No, we don't.25 106 2/17/11 - HOUSING - RES. 1008801 Licenses, when we issue a license, that2 is an inferred or implied agreement that3 you have with the City as the landlord4 that you will abide by whatever the code5 requirements are. We don't inspect every6 single -- there's 60,000 rental7 properties out there. We can't possibly8 inspect every single rental property9 prior to the issuance of a license. When10 we get complaints, we go out and11 investigate the complaints on a12 particular property, and we would cite13 the property owner accordingly in14 accordance with whatever violation of the15 code there is. We have to work that16 through the court process. If in fact17 the violations were so egregious, we18 would seek to revoke or suspend that19 license.20 But, as you know, even with the21 taking of a license doesn't mean that it22 will stay taken. The person would afford23 themselves the right to appeal that24 situation to either an administrative25 107 2/17/11 - HOUSING - RES. 1008801 board or they could appeal directly to2 the Common Pleas Court, in which case if3 there's a court order or an injunction,4 then we would have to abide by the court5 order or injunction.6
Because7 there were so many of these renters'8 licenses in a particular name, when you9 have massive complaints with a particular10 person who has a renter's license, at11 what point do you say, Wait a minute,12 there's a pattern?13
If we receive a14 complaint, especially if it's a systemic15 complaint about a particular person who16 owns several properties, we would17 institute whatever necessary procedure18 that we have in place to bring that19 person in. We have to conduct an20 administrative hearing first prior to21 taking that license. So, again, because22 once you take the license, the person can23 further go with whatever proceedings they24 have to go through to get that license25 108 2/17/11 - HOUSING - RES. 1008801 back. So we have to make sure that we do2 everything, cross our T's and dot our3 I's, because, again, there has to be a4 record as to what steps we took prior to5 taking that license. We would go through6 the administrative hearing process. If7 we find that the case is warranted, we8 would suspend, revoke the license. And,9 again, if the person afforded themselves10 the right to appeal that, we would wait11 for the judgment of either the courts or12 the board that will hear that appeal.13
And what14 triggers that? One of the things that15 we've been talking about today, there's16 been so many of these, and when we look17 at the cases, is that by policy? Who18 makes the determination that we have a19 bad landlord out there?20
Well, in this21 case, like I said, there's -- like I22 said, I've listened to all the testimony,23 and there seems to be some questionable24 issues related to whether or not there's25 109 2/17/11 - HOUSING - RES. 1008801 a landlord-tenant relationship here,2 there's an ownership relationship here.3 There's a lot of murkiness about whether4 or not there's really any -- a lot of5 these things have even come to our6 attention as part of a rental property7 issue as opposed to some other issue.8 There's a lot of questionable issues9 about who owns these properties and10 whether or not persons who thought they11 might have owned the property might have12 complained to us.13
Excuse14 me one moment.15 Rob Hess, who was head of our16 Office of Housing and Supportive17 Services, our homeless services, is18 certainly here. He's sneaking around in19 this hall, and we have to acknowledge20 him. He went to New York to head their21 Welfare Department, and now he's with22 Ready, Willing and Able.23 Always a pleasure to see you.24
Thank you,25 110 2/17/11 - HOUSING - RES. 1008801 Councilwoman.2
So, like I said,6 if the issues are brought to our7 attention, then we would address it8 immediately. We have a policy to inspect9 properties within a certain timeframe.10 It's not that long. It's within a week.11 We would cite the property owner for12 whatever the violations are. Then we13 would have to give them a reasonable time14 period to correct those violations. If15 they don't correct it, then we have16 another policy that we would do a17 reinspection. At the end of the final18 inspection that we would do on the19 property, if the property still hasn't20 been corrected after the third21 inspection, then we would send that case22 to court for prosecution.23
No, no.24 I'm aware of your process. I'm just25 111 2/17/11 - HOUSING - RES. 1008801 thinking from a policy perspective, at2 what point in L&I does something trigger3 there's a pattern here, if we have the4 capacity to do that? So, again, if you5 have five or six or seven properties and6 one name that are being inspected because7 of some of the same pattern of8 violations, is that too open-ended in9 terms of when L&I proceeds to --10
I want12 to acknowledge Bridget came in.13 (Witness approached witness14 table.)15
I'm16 trying to figure out, just because this17 particular caseload seems so egregious,18 that at what point is the pattern19 connected, other than someone openly20 saying, Robert Coyle is a slumlord in21 Kensington, can somebody do something22 about it?23
