COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA2 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE3 - - -4 Room 400, City Hall5 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Tuesday, April 21, 20096 11:00 a.m. 7 - - - 8 9 PRESENT: COUNCIL PRESIDENT ANNA C. VERNA10 COUNCILWOMAN JANNIE BLACKWELL COUNCILMAN DARRELL L. CLARKE11 COUNCILMAN W. WILSON GOODE, JR. COUNCILMAN BILL GREEN12 COUNCILMAN WILLIAM GREENLEE COUNCILMAN CURTIS JONES, JR.13 COUNCILWOMAN JOAN L. KRAJEWSKI COUNCILMAN BRIAN J. O'NEILL14 COUNCILWOMAN DONNA REED MILLER COUNCILWOMAN BLONDELL REYNOLDS BROWN15 COUNCILMAN FRANK RIZZO COUNCILWOMAN MARIAN B. TASCO16 17 BILLS 090212, 090213, 090214, 090215, 090218, 090219, 090220, 09022118 RESOLUTION 090226 19 20 - - -21 22 V A R A L L O Incorporated Litigation Support Services23 Eleven Penn Center 1835 Market Street, Suite 60024 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103 215.561.2220 215.567.267025 2 1
Good2 morning. We apologize for being late,3 and trust it won't happen again, except4 for a Tuesday.5 We're going to continue our6 hearings on the Operating Budget, and7 we'd like to now call before the Council8 the Fairmount Park.9 (Witness approached witness10 table.)11
Would you15 please identify yourself and proceed with16 your testimony.17
Good morning. I'm18 Mark Focht, the Executive Director of19 Fairmount Park. I am pleased to appear20 before City Council to testify on behalf21 of our Fiscal Year 2010 operating budget.22 Our proposed operating budget is23 $12,590,512 for the Fiscal Year 2010.24 I would also like to note that25 3 4/21/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.1 joining me today are several members of2 the Fairmount Park senior staff,3 Fairmount Park Commissioner Phil Price,4 Jr., and up in front of the railing with5 me is Barry Bessler, the Chief of Staff6 for Fairmount Park, and Michael7 DiBerardinis, the new Commissioner of8 Parks and Recreation for the City of9 Philadelphia.10
Thank you.11 Welcome, Michael DiBerardinis. It's good12 to see you back in the Chambers again.13
The Park's proposed14 operating budget is consistent with our15 revised and current Fiscal Year 200916 budget. The Class 100 request of17 $8,733,525 sustains the Park's authorized18 level of 171 positions. 1 percent reduction to the Park's original2 Fiscal Year '09 operating budget. 6 This funding level, therefore, remains7 consistent for Fiscal Year '10. As you8 may recall, Mayor Nutter and this City9 Council increased the Park's budget by10 two and a half million from last fiscal11 year, '08, to the current fiscal year,12 '09. 16 The mission of Fairmount Park17 is to preserve, protect and maintain the18 open space, trees, natural and cultural19 resources of Philadelphia's parks for the20 recreation and enjoyment of both citizens21 and visitors. 9 Fairmount Park remains10 committed to fulfilling our mission while11 striving to attain the goal of Mayor12 Nutter's Philadelphia plan. Our daily13 work helps Philadelphia grow as a green14 city. The Park's involvement on both the15 Schuylkill and North Delaware16 riverfronts, as well as our work in17 neighborhood and watershed parks,18 supports the region's economy and19 enhances the City's sustainability and20 livability. 1 field programs. The pending merger of2 Fairmount Park and the Department of3 Recreation will support the Mayor's goal4 of reforming government. 21 Fairmount Park is pursuing22 several opportunities that will improve23 services for park users and increase24 revenue to the General Fund. 1 include food and beverage vending2 opportunities at heavily used places3 throughout the park system,4 professionally managed parking at5 selected sites and special events, and6 the sale of high-quality organic material7 such as compost and mulch. 12 I am pleased to report on the13 status of the Park's MBE/WBE/DBE14 participation. In aggregate, the Park's15 Fiscal Year '09 participation in16 contracts is 25 percent. This includes17 five prime and five subcontracts18 totalling over $860,000. Between Fiscal19 Year '08 last year and the current Fiscal20 Year '09, the Park recorded an increase21 in the number of minority contracts,22 combined both prime and sub, from eight23 to ten. 4 I would like to highlight5 several of our contracts. As many of you6 are aware, one of the Park's largest7 groups of contracts is our turf8 management. Five geographic contracts9 were bid this spring for the Park by the10 Procurement Department. The City's11 Office of Economic Opportunity, OEO, set12 the participation range for this bundle13 of contracts at 15 to 20 percent. I am14 pleased to report that when the contracts15 were awarded, they included 51 percent16 participation. 19 Minority Services will maintain turf at20 Fairmount Park sites in three of our five21 geographic areas. 