COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA BUDGET HEARING BEFORE THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - - - Room 696, City Hall Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Monday, February 24, 2003 10:05 a.m. - - - Bill No. 030004: An Ordinance adopting the Operating Budget for Fiscal Year 2004. Bill No. 030008: An Ordinance amending Section 10 19-2604 of the Philadelphia Code, relating to tax rates, credits, and alternative tax computation for the business privilege tax, by reducing certain tax rates, all under certain terms and conditions. Bill No. 030010: An Ordinance amending Section 13 19-1301 of The Philadelphia Code, entitled "Real Estate Taxes," by restating the rates of tax in tabular form. - - - PRESENT: COUNCILWOMAN ANNA C. VERNA, Chair COUNCILMAN DAVID COHEN COUNCILWOMAN BLONDELL REYNOLDS BROWN COUNCILMAN W. WILSON GOODE, JR. COUNCILMAN ANGEL L. ORTIZ COUNCILMAN FRANK RIZZO COUNCILMAN FRANK DiCICCO COUNCILWOMAN JANNIE L. BLACKWELL COUNCILMAN MICHAEL A. NUTTER COUNCILMAN DARRELL L. CLARKE COUNCILWOMAN DONNA REED MILLER COUNCILWOMAN MARIAN B. TASCO COUNCILMAN BRIAN J. O'NEILL V A R A L L O Incorporated Litigation Support Services Eleven Penn Center Plaza, Suite 600 Philadelphia, PA 19103 (215) 561-2220 I N D E X BILLS 030004, 030008, 030010 Joyce S. Wilkerson, Chief of Staff, Mayor John F. Street-------------------------------- Rob Dubow, Budget Director---------------------- 19 William B. Grab, Director, Mayor's Office of Labor Relations------------------------------- 94 Delia Gorman, Deputy Director, Labor Relations-- 107 Joseph Tolan, Deputy Director, Labor Relations-- 154 Dianah L. Neff, Chief Information Officer, MOIS- 157 Jim Cray, Director of Enterprise, GIS----------- 169 Howard Baker, First Deputy, CIO----------------- 173 Ralph P. Blakney, Executive Director, MOCS------ 208 Eva Gladstein, Executive Director, Empowerment Zone, MOCS------------------------------------ 210 Leon Simmons, Director, Supportive Work Program, MOCS------------------------------------------ 214 Malik Aziz, Safe Schools, Safer Communities Program, MOCS--------------------------------- 218 Steven Blackburn, Director, Frankford Family Development Center, MOCS---------------------- 247 Gilbert Coleman, Director, Fatherhood Initiative, MOCS------------------------------ 263 Odessa Clarkson, Director, Community Services, MOCS------------------------------------------ 272 Phyllis Royal, Director, Foster Grandparent Program, MOCS--------------------------------- 273 Terry Flores, Fiscal Officer, MOCS-------------- 291 Kevin Hanna, Secretary of Housing & Neighborhood Preservation, Office of Housing & Community Development----------------------------------- 308 Deborah McColloch, Director, Housing, Office of Housing & Community Development--------------- 310 Roderick Lyles, Fiscal Officer, OHCD------------ 321 - - - 3 BILLS 030004, 030008, 030010 - 2/24/03
Good morning, everyone. This is the Public Hearing of the Committee of the Whole regarding Bill Nos. 030004, 030008, 030010. I would ask Mr. McPherson to please read the titles of the bills.
Bill No. 030004, an Ordinance adopting the Operating Budget for Fiscal Year 2004; Bill No. 030008, an Ordinance amending Section 19-2604 of the Philadelphia Code, relating to tax rates, credits, and alternative tax computation for the business privilege tax, by reducing certain tax rates, all under certain terms and conditions; Bill No. 030010, an Ordinance 16 amending Section 19-1301 of The Philadelphia Code, entitled "Real Estate Taxes," by restating the rates of tax in tabular form.