Hello. Sorry24 for being late. I was in another25 112 2/17/11 - HOUSING - RES. 1008801 meeting.2 Bridget Collins-Greenwald with3 the Managing Director's Office, but I was4 formerly the Deputy Commissioner of L&I5 in the Operations Division.6 I believe your question is when7 would we notice a pattern if there was a8 slumlord, quote/unquote? Is that what9 you said? The way the system is set up10 right now in the L&I database, actually11 there is no way to actually coordinate12 something with a unique identifier, such13 as a name. The way things that are put14 into the database now, it could be J.15 Coyle, Joe Coyle, Coyle, Coyle16 Incorporated. You know what I mean?17 Depending on how the data entry went in18 depends -- is how it went in. So there's19 actually no way to coordinate.20 Now, what L&I is doing going21 forward, though, is every license is22 going to be tied to the business23 privilege tax number. So this situation24 going forward should not happen. But,25 113 2/17/11 - HOUSING - RES. 1008801 unfortunately, it did happen in the past,2 because if you keep using these different3 names, it's kind of hard to hit a moving4 target type of deal. That's what5 happened in this case.6
That's7 what I wanted to get to, the fact that we8 didn't have a mechanism of tracking this,9 but moving forward, so we will be able to10 track this. What's the trigger point?11
The trigger12 point -- well, the unique identifier will13 be -- it's not in place yet, because this14 is a technology priority of Commissioner15 Burns -- is to have everything connected16 at a business privilege tax number. So17 once we get that and once L&I would get18 that and police, then if you would start19 to see patterns, you could do queries off20 of that tax number and you could see --21 which in turn would be off of that22 business privilege license, which in turn23 would go down to the housing inspection24 licenses and so on, and that could25 114 2/17/11 - HOUSING - RES. 1008801 trigger, Okay, this tax number has this2 many violations. What you could run the3 query on is, Give me all the tax4 identification numbers that have over a5 certain amount of violations, and then6 you could go from there.7 So I don't know exactly what8 the threshold would be right now, but I9 would assume that would be a good start,10 and that's exactly what we were talking11 about before when I was still in L&I. So12 I think that's definitely the way Fran13 would continue.14
Okay.15 Thank you.16 One last thing, and I know my17 colleague wants to ask some questions.18 How much does it cost us to conduct an19 inspection from L&I?20
I would have to21 say that depends on the type of22 inspection. An average inspection we23 would say takes approximately 30 minutes24 to an hour for a good inspection. A25 115 2/17/11 - HOUSING - RES. 1008801 property maintenance inspection, which2 would occur in this place, a housing3 inspector makes probably $35,000 a year.4 A few hundred dollars. I mean, I could5 definitely get you a better number on6 that, but a few hundred dollars, I would7 say, including fringe and all.8
How much9 does it cost us to do a clean and seal?10
And then16 when we take someone to Equity Court,17 after we do the reinspect, the 30-day18 reinspect and then we go to Equity Court?19
We have to factor20 in whatever the Law Department's costs21 are, their attorneys that would represent22 us in Equity Court, and any other23 administrative costs we would add to24 that.25 116 2/17/11 - HOUSING - RES. 1008801
There's an2 administrative fee that's tacked right3 on, a 21 percent administrative fee that4 goes on automatically. And then whatever5 abatement costs or whatever, the cost of6 the equipment goes on there, whatever the7 actual personnel costs go on there, any8 supplies that were used go into that9 bill. And then if it's for a demolition,10 it's the contractor's costs, plus the 2111 percent.12
Seventeen.15 COUNCILWOMAN SANCHEZ:16 Seventeen to 19,000.17 My point with this is, it's18 fair to say we could easily spend $1,50019 on each one of these properties if we do20 nothing?21 Don't all of y'all speak at the22 same time.23
It's something to24 think about. I don't --25 117 2/17/11 - HOUSING - RES. 1008801
No, I2 don't want to think about it. I want to3 talk about it, Otis.4
I don't know if I5 could definitely say that on the record.6
Yeah. I don't7 know. I wouldn't want to commit to that,8 because actually we wouldn't -- not every9 property does need to be cleaned and10 sealed, as you know. Some of them would11 be in that situation. Some of them would12 remain vacant, but structurally sound and13 they would have their windows and doors,14 but they would just remain vacant. Not15 that I'm making light of it being vacant,16 but you may not have to take any kind of17 abatement action towards the property.18
Okay.21 And that's an important point, because I22 think when we talk about the seriousness23 and the impact -- and I think that's what24 the CDCs were alluding to -- is, we need25 118 2/17/11 - HOUSING - RES. 1008801 to make some investments now or later.2 As Chair of L&I, I hate for us to think3 about it as later, just because I know4 that that's one of the budgets that has5 continuously been cut, and these are the6 issues that impact them. But just I7 think it's an important figure to keep in8 mind if we do nothing and if the banks9 are not responsible partners in this. So10 I'll leave it at that.11 Councilman Greenlee.12