1 Similarly, the Park utilizes2 several contractors for tree removal. A3 woman-owned business, Edens Corporation,4 serves as prime for 23 percent of the5 total amount of tree removal work done by6 the Park. Additionally, another tree7 removal contractor, Independence8 Constructors, utilizes Minority Services,9 Inc. as a subcontractor for 12 percent of10 their contract. 15 Davey Tree Experts utilizes Still Man16 Tree Services as a subcontractor for 1017 percent of the work. The other tree18 pruning prime contractor, Bustleton19 Services, utilizes Academy Recycling as a20 subcontractor for 15 percent of their21 work. 4 In the event that the City5 needs to enact the Plan B budget, the6 Park would sustain a two percent7 reduction to our proposed Plan A8 $12,590,512 Operating Budget. This9 reduction amounts to $257,550. To10 achieve the Plan B reduction, the Park11 will have no reductions of filled or12 unfilled Class 100 full-time, part-time13 or seasonal positions. However, to14 achieve the Plan B reduction, the Park15 would undertake the following three16 initiatives:17 First of all, we would have to18 eliminate $92,000 in Class 200 funds for19 our functional requirements contract for20 an asset management system.
1 respond to constituent requests,2 including those coming from both City3 Council, 3-1-1 and individuals. The Park4 currently manages information using Excel5 spreadsheets and an interim rudimentary6 database. 11 The second thing we would have12 to undertake to achieve the B budget is13 the elimination of one turf mowing cycle,14 which would save about $82,000 in Class15 200 funds. One mowing cycle will be16 eliminated either during the warmer,17 dryer summer months or at the end of the18 mowing cycle in mid October, depending on19 weather conditions. This would reduce20 the Park's contractual mowing from 14 to21 13 cycles annually. 1 the trash from the turf areas prior to2 each mowing. 5 And the final thing we would do6 to meet our Plan B budget is, we would be7 charged with generating additional8 revenue amounting to about $84,000. Park9 staff would look to identify additional10 revenue opportunities which would also11 ideally provide additional amenities for12 park users. 1
Thank you2 very much.3 Let me just ask a question4 here. The $2.5 million that we5 appropriated last year, what impact has6 that had on your budget in terms of7 operation? What were you going to use8 those funds for and what's the impact of9 not having those dollars?10
The two and a half11 million dollars were broken out as12 follows: A million dollars was13 specifically intended for tree plantings14 throughout the City. We actually did15 expend about 430,000 of that last fall16 before the budget readjustment occurred.17 So about 430,000 of that million dollars18 was spent and those trees are gracing the19 City.20 Additionally, in the other21 million and a half dollars, we were to22 fund 21 new staff positions at the Park.23 Of those, only one position was funded24 prior to the rebalancing plan. So the25 14 4/21/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.1 other 20 positions have been put on hold.2
They were5 principally front-line men and women in6 both our grounds maintenance operations7 and our facilities maintenance8 operations, the skill trades, like9 plumbers, carpenters, electricians. And10 then the grounds maintenance workers are11 those folks that maintain our ball12 fields, pick up the trash, maintain the13 trails. That's where the vast majority14 of those 20 positions were, to fill in15 front-line needs. And then additionally,16 some of the money was to be spent on the17 purchasing of some new equipment to18 support those 20 additional new19 positions. So when those 20 positions20 were put on hold, as was obviously the21 purchase of the equipment to support22 them.23
In the24 merger of Fairmount Park and the25 15 4/21/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.1 Department of Recreation, has that come2 about yet in terms of merging those two3 departments in terms of providing service4 or even staffing?5
Some functions even6 prior to the ballot question had been7 realigned at both Fairmount Park and8 Recreation. For example, in 2005, the9 administrative cluster was formed for10 Fairmount Park and Recreation. So all11 finance, human resources, technology was12 all done out of one administrative13 cluster that serves both departments. So14 there's no duplication between the15 departments anymore.16
Yes. There was a19 calculated savings of about a half a20 million dollars annually from forming the21 cluster.22 Subsequent to the ballot23 passing last November, we've been working24 on looking at both departments and our25 16 4/21/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.1 operations and better understanding each2 other and looking at how components might3 merge. We've not actually4 operationalized any of that yet, and I5 would look to Commissioner DiBerardinis,6 if he would like to add any additional7 comments about the merger process.8
Sure.9 (Witness approached witness10 table.)11 COMMISSIONER DiBERARDINIS:12 Thanks, Mark.13 Councilwoman, it's our -- I14 think to meet the deadline in the15 legislation, which essentially says --16
First17 identify yourself.18 COMMISSIONER DiBERARDINIS: I'm19 sorry. Michael DiBerardinis. I'm the20 Commissioner of Parks and Recreation, or21 at least soon to be formed single22 organization.23 But the legislation dictates24 that we have a combined agency in place25 17 4/21/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.1 by not this July but next July, July of2 '10, July 1st of '10. But in order to do3 that, we need to have most of the answers4 and most of the work done by this5 December, this coming December, before6 Christmas, because then we'll have to7 propose a combined budget for the two8 agencies.9 So we hope that by the end of10 this calendar year, we will have, in11 addition to a very strong and12 aspirational mission and vision and goals13 for the combined organization, we will14 have management structures in place,15 we'll have geographic districts in place,16 we will know what the units, the17 Maintenance Unit, the Program Unit, the18 Cultural Unit, what they all look like19 and how they will be structured for next20 year's operating budget. So we're21 working on that calendar, and we hope to22 engage citizens, staff, this body, the23 organized groups all over the City who24 have an interest in either one of these25 18 4/21/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.1 agencies in helping us think how the best2 way to do that is.3 So we're very excited about4 that process and completely excited about5 the enthusiasm of folks wanting to serve6 on the newly formed Parks and Recreation7 Advisory Commission. That to us is8 emblematic of the support that these two9 agencies have, when over 200 people10 applied to serve on that newly formed11 Commission. So we're very excited about12 it and really are anxious to get started13 on the merger process.14
Thank you15 very much.16 The Chair recognizes Councilman17 Greenlee.18 You may want to stay at the19 table, Commissioner.20
Thank21 you, Madam Chair.22 Good morning.23 COMMISSIONER DiBERARDINIS:24 Good morning.25 19 4/21/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.1
A couple2 of questions particularly on street3 trees. First on pruning, I think you4 had -- before the goal was always roughly5 every seven to ten years. Is that still6 your target times?7
Right. The target8 has always been a seven- to eight-year9 cycle ideally, is what we would get to.10 Currently we're probably on a ten- to11 11-year cycle with the funding we have12 and the number of trees we have.13
Sure.14 Okay. On tree removal, particularly on15 curbside trees, I'm never quite sure16 exactly the process. Is there an17 actual -- because the owner has some18 responsibility too, right?19
Is there21 a notice given to the owner first before22 Fairmount Park comes in? I'm never --23
Yes. Actually,24 many of our tree removals are prompted by25 20 4/21/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.1 the property owner themselves who have a2 concern about the tree.3 The way the process works is4 that when we receive a call from a5 constituent, normally a property owner,6 we dispatch a Fairmount Park arborist to7 go out and look at the tree, assess the8 tree. There's a number of categories9 that we rank the tree, from imminently10 dangerous to healthy, on a sliding scale.11 The arborist makes a determination on if12 the tree should be removed and how soon13 the tree should be removed. That14 information is conveyed back to the15 property owner, and then either we do it16 via our contracts or our own staff,17 depending on the level of emergency.18 There's a lot of factors that go into19 that decision.20 The property owner always has21 the opportunity to have the tree removed22 using a private contractor at their own23 expense if they feel that they want it24 removed sooner and we agree it should be25 21 4/21/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.1 removed. So there's two options.2
Is there3 any cost put on the homeowner when4 Fairmount Park does it?5
That's7 what I thought. Okay. Thank you.8 One last question. You talk9 about the food and beverage vending10 opportunities. These are new things11 you're trying to set up, right?12
No, Councilman.16 These would be mobile carts, and they17 would be at select locations for defined18 periods of time. And we're looking that19 this is a pilot program that would start20 on June 1st and only last through October21 31st of this year to see how it's22 received by the park constituents and23 also what it is like to manage it as a24 staff.25 22 4/21/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.1
Okay. So2 areas where they're heavily used, like3 Lemon Hill?4
And this10 would be like a private contractor that11 would do it?12
No. Actually,16 Procurement today is posting the bid on17 eContract Philly, and vendors will have18 the opportunity to respond to one site,19 to all the sites, to any combination of20 sites. We will evaluate each bid on a21 site-by-site basis. So it's not a master22 concession agreement, no.23
Do you24 have any rough idea how many sites you're25 23 4/21/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.1 looking at yet or is that still in the --2
We're looking at3 only about 16 to 18 sites throughout the4 whole Park system just to start it as a5 pilot project.6
Because it will9 take some responsibility of Park staff to10 monitor it to make sure everything is11 being done in compliance and being done12 appropriately.13
Got you.14 Okay. Sounds like a good idea. Good15 luck with it.16
We hope that it17 will provide additional services to the18 park users.19
And thank20 you for all you've helped us with over21 these years.22
The25 24 4/21/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.1 Chair recognizes Councilman Jones.2
Thank5 you.6 COUNCILMAN JONES:7 Commissioner, Commissioner, how are you8 both?9
Very good. Thank10 you.11 COMMISSIONER DiBERARDINIS:12 Good.13
It is so14 very good to see you two sitting at the15 table. It inspires all of us on Parks16 and Recreation. My Chairwoman gets17 tickled pink when she thinks about the18 possibilities.19 I'd like to ask a couple of20 questions, and one is a hard one, but I21 need to ask it first and then we can get22 to the good stuff.23 The closing of the 92nd Police24 Unit within the Park, which had the25 25 4/21/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.1 responsibility for touring the Park, can2 you give me some feedback on how that3 transition has happened, what impacts4 have occurred since that closing of that5 unit.6
Certainly. For7 those of you that are not familiar, the8 92nd closed, but the police officers in9 the 92nd were assigned to adjacent police10 districts that buffer both Fairmount Park11 East and West and Wissahickon Valley12 Parks. Some officers were assigned to13 the Traffic Division for special events.14 Councilman, I think much to all15 of our pleasure, it's been a very smooth16 transition. We have received very good17 coverage from the adjacent police18 districts. Most of our tenants in the19 Park, which were understandably concerned20 about the abolition of the 92nd, have21 expressed to us that they've been very22 pleased with the level of just physical23 patrols they've seen, police cars in the24 park from the adjacent districts,25 26 4/21/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.1 outreach that has been done. I'll cite2 one example. Nancy Kolb, our foster at3 Please Touch Museum at Memorial Hall, has4 been very pleased with the outreach from5 the 16th Police District, which now6 covers that section of West Park. The7 police officers stop there regularly.8 They check in on the special events.9 They check in on the parking lot. And10 we've heard this almost uniformly from11 our tenants, and also our own staff has12 observed very good police coverage in the13 park.14
Any time15 that we make a shift, I want to gauge16 what the reaction is in the parks. They17 are vulnerable areas and have been used18 often as crime scenes, and we want to19 make sure that is a thing of the past and20 that in our efforts to try to save money,21 that we don't throw the baby out with the22 bath water when it comes to this valuable23 asset.24 Quickly moving along, I am25 27 4/21/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.1 concerned about our plan to market a lot2 of our assets. We have, as you've3 exposed me to, some valuable mansions,4 some sites within the Park that I5 consider hidden treasures. If I were to6 advise someone that was coming to the7 City of Philadelphia in the future8 tense -- this is maybe five years from9 now -- I would say if you were standing10 there with your family and you wanted to11 have adult entertainment and you were12 standing in front of the Marriott, I13 would suggest they go east, go east to14 the waterfront, go east to the gambling15 casinos, go east to some of the more16 provocative clubs that are down on the17 waterfront. But if you wanted wholesome18 family entertainment, I would urge them19 to go west, west through Logan Circle,20 west up into the Park, anchoring on the21 Zoo and so forth.22 How are we marketing that kind23 of two different experiences of24 Philadelphia and highlighting our parks25 28 4/21/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.1 in the process and some of the mansions,2 such as Benedict Arnold's mansion and3 Smith Playground, which they've just4 opened up? How are we promoting those5 assets?6
Actually,7 Councilman, there's three very positive8 things happening right now. The Park9 recently received a grant to do a10 marketing study specifically for our11 historic mansions, so Mount Pleasant that12 you mentioned and others. We are just --13 we literally just issued a request for14 proposals to marketing firms to begin15 that process. But that's a federal grant16 that came through the Preserve America17 Program. So that's specifically for our18 historic assets in East and West Park.19 Separately and second, our20 partners at the Fairmount Park21 Conservancy, our non-profit, have22 retained a marketing consultant to do an23 overall brand study, imaging study of the24 Fairmount Park brand, Fairmount Park25 29 4/21/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.1 system, our 63 parks, and figure out how2 to promote that widely. Again, we're at3 about the first phase of that study, and4 that's much larger than just the historic5 assets.6 And then, thirdly, the greatest7 concentration of those family-focused8 assets are, of course, in the Centennial9 District, with the Zoo, the Mann, Please10 Touch, our Horticultural Center, Japanese11 House and Garden, et cetera. We are12 working very closely -- I personally am13 working very closely with Please Touch,14 Mann, Zoo leadership to look at an15 overall marketing campaign, branding16 campaign. We've actually developed a17 logo, a visual identity, for the18 Centennial District in West Park,19 specifically to have all the institutions20 use it to start to bring people out, get21 brand recognition. We have new signage22 we put up that identifies the area as the23 Centennial District. So that's a very24 targeted, specific thing for that area.25 30 4/21/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.1
You could2 actually spend two or three days with3 your family and still not experience all4 there is to experience within our mansion5 system. Rittenhouse, for example, is the6 first place paper was manufactured in the7 United States, and for those of us who8 have become historic buffs because of our9 experience in the park, we can appreciate10 that. So I would be interested in11 providing to this Council how we mature12 that marketing effort and how it's going13 to be promoted to visitors.14 In concert with that, I'm also15 interested in the Schuylkill River Trail16 connection and how we take advantage of17 that particular pathway of both visitors18 to the City of Philadelphia but also19 consumers as they stop in places like20 Manayunk and East Falls along the way to21 experience some of the commercial benefit22 of being right adjacent to that trail.23 How are we connecting with that?24
There's actually25 31 4/21/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.1 three projects we have going on right now2 to serve the trail users to both provide3 them with amenities and for economic4 generation. One I've already mentioned,5 the mobile vending carts, which will be6 out there to provide a bottle of water, a7 soft pretzel, something like that, to8 someone that's biking in from Montgomery9 County. But specifically, we're working10 with, as I believe you're aware being on11 the Board of the Fairmount Park Historic12 Preservation Trust, renovation of the13 Bathey House, which is the small brick14 building off of Kelly Drive in East15 Falls. That will be renovated as a cafe,16 restrooms, bike rental, blade rental.17 (Bell rung.)18
So, again,19 providing that amenity, most notably20 restrooms and bottled water, to folks21 that are on the recreation trail. And22 then farther up in Manayunk, working with23 your office last year, approved the24 expansion, the deck expansion, of Bourbon25 32 4/21/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.1 Blue to provide that amenity to users in2 the Manayunk Canal Towpath section of the3 Schuylkill River Trail. So there's a4 number of initiatives sprinkled in each5 section that we're doing.6
I'm going to7 allow my colleagues to get an opportunity8 to ask some questions, but I will say9 last year we challenged you on the10 affirmative action minority participation11 contracting goals and I'm pleased to hear12 that you met that challenge, exceeded13 that challenge, and particularly under14 the grass-cutting contract that we15 mentioned, that every 17-day cycle, that16 you've cut it up into five different17 areas, and I'm truly appreciative. We18 tend to sit over here and we give it to19 you real hard when you don't do20 something, but when you hear us and then21 make adjustments for the affirmative, I22 have to go on the record and say thank23 you for that as well.24
Thank you very25 33 4/21/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.1 much.2
Thank you,3 Madam President.4 COUNCIL PRESIDENT VERNA:5 You're welcome.6 The Chair recognizes7 Councilwoman Brown.8
Thank you,9 Madam President.10 Good morning, gentlemen.11
Let me13 also acknowledge and underscore14 Councilman Jones' comments regarding the15 improvement and huge progress with16 MBE/WBE participation. It's very much17 appreciated.18
Revisit20 Councilwoman Tasco's opening questions.21 With the deadline being July '10, we then22 can assume that come -- can we assume23 that next year at this time there will be24 one flow chart, one budget, one set of25 34 4/21/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.1 testimony, unless the Commissioner2 decides that he wants to spread that3 across the leadership in this team?4 COMMISSