availability of more car-sharing in more places seems like a winning strategy. Because it institutionalizes a competitive but fair process for the long-term allocation of public parking space, PhillyCarShare supports Bill No. 25 090014 and encourages the committee to 203 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - CAR-SHARING PARKING bring it to a vote of the whole Council. Because it codifies spaces according to the existing process for on-street space creation, PhillyCarShare also supports Bill No. 090013 and encourages the committee to recommend adoption to the whole Council. Thank you for the opportunity to testify today, and I look forward to providing answers to your questions.
Thank you. Thank you for your testimony. Please proceed with your testimony.
Thank you. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. I'm Mark Norman, president of Zipcar, and I'd like to thank you for allowing me to present my testimony today in support of Bill No. 22 090014. This bill will allow Zipcar and the car-sharing category in general to effectively expand in all parts of the 204 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - CAR-SHARING PARKING City in such a way that it will benefit all of the residents of Philadelphia. By way of background, I'd like to point out that Zipcar has been in the business for nine years, and has had significant success with private and public partnerships between cities and agencies that we serve around the world. We've been an effective model in reducing car usage and ownership in urban areas, and because of it, we find ourselves growing in every market that we've entered. The last time appeared before this committee was in October, and we were concerned about the committee's decision to add additional parking spaces to benefit only one organization. As we said, the City should be concerned out creating an atmosphere in which car-sharing as a category can flourish rather than favoring one company over another or promoting nonprofit versus for-profit car-sharing. 205 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - CAR-SHARING PARKING As PhillyCarShare does, Zipcar takes cars off the road, reduces driving by our members, increases the use of mass transit, reduces greenhouse gas emissions, and saves people money. We're pleased to be back before you today to talk about what we believe to be an appropriate response to our concerns with the bill introduced by Chairman DiCicco. In general, it's a significant step in creating the kind of level playing field that will allow car-sharing to flourish even more widely in Philadelphia. We have one particular concern with the bill as originally drafted, however. Section 7 says that "no permit shall be revoked and reissued to a competing auto-sharing organization for the same location or block face." Given the current makeup of where we are with on-street parking, it could conceivably leave room for abuse 206 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - CAR-SHARING PARKING between both companies, but I know there's been great work by you, Mr. Chairman, and the committee taking interest in this and crafting proposed amendments. So one other comment I had related to Section 8 of the bill 9 supporting collaboration jointly with us and PhillyCarShare and the Parking Authority. As we understand it, the Parking Authority will be responsible for adopting and implementing these regulations, so I'd ask the committee to allow both PhillyCarShare and Zipcar to be a part of this process to produce the best, most fair, and open result. We're the largest car-sharing company in the world, and PhillyCarShare is the largest in the City. Together, we have many partnerships, and we believe our combined and expertise can serve as a value added to the Parking Authority's deliberation. 207 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - CAR-SHARING PARKING With that said and in closing, we're committed to Philadelphia. We have every intention of growing our business here. And with the passage of Bill 6 090014, we will. Thanks again for your time. And I'd be happy to answer any questions.
Thank you. We have other folks to be testifying, I believe? Yes. Why don't we get all of the testimony and then we'll take questions. Whoever is next. (Witness comes forward.)
My name is James Callahan. I'm a regional vice president with Enterprise Rent-a-Car, and several of the branches that I manage are located in the City of Philadelphia. Councilman DiCicco and members of the Committee on Streets and Services, 208 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - CAR-SHARING PARKING thank you for allowing me to give testimony on Bill No. 090014. Enterprise has been doing business in the City of Philadelphia for nearly years. We have locations 7 and employ more than 350 people in the 8 City. We also spend more than 9 $10 million annually in Philadelphia 10 through a variety of taxes and fees. 11 Enterprise recently created 12 nearly 100 jobs in the City when we moved 13 our regional office from a neighboring 14 suburb into the City of Philadelphia. 15 We are very proud of the 16 commitment we have made in Philadelphia, 17 and we look forward to expanding our 18 presence in years to come. 19 In addition, our staff at the 20 highest level is very involved with 21 organizations that provide invaluable 22 services to the City. Our general 23 manager, Vita Keys, serves as vice chair 24 of the Urban League, and many of our 25 employees serve on the leadership forum 209 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - CAR-SHARING PARKING of this organization. Also, Mr. Keys is on the cabinet of the United Way. I also wanted to take this opportunity to highlight our strong environmental platform. Enterprise has the world's vehicles fleet of fuel-efficient vehicles. We have over 60,000 hybrids and flex fuel vehicles in the United States. More than ten percent of our Philadelphia branches are hybrid-specific branches, where we provide a wide selection of fuel-efficient vehicles. In addition, Enterprise recently planted trees in Fairmount Park as 18 part of our national pledge to plant 19 50 million trees over a period of 50 20 years. 21 I come before the committee 22 today to share our concerns with 23 Councilman DiCicco's Bill No. 090014, 24 which pertains to parking spaces for 25 auto-sharing organizations. As currently 210 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - CAR-SHARING PARKING written, the bill creates an advantage for so-called car-sharing organizations over other companies in the form of free parking spaces. Enterprise, which provides many of the same services as these car-sharing companies, should have the same City-provided opportunities afforded these companies. We've met with Councilman DiCicco regarding the issue, and we really do appreciate his willingness to examine the topic. I've submitted language to the committee that amends the definition of "auto-sharing organizations," and we believe this would resolve this disparity and level the playing field, which, in the end, benefits all customers. Enterprise believes that it has a strong case to make on the issue, in large part, because of our history. If I may digress for a moment. The company you now know as Enterprise Rent-A-Car actually started as a leasing 211 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - CAR-SHARING PARKING company in 1957. After a couple of short years, our daily rental service began as a result of the our leasing customers' need for temporary vehicles while their vehicle was being serviced. As a leasing business group, so did the rental business. Therefore, our daily rental service began in neighborhoods, renting to local customers who had temporary needs. Their vehicles were being serviced or they needed a larger vehicle for a special occasion, or some didn't own vehicles at all. These are still the same needs that we are meeting today. It is serving these local customers and doing it better than anyone else that has allowed us to grow into the largest rent-a-car company in the country. To put this in perspective, we began the daily rental business in 1962. It was 32 years later before Enterprise entered the airport market. So you can say that Enterprise created and built the 212 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS.
- CAR-SHARING PARKING local rental-car market, a market in which car-sharing companies participate today. We welcome that, as we welcome competition, because that is good for the consumer. But that competition must be fair. And that is why I am here today, because of fairness. The current bill 10 you have today is simply not fair, in our opinion. The government should not be in the business of picking winners and losers. Enterprise provides the same services as car-sharing organizations. We offer hourly rentals, we make cars available at convenient locations, and we rent flex fuel and hybrid vehicles. We've been renting to the City residents who did not only a vehicle for years, certainly longer than car-sharing companies. Our prices are very competitive and, in some case, are even better than those of car-sharing companies, although 213 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - CAR-SHARING PARKING we do not charge membership fees as some of them do. We build and grow business by listening to our customers. Therefore, we are committed to making it very convenient for our customers to use our vehicles, even if it means meeting them at a designated parking spot in the City to deliver the keys to the vehicle. Enterprise's locations in the City are open seven days a week, and we provide services to our commerce over a wide range of hours each day. In short, we are very accessible on weekends as well as evenings. In closing, I would once again like to state that this is an issue of fairness. Exclusively providing car- sharing companies with valuable parking spaces in the City puts others, including Enterprise, at a competitive disadvantage. If the City were considering a tax reduction, would the City reduce the 214 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - CAR-SHARING PARKING salaries tax for customers at Sam's Club or at Cosco but not for customers at Target? We find ourselves competing with these organizations more than ever for daily, corporate, and governmental business. All that we ask is that the competition for the business be fair and let the market pick who should receive the business and not the government. Thank you again for allowing me the opportunity to provide testimony. And I'd be happy to answer any questions.
Thank you, Mr. Callahan. Is there anyone else here testifying on this bill? (No response.)
Look, as you know, Mr. Callahan, we did have a conversation in my office about a week ago, which was about the 2nd or 3rd. (Cellphone rings.) And all cellphones off, please. 215 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - CAR-SHARING PARKING Thank you.
All of you serve a great purpose to the citizens of this city and other municipalities where you have your businesses. And all of you employ people -- some more than others -- in the City of Philadelphia businesses. You're good businesses and you pay your taxes and employ people, which helps our economy. We've been trying to figure out a way in which we can accommodate everyone's needs. I mean, there are other rental agencies, automobile rental agencies that are out there that are for-profit that have similar concerns as Enterprise, and I do recognize this. While I will ask for this bill's passage today, I'm on the record committing that I will continue to work with you folks to try to figure out a way 216 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - CAR-SHARING PARKING in which we can accommodate you. Last week, I went out to 12th and Sansom, as an example, and I wanted to figure out a way in which I could designate a spot without opening up a can of worms and defeat what I think is everyone's best intention about providing a unique service and not have all of our limited on-street parking spaces taken up by entities, by business entities, whether they are for profit or not for profit, is a challenge that I'm faced with. I do think we'll come up with something; what that is exactly, I don't know. But I'm confident that when we continue to work through this and work with the Parking Authority and the Streets Department that we will be able to figure a way in which we can get you some of the exposure that you're entitled to and deserve. So you have my commitment on that. 217 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - CAR-SHARING PARKING And we don't have copies of your testimony, do we, Mr. Callahan?
Yeah, I'd like to have those 'cause I want to go through those as well so that the committee will have an opportunity to look through that testimony as well. I do appreciates you all coming in. I will apologize again, as I apologized earlier for cancelling the last Streets and Services Committee meeting. I know that some of you came from distances outside of the City of Philadelphia, so I do appreciate it. And we will get back to you on that. Thank you.
Any questions from this committee? (No questions or comments.)
Hearing none, if Councilman Jones is listening, we need you down here shortly so that we 218 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - CAR-SHARING PARKING can get these bills out of committee. Please come back to the chambers. In the meantime, Mr. Abernathy, please read the titles of the next bills. Thank you, gentlemen.
Bill 090009, an ordinance establishing a parking regulation on 27th Street, west side, Allegheny Avenue to Clearfield Street. Bill No. 090010, an ordinance 13 authorizing a parking regulation on Arnold Street, west side, Midvale Avenue, to no outlet. Bill No. 090011, an ordinance 17 establishing a parking regulation on Hirst Street, west side, Arch Street to Market Street. Bill No. 090017, an ordinance 21 establishing a parking regulation on Moore Street, both sides, 12th to 13th Street. Bill No. 090018, an ordinance 25 establishing a parking regulation on 219 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - CAR-SHARING PARKING Morris Street, both sides, Broad Street to 13th Street. Bill No. 090019, an ordinance 5 establishing a parking regulation on Ellsworth Street, both sides, 12th Street to 11th Street. Bill No. 090020, an ordinance 9 establishing a parking regulation on Federal Street, both sides, 12th Street to 13th Street. Bill No. 09021, an ordinance 13 establishing a parking regulation on Clarion Street, west side, Federal Street to no outlet. Bill No. 090022, an ordinance 17 establishing a parking regulation on Sartain Street, east side, McKean Street to Mifflin Street. Bill No. 090023, an ordinance 21 establishing a parking regulation on Seventh Street, both sides, Carpenter Street to Christian Street. Bill No. 090024, an ordinance 25 establishing a parking regulation on 220 3/24/09 - STREETS/SVCS. - CAR-SHARING PARKING Packer Avenue, north side, 16th Street to 17th Street. Bill No. 090025, an ordinance 5 establishing a parking regulation on Tasker Street, north side, 11th Street to 12th Street. Bill No. 090026, an ordinance 9 establishing a parking regulation on Darrah Street, both sides, Brill Street to Bridge Street. * * * 221 3/23/09 - STREETS & SERVICES PUBLIC MEETING
Okay. The public hearing on the Committee on Streets and Services will now move into the public meeting. And the Chair recognizes Councilman Greenlee, who will read off a list of all of the bills that are being recommended for approval.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I move that the following bills, 090001, 090002, 090009, 090010, 090011, 090013, 090015, 090017, 090018, 090019, 090020, 090021, 090022, 090023, 090024, 090025, 090026, 090070, 090076, 090120, 090121, 090126, and 090129 be reported out of committee with a favorable recommendation, and move further that the rules of Council be suspended so as to allow for first reading at our next session of Council. (Motion duly seconded.)
It has been properly moved and seconded that all of 222 3/23/09 - STREETS & SERVICES PUBLIC MEETING the bills that have just been read into the record be reported out of committee with a favorable recommendation and that the rules of Council be suspended. Those in favor will signify by saying aye. Those opposed? The ayes have it. The chair recognizes Councilman Greenlee for the amended bills.
Mr. Chairman, I move the approval of the amendment to Bill No. 080645. (Motion duly seconded.)
It has been properly moved and seconded that the amendment to Bill No. 080645 be approved. All in favor will signify by saying aye. Those opposed? The amendment is approved.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I move that Bill No. 080645, as 223 3/23/09 - STREETS & SERVICES PUBLIC MEETING amended, be reported out of this committee with a favorable recommendation and further that the rules be suspended so as to allow for first reading at our next session of Council. (Motion duly seconded.)
It's been properly moved and seconded that Bill No. 10 080645, as amended, be reported out of this committee with a favorable recommendation and that the rules of Council be suspended. All in favor will signify by saying aye. Those opposed? The bill is approved. Councilman Greenlee.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I move the amendment to Bill No. 22 090014. (Motion duly seconded.)
It has been properly moved and seconded that the 224 3/23/09 - STREETS & SERVICES PUBLIC MEETING amendment to Bill No. 090014 be approved. All in favor of the motion signify by saying aye. Those opposed? The amendment's approved. Councilman Greenlee.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I move that Bill No. 090014, as amended, be reported out of this committee with a favorable recommendation and that the rules of Council be suspended so as to allow for first reading at our next session of Council. (Motion duly seconded.)
It has been properly moved and seconded that Bill No. 19 090014, as amended, be reported out of this committee with a favorable recommendation and that the rules of Council be suspended All in favor will signify by saying aye. Those opposed? The ayes have it. 225 3/23/09 - STREETS & SERVICES PUBLIC MEETING This concludes the public meeting on the Committee of Streets and Services. Thank you all for attending. (Proceedings end at 1:15 p.m.) * * * 226 C E R T I F I C A T E I HEREBY CERTIFY that the proceedings of the City of Philadelphia Council Committee on Streets and Services are contained fully and accurately in the stenographic notes taken by me on Tuesday, March 24, 2009, and that this is a true and correct statement of same. __________________________________ JOSEPHINE CARDILLO Registered Professional Reporter (The foregoing certification of this transcript does not apply to any reproduction of the same by any means, unless under the direct control and/or supervision of the certifying reporter.)