Thank13 you. Thank you, Councilwoman.14 I have a question along the15 same lines as far as the license, the16 rental license, if somebody applies for17 that. Is there a cross-check to see if18 there's violations on that property?19
So a23 person should not get the rental license24 if they have violations?25 119 2/17/11 - HOUSING - RES. 1008801
Now, I5 know that may not pertain here, because,6 as you said, Otis --7
Especially for8 license renewals. I know that for a9 fact. If there's a license renewal that10 would come up, it would automatically11 kick out that license as a flag on it for12 violation. Now, you would have to look13 at the specific violation, because some14 issues are more egregious than others. I15 mean, would you hold up a person's16 license for something very minor,17 because --18
But I'm23 particularly thinking when it comes to24 rental license, if there's housing25 120 2/17/11 - HOUSING - RES. 1008801 violations, that says something right2 there, should they be renting if there's3 already violations on the property. So4 there is that cross-check?5
It does flag it6 and it actually will not send you the7 renewal notice. You would have to come8 to L&I and remedy that violation, and9 then you could get your housing license.10
Renewal12 license, but how about when you apply the13 first time?14
Nobody really17 does an inspection or pre-inspection18 prior to the issuance of the license,19 because, again --20
No, but21 there could be already housing violations22 on that property before they apply for23 the license, right?24
Well, there could25 121 2/17/11 - HOUSING - RES. 1008801 be, and if there is, I don't think that2 there's any particular --3
I thought4 that. That's where I was getting at. I5 thought there was a regulation on that.6
There used to7 be that Certificate of Rental Suitability8 that was out there when you went and9 applied for the first time, and then any10 time you changed tenants, you were11 supposed to come to the Department of12 Licenses and Inspections and get the13 certificate. That's held up in court14 somewhere. So now, believe it or not,15 it's on a voluntary basis. You could16 come in as a landlord and voluntarily get17 it.18
And that was19 self-certification. That wasn't20 something where there was anything that21 the Department had to affirmatively do22 prior to issuing the license. That was23 your certifying that your property was24 suitable to rent based on the fact that25 122 2/17/11 - HOUSING - RES. 1008801 you had no serious violations on the2 property.3
Okay.8 And I know in this case, it might not9 have saved a lot, because it sounds like10 a lot -- there's a real question on the11 validity of the license to start with,12 but I was just wondering general policy.13 Okay. Thank you.14 Thank you, Madam Chair.15
My16 question is, given the fact that you're17 coming here and given the fact that there18 is this community and this neighborhood19 problem, what then is the City's housing20 department plans going forward for this21 area?22 MS. McCOLLOCH: At the moment,23 we don't have a specific plan. We're24 continuing to work with the25 123 2/17/11 - HOUSING - RES. 1008801 Councilwoman's office to analyze what the2 situation is for these properties. As we3 say, the numbers even we've heard today,4 different people have given us different5 numbers of how many properties are6 included in this whole array, and we have7 to really analyze. As the attorneys from8 CLS testified, there's some folks who9 have some ownership interest, and then we10 have to figure out do those folks want to11 buy those properties, are they living in12 the properties. There's some folks who13 think they have ownership interest, but14 they may not. There's some people who15 are tenants. There's some set of16 properties that are vacant now.17 We need to work with the18 Councilwoman's office to do that analysis19 and see what's the situation with the20 properties and then try to figure out21 some strategy to help them. The biggest22 problem is that they're not in City23 ownership, and if folks don't have title24 to the properties, even those programs25 124 2/17/11 - HOUSING - RES. 1008801 that we have that could otherwise assist2 people, if they're not in title, those3 programs -- they're not eligible for4 those programs.5
Well,6 certainly going forward as we approach7 our housing agenda and our City agenda8 for housing, even though we don't know9 what those dollars will be, we certainly10 look forward to -- this afternoon we11 intend to recess this hearing, but we12 want to be available to at least when we13 have our housing hearings to get some14 kind of follow-up on just what's15 happening in this neighborhood from the16 Councilwoman and from Councilman DiCicco17 so that we know.18 It's our job to keep hope alive19 by having positive programs to help20 people who are victimized, as these21 people are, unfairly. And so it's our22 job to try to come up, as their City23 leaders, to come up with a plan. So24 we're committed to that, and we'll look25 125 2/17/11 - HOUSING - RES. 1008801 forward to the Councilwoman of this area2 letting us know where we are so that we3 can have some positive plan before our4 fiscal year is out.5 Is that satisfactory,6 Councilwoman?7
Yeah.8 Let me just --9 MS. McCOLLOCH: I think one of10 the keys is the example that was given, I11 can't stress enough, that if the bank is12 unwilling to sell the property for less13 than the value that it has, for less than14 its loan, we're not going to be able to15 solve this problem, because the City will16 pay the appraised -- may be able to, if17 we could figure out some strategy, the18 appraised value. But the example that19 was given that Steve Culbertson gave of20 having -- there were only nine in that21 case, but that would be nine more than we22 had before. We were prepared to invest23 in those nine, and the bank was unwilling24 to take the appraised value for the25 126 2/17/11 - HOUSING - RES. 1008801 properties. And so if we can't negotiate2 that kind of a deal, we're going to3 really be stuck.4
And I5 think, again, we didn't expect to come6 out with all the answers here today, but7 I think the lack of participation from8 the banks, it's evidence that we are9 going to have to get a little bit more10 aggressive as the City and our lien11 position, since these properties12 technically almost all are owned by us13 given their water, tax, PGW liens. I14 think the message today is, as a city,15 we're going to have to be more aggressive16 with them to take -- in some cases using17 our condemnation power -- to take some of18 these properties and do right by the19 people, because the banks may not be20 willing to. And I think up to now, we've21 been trying to work with the banks. We22 will continue to work with the banks, but23 clearly, the next steps -- and our office24 would be happy to lead the initial25 127 2/17/11 - HOUSING - RES. 1008801 discussions, but the City is going to2 have to look at its NTI potentially, City3 significance portion, but definitely our4 lien positioning to tell the banks,5 You're either going to do right by people6 or we're going to take these properties7 and do right by people. And I think8 that's where we are today, and that's why9 we're even having these hearings, because10 they have been reluctant, partly because11 they don't know what to do with this.12 This is unheard of, and I think Deborah13 has been very open and willing, and even14 with all her years of experience, she has15 never seen anything as drastic as this.16 But clearly, we're going to now have to17 play the lead role, because the banks are18 not going to.19 I think to the extent that Nova20 and others are willing to continue the21 discussion is one thing, but I would22 hope, Madam Chair, that as we recess23 these hearings, that we schedule a24 follow-up, and that in the interim, we25 128 2/17/11 - HOUSING - RES. 1008801 could probably reconvene the discussions2 between RDA, CLS, OHCD and our office to3 see if there is an opportunity in4 partnership with our CDCs through NTI to5 make some blocks whole and to keep some6 people in their homes. And we're not7 going to be able to wait anymore, and I8 think that's where we are now.9 I cannot even imagine what10 would happen in April if some of these go11 to foreclosure and these banks turn12 around and sell these properties to some13 New York investor or some holding14 company, who is even less interested in15 what happens in Kensington.16 So that is my ask for the17 Administration. That is my ask for my18 members of the Housing Committee, is that19 we provide leadership here. I mean, this20 is about providing leadership and taking21 this incredible monster -- it's like an22 octopus. It has a lot of legs. But I23 have all the faith that we have the24 ability to bring some resolutions to some25 129 2/17/11 - HOUSING - RES. 1008801 of these problems. And while we won't be2 able to take care of everybody, we should3 be able to take care of quite a few,4 again, in collaboration with our CDCs.5 So I am going to ask that we6 reconvene that discussion and we begin to7 work through some of these issues with8 our CDCs immediately and come up with a9 plan and try to pilot some things quickly10 to see if we can entice the banks into11 doing the right things.12 But I'm not going to sit around13 any longer and wait for the banks to do14 the right thing by my constituents and by15 the City of Philadelphia.16 Thank you, Madam Chair.17
Well,18 let me thank all of you. Unless there's19 someone else we haven't called on who20 would like to testify, let me thank all21 of you for your participation, for your22 patience, for being here, those on the23 panel as well as those who have come who24 are interested in this issue. Certainly25 130 2/17/11 - HOUSING - RES. 1008801 we commit, the Housing Committee, to2 doing everything we can to be part of the3 solution certainly in this massive4 problem.5 Thank you all, and this hearing6 is recessed subject to the call of the7 Chair.8 Thank you.9 (Applause.)10 (Committee on Housing,11 Neighborhood Development and the Homeless12 recessed at 3:05 p.m.)13 - - -14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 131 1 CERTIFICATE2 I HEREBY CERTIFY that the3 proceedings, evidence and objections are4 contained fully and accurately in the5 stenographic notes taken by me upon the6 foregoing matter on February 17, 2011, and7 that this is a true and correct transcript of8 same.9 10 11 12 13 --------------------14 MICHELE L. MURPHY15 RPR-Notary Public16 17 18 19 (The foregoing certification of this20 transcript does not apply to any reproduction21 of the same by any means, unless under the22 direct control and/or supervision of the23 certifying reporter.)24 25