Good morning. I am Joyce Wilkerson, Chief of Staff for the Mayor. I am here to present testimony for the Office of the Mayor. I would like to thank you for this 4 BILLS 030004, 030008, 030010 - 2/24/03 opportunity to provide testimony regarding Fiscal Year 2004 Operating Budget for the Office of the Mayor. The total amount requested for the Mayor's Office from the General Fund for Fiscal Year 2004 is $3,983,407, a decrease of $704,097 from FY '03 estimated obligations. Of this total amount, $3,783,407 is for employee compensation and purchase of services, materials, supplies, and equipment, the largest portion of the request. The Class 100 appropriation includes $2,905,763 for 48 positions and represents a decrease of $681,717 from FY 2003 estimated obligations. The 48 positions represent a reduction of positions from the authorized level of FY 19 2003. And the request in Class 100 appropriation reflects a 19 percent reduction. There is also a reduction of $18,891 in Class 200 appropriations and 3,489 in Class 300/400 appropriation. The remaining portion of the General Fund, totaled $200,000, is for City Scholarships. 5 BILLS 030004, 030008, 030010 - 2/24/03 This amount will continue the existing Mayor's Office Scholarship Program for Philadelphia students who attend classes at area colleges and universities. The Grants Revenue request for FY 2004 is $4,460,049, an increase of $1,454,209 from FY 2003 estimated obligations. This figure principally reflects state and federal grants to the Mayor's Commission on Aging and the Mayor's Commission on Literacy. The grants will enable funding for occupational training for older adults, literacy programs for the community, and staff support for the Mayor's Action center and the Office of Transportation. The Mayor's Office is taking the current physical situation very seriously. The dramatic reduction in positions reflects our understanding that we must focus our efforts on our core activities and makes sacrifices. The Mayor's Office staff will be expected to work more productively and will hopefully serve as a model for the rest of government as we all look for ways to become more 6 BILLS 030004, 030008, 030010 - 2/24/03 effective and efficient. You will be hearing from the Mayor's Office of Community Service, the Office of Housing and Community Development, Office of Labor Relations, and the Mayor's Office of Informational Services for their Fiscal 2004 operating budget requests later in these hearings. I would like to thank you for your support, and I will be happy to answer any questions you may have.
Thank you. Do any members have questions of Ms. Wilkerson? The Chair recognizes Councilman Nutter.
Thank you, Madam President. Good morning, Ms. Wilkerson.
In the testimony, you make reference to, it says, the largest portion of this request, the Class 100 appropriation, includes $2.9 million for 48 positions and represents a decrease of the FY '03 obligations. It later goes on to talk about a 7 BILLS 030004, 030008, 030010 - 2/24/03 reduction of 19 positions from the authorized level for FY '03. Who are the 19 people?
We will be announcing the 19 later on this week. The Mayor committed to doing it within 30 days of his budget address.
I am sorry. I was 11 mixing two things. 12 The Mayor committed to announcing the 13 50. Those are actual people. The 19 reductions 14 includes some that were positions that aren't 15 currently filled. 16
Okay. How many of 17 the 19 represent actual people? 18
That would be included 19 in the 50? I don't have that actual number at this point.
Let me make sure I am understanding. Are the 19 a part of the 50?
Some portion of them will be. 8 BILLS 030004, 030008, 030010 - 2/24/03
There are some positions that are currently vacant that won't be filled. There will be additional positions that will be eliminated, or positions that employees that will be terminated. What we have done in the budget is, identify a target number out of the General Fund that would be absorbed by the Mayor's Office. Exactly, you know, which positions, which individuals will be laid off, we have not finalized that list yet.
I understand that. But maybe what I was not understanding was your response. I asked you whether the positions 18 were all a part of the larger 50 positions that the 19 Mayor announced at his budget address, I believe, 50 positions across three branches -- I am sorry, three departments of the government; the Mayor's Office, Managing Director's Office, and the Finance Office. Is that what the Mayor said back at the budget address ?
The Mayor said that he 9 Bill Nos. 030004, 030008, and 030010 - 2/24/03 would eliminate -- the 50 positions would be terminated. It is in the Finance Department, the Mayor's Office, the Managing Director's Office, and then there are some positions that are being eliminated from one of the delivery departments. The positions are not -- 8
All right. So now 13 it is 50 positions across four departments? 14
Okay. So my 16 question was, the 50 positions are across the now 17 four departments, although back at the budget 18 address on January 28, the Mayor's statement reads, 19 "Within the next 30 days I will eliminate 50 Administration positions mostly in the Mayor's Office, the Finance Department, and the Managing Director's Office. So my question was, the 19 from the Mayor's Office, are they from the larger universe of 50? 10 Bill Nos. 030004, 030008, and 030010 - 2/24/03
Some. Some portion of them are; not all of them. The positions that were vacant, unfilled positions, are not part of the 50. So, you know, that portion of the 7 that are not filled positions are not part of the 50 8 that we intend to eliminate. 9
So when the Mayor's 10 address talked about 50 Administration positions, 11 you are talking about, actually, 50 people? 12
There may be a 14 larger number of positions, some of which are 15 unfilled? 16
All right. So for 18 the 19 positions, can you tell me how many are 19 actually filled and how many are vacant? Or are you saying that all 19 represent actual individuals?
Okay. Of the 19, how many represent people? 11 Bill Nos. 030004, 030008, and 030010 - 2/24/03
All right. I have got 2-10. You are saying 2-10 and 2-12?
If you go from the FY '03 to the '04-'05 position, you can see which positions are filled.
Okay. So, for 12 Bill Nos. 030004, 030008, and 030010 - 2/24/03 instance, on Line No. 3, Fiscal '03 budgeted positions, we have three assistant deputy mayor positions. And now you are showing for Fiscal '04, two?
I am sorry. I didn't hear the last thing you just said.
You have the Fiscal '03 budgeted. Then we also do a run in November that reflects if the position is filled at that point, and then we have the budgeted.
Okay. So let me make sure I am understanding. So we are really looking at Columns 5, 6, and 7; is that correct?
So in FY '03, when the budget was passed, you anticipated that there would be, in this example, three assistant deputy mayors. But when you did your run in November of 13 Bill Nos. 030004, 030008, and 030010 - 2/24/03 '02, this is now prior to the budget message, you found that there were only two positions filled?
Yes. Well, the Administration has had a hiring freeze for some time now, and so we have been working to constrain the size of government. And so, you know, positions were budgeted. You know, we have been taking austerity measures.
Sure. So let me make sure I understand the significance as we get to, then, Column 7. Are you then saying that you are anticipating in FY '04 that there will be the two positions, which I am making the assumption -- you will correct me if I am wrong -- that those two positions are actually filled?
I want to keep track of the one that changed from the start of the budget year to November. In the count of decrease in positions, are we including that one which was not filled as 14 Bill Nos. 030004, 030008, and 030010 - 2/24/03 far back as November as a decrease in positions?
No. The 50 that we are counting that the Mayor set as the benchmark would not be the one position that is held from the budgeted to the November run. When we made that statement, we were looking at people who were currently on payroll as of the beginning of the year.
Okay. And in this particular example, there were only two people on payroll, even though there were three positions designated?
So let's go back to the original question. The are active, filled positions, 18 people -- I am sorry. Some part of the 19 are not 19 active. What have the answer to that question?
The answer is, we are looking at -- some part of the 19 are positions that were not filled. Those unfilled positions are not part of the 50.
Got you. How many 15 Bill Nos. 030004, 030008, and 030010 - 2/24/03 of the 19 are not filled?
So of the that 9 are being eliminated, 12 are unfilled, and we 10 started the budget year with those in the budget. 11
And 7 are presently 13 filled. 14 And, so, for accounting purposes those 7 15 are a part of what the Mayor talked about, this 16 larger universe of 50? 17
Yes. We are still 18 refining, but it will be approximately that. 19
So there are actually seven people who presently work in the Mayor's Office, or who are listed in the budget books in the Mayor's Office, seven people will be -- now, are they being laid off or are they actually being terminated from the payroll?
They are being 16 Bill Nos. 030004, 030008, and 030010 - 2/24/03 terminated.
Okay. And I am assuming they are being classified as a layoff?
I don't know what the -- yes, they are being laid off, right.
Oh, they are in the other departments. They are in the -- I am sorry. I am not feeling well today. They are in the Managing Director's Office, the Finance Department. And then the Mayor, I believe, as you indicated, said mostly from those departments. Seven come out of the Health Department.
7 of the 50 are in 17 Bill Nos. 030004, 030008, and 030010 - 2/24/03 Health?
Tell me a little bit about the size of the Mayor's Office over the past two or three years in terms of number of filled positions. I am sorry. Strike that question for the moment. The 48 positions that you are showing for FY '04, are they all filled? The testimony says the 48 positions represent a reduction of 19 positions from the authorized level of FY '03, and the requested Class 100 appropriation reflects a 19 percent reduction.
The 48 positions, 18 Bill Nos. 030004, 030008, and 030010 - 2/24/03 are they all actually filled?
They are actually filled. Okay. What was the filled position level last year?
November '02. But that's still in FY '03. What was the filled position level for FY '02?
The year end for '02 was 63, I am sorry. The year end for FY '01 was 56. And the year end for '00 was 72.
I think you would have been on the other side at this time, but maybe Mr. Dubow knows. 19 Bill Nos. 030004, 030008, and 030010 - 2/24/03 What was the filled position level in FY '98?
Rob Dubow, the City's Budget Director. I would have to go get that information. I don't have it with me, the '98 level.
Well, let me ask this question: Was there any significant increase in hiring somewhere in the course of FY 2000 in the Mayor's Office?
Yes. This Administration undertook additional initiatives. Some of those positions are in the Mayor's Office. For example, as you will recall, the Home Rule Charter was changed in order to create additional responsibility for the Mayor in the area of education, and so this Administration has a Secretary of Education. And there are two support people working with Deborah Kahn. Those are three positions that did not exist in the previous Administration as a result of --
I remember that well. 20 Bill Nos. 030004, 030008, and 030010 - 2/24/03
Well, I mean, this is where some of it comes from, as a result of initiatives and responsibilities that change from Administration to Administration. The Mayor also defined as a major goal the Neighborhood Transformation Initiative. This Administration's approach to neighborhoods has been dramatically different. What we wanted to do and have been working to do is to realign government's approach in neighborhoods. And, so, some of the staff reflects increases as a result of that. And, so, I think as you move from Administration to Administration, you find differences in that regard. But those are just some of the positions that did not exist under the previous Administration. Also, Mr. Borrell's position with External Affairs is a new position. The Administration also created a Secretary of Boards and Commissions. The city has over a hundred boards and commissions that, as came out in testimony the other day, oversee various 21 Bill Nos. 030004, 030008, and 030010 - 2/24/03 functions of government. Yet, there is no real mechanism within government in order to coordinate and harness any of those activities that go on. And, so, the Administration established a secretary responsible for boards and commissions to try to better coordinate the activities.
In that regard -- which I hadn't quite asked this question, but you reminded me of something -- is it possible to get a list of all of the boards and commissions and the members of those commissions and whoever is in charge, Chair, Vice-Chair, secretary, executive director?
Thank you. With regard to the education issue -- and I certainly do remember that well -- given the change in governance, as the Mayor was certainly given that additional responsibility and the opportunity to appoint all of the members of the then Board of Education, now as a result of the Mayor's first discussions and then negotiations and then ultimate agreement to turn the schools over to 22 Bill Nos. 030004, 030008, and 030010 - 2/24/03 the state, is there still a need for that level of monitoring or oversight, since it would appear now that there's virtually no responsibility?
Of course it wasn't a decision to turn the schools over to the state. What the Administration has done is established a partnership between the city and the Commonwealth. And, so, there are two Mayor appointees on the SRC. There continues to be substantial involvement, day-to-day involvement. Some of what you have going on with the school district impacts the city in ways that are critical. For example, the CEO's initiative to create additional schools, to close some schools presents unique opportunities for the city to look at -- you know, as we talk about trying to right-size our facilities, one of the things we are looking at is whether some of those facilities ought to be housed in schools. The city also helps support beacon programs. There are a lot of areas of overlap between the school district and the city. And one of the things -- in addition to, you know, like the 23 Bill Nos. 030004, 030008, and 030010 - 2/24/03 financial affairs of the district. And, so, Debra Kahn remains no less involved in the affairs of the school district, in coordinating what's going on at the school district with the city. We also have a very complicated tax issue that is going on both at the state and locally which will impact on the school district. And, so, Debra Kahn is involved in addressing those issues for the Administration.
Councilman Nutter, there are other Council Members that would like to be recognized. So, if you don't mind.
I thought there might be. I will come back. Thank you.
You can continue on the second go-around. The Chair recognizes Councilman Cohen.
Thank you, Madam President. I am very concerned when we talk about a partnership with the state. And I kind of regard it as a bit insulting to the City of Philadelphia to tell its people we are in a partnership. 24 Bill Nos. 030004, 030008, and 030010 - 2/24/03 We have no control. The majority is with the state. The only thing we are continuing to do, we were able to continue to do, is to pay the tariff. And in that case we are still paying most of the tariff. It is true the state has added a little bit. We have added much more than the state has added, did it quicker. So let's not talk about partnership. Let's say the city has fundamentally lost a basic right. Until the Mayor turned over the schools to the state, the city was in control. We even tried to give the Mayor more control by an amendment, which I was very fearful of and actually opposed. Because I did not believe that the Mayor was willing to undertake the responsibility for the schools, and that he would want to divest himself of responsibility for the schools as soon as it became possible. And, in my judgment, that amendment made it much easier for the Mayor to turn it over the schools to the state. So let's not talk about a partnership. 25 Bill Nos. 030004, 030008, and 030010 - 2/24/03 We have no partnership. The state any time it can, any time it wants to, can run with the ball. And a big unsolved problem is, how do Philadelphians get control of the school? Maybe to this Administration it is just a semantic thing who has control. But I think it is a basic issue when the vote has been taken away from the people of Philadelphia, when they no longer have control of the school system and have turned it over to a Board which they have no control over. In fact, nobody seems to have control. It is true Paul Valis, in his first actions, seems to be doing a splendid job as school superintendent. But he ought to be responsible to the people of Philadelphia and not to a group of names that Philadelphians don't know much about and who are under the control of the state, if they are under anybody's control. When you read the state law under which the state took over the schools, it is hard to see any responsibility owed to anybody by the members of the School Reform Commission. But if I wanted to concede, I would have Bill Nos. 030004, 030008, and 030010 - 2/24/03 to concede, if they owe any responsibility to anybody, they owe it to the people at the state level and not at the city level. And I think that is a slight to the people of Philadelphia. You are telling the people of Philadelphia they have no right to control. Maybe they don't even have the ability to control. I don't know how more insulting it can be to a major city than to have total control taken away. So my suggestion to the Administration is, let's be honest and be open about it, and let's do something about restoring control. Paul Valis ought to owe his responsibility to us, not to unknown people at the state level. Thank you, Madam President.
Just a couple of clarifications on issues that Councilman Nutter raised. You said that of the 50 reductions of personnel, 7 of those 50 will come from the Health 27 Bill Nos. 030004, 030008, and 030010 - 2/24/03 Department?
And where in the Health Department are those seven coming from?
You are abolishing the Organizational Development Unit. And what did that unit do?
It was a unit inside the Health Department. And, according to the Health Department, it was supposed to help with developing the organization and help to get personnel issues. And it never really accomplished its goal, so it was abolished.
And they have no 3 function at all in terms of services to health centers or anything like that?
I think across the board what the Administration has tried to do is minimize any direct-service input. And, like with the administrative clusters, trying to handle more efficiently the work.
I'm not sure of the exact number. It was a few years. It had not been around a long time.
So it had been in existence for a lot of years and nobody knows what it ever did?
They didn't 29 Bill Nos. 030004, 030008, and 030010 - 2/24/03 accomplish anything? Nobody ever looked into it?
Because it didn't accomplish anything, that's why it is being abolished, that's right.
But if it didn't accomplish anything for so many years, then wouldn't somebody at least say, "Hey, guys, what are you doing"?
Well, maybe you are right, maybe it should have been abolished sooner.
So let me get it straight. You say positions. 14 Of those 19, 12, I would imagine 12, of 15 them are never been filled; is that true? 16
Yes. I would have to go back on each position and identify the last point where they were all filled.
Could you get us some 30 Bill Nos. 030004, 030008, and 030010 - 2/24/03 aspect? Because maybe positions were created, never filled. And then you come in and you say, "Well, we are eliminating these positions," but they were never filled.
I will try to give you something that will give you a more accurate snapshot. For example, when I have said that there is going to be seven fewer positions in the Mayor's Office, seven fewer people in the Mayor's Office, than there were previously, that's a net figure, because we will also be hiring some individuals. We had contracted out a large part of the Mayor's Communication Office. We've brought that back in-house. And, so, we have hired people for communications. So as you go through a year, you know, there are increases and decreases --
But you have a contract for communications with Mr. Keel. 31 Bill Nos. 030004, 030008, and 030010 - 2/24/03
No; that relationship no 3 longer exists. And, so, the Administration --
September, I believe. September, October. I don't have the exact time.
Does Mr. Keel still have contracts with the Administration?
I believe he has some with some other city departments. He is not doing the Mayor's communication.
Can you give detail to us and send to the Chair the contracts that Mr. Keel has with the Administration?
And the amount of contracts and what services is he to provide?
So how many people did you add in terms of communications?
There have -- I believe there are three communication positions that have 32 Bill Nos. 030004, 030008, and 030010 - 2/24/03 been added.
Ms. Grant is added. There is a Mr. Avery, and then there is a receptionist position that is added to the office. And so my point in saying that is that, when you talk about how many of these positions were filled, you know, during the course of the year you might have a position filled, unfilled, you might be replacing it. And, so... But we will provide you with a report that attempts to detail that.
In the Class 200, what is the total appropriations for the Class 200? You explained that there is a reduction of $18,000.
On page -- if you start on -13, you will see all the items that go into our Class 200.
And that total is being reduced from the previous year by $18,000? 33 Bill Nos. 030004, 030008, and 030010 - 2/24/03
Thank you, Madam President. I want to follow up on the statement that Councilman Ortiz just ended with in terms of the Class 200. Looking at -16 in the book, I notice there are some expenditures for NTI. Why are they coming out of the Mayor's budget, as opposed to the NTI budget?
The NTI budget largely funds acquisition, disposition, programmatic costs. We are not funding administrative costs out of the NTI bond proceeds. And so, for example, we are using the reinvestment funds to provide consulting services. And that's coming out of the General Fund, and not the bond proceeds.
The project manager for 34 Bill Nos. 030004, 030008, and 030010 - 2/24/03 the demolition is coming out of the bond proceeds.
Now, I know we have a need for lobbying in Washington and Harrisburg, but we have five lobbying firms. What does that buy us?
The Administration has had a very, very, very active lobbying year in Harrisburg over the course of the last year. And I think that we have had a deluge of challenges, both in tax matters with -- we have had our own agenda, we have had an NTI-related agenda that we have been moving. There have just been a whole host of issues that the City has had to be engaged in over the year. And, so, we have had lobbyists working with us in Harrisburg on our specific agenda. We have also been watching out for PGW issues. We, at the federal level, are continuously monitoring the federal budget. We are always trolling for discretionary funds that may be available. We work to keep our legislative delegations apprised of what's going on. And some 35 Bill Nos. 030004, 030008, and 030010 - 2/24/03 of those relationships are -- some of the consultants that you see identified help us manage those relationships.
Other than the very visible newspaper stories about activities in Harrisburg, and which are much more visible than your other agenda items, have you been successful in moving that agenda forward, the nonhigh-profile, visible like the Convention Center, the Parking Authority, those things? How effective have these people been with your other agenda items?
I think we have won some and we have lost some. I think the larger story, in some respects, is what didn't happen. Everybody knows about the Parking Authority, the Convention Center. But there were, you know, several tax bills that could have been devastating for the city. Those did not happen. The city was involved in lobbying to reform the KOZ legislation. That didn't get a lot of exposure. You know, there have been a number of issues. And I can develop a report, if you would 36 Bill Nos. 030004, 030008, and 030010 - 2/24/03 like, that talks about the City's involvement in Harrisburg and what we saw as some of the major challenges and how we fared with respect to those.
I want to go back to the seven staff people in the Health Department. Those are staff positions that will not have any impact on the delivery of services to our constituents?
They will not impact the health centers, the delivery of services at the health centers. I can have the Health Department prepare a report on why that department, why that unit was created, what they accomplished over the time period, and what the rationale is for its elimination.
Well, I think when they come to us, they should be prepared to address that. And if it is not enough, we will get a report. We don't need a report.
Thank you. 37 Bill Nos. 030004, 030008, and 030010 - 2/24/03 The Chair recognizes Councilman Nutter.
Thank you, Madam President. Councilwoman Tasco was in -16. And when I looked at that, saw a few items that I wanted to ask you a question about. What was the investigation by Donnigan Security Associates?
Those are services provided to the Inspector General's Office. The Inspector General at any given point in time will be conducting forensic audits, those kinds of activities. We don't have people on staff that do that. We don't have that expertise on staff. And so from time to time we will use outside consulting security.
The Inspector General now is William Gill. William Gill, as you know, Benjamin Redman retired. William Gill comes to the city from the department of -- for a long part of his career he 38 Bill Nos. 030004, 030008, and 030010 - 2/24/03 was with the Department of the Treasury.
How many people work in the Inspector General's Office?
The Inspector General has three full-time individuals in his office. We have consulting services provided by Donnigan, and then there is some supportive work that is also provided by, I believe, the District Attorney's Office.
Is Donnigan, I mean, an actual security firm or are they more an investigative? I mean, do they have, like, armed guards? Or, what kind of firm is this?
No. I believe that we contract with them for auditing, forensic auditing type services, as opposed to private-eye type services.
Carl Ludi was part of the Administration's communications office at one point. He is not with us anymore, or we are not contracting with him anymore. 39 Bill Nos. 030004, 030008, and 030010 - 2/24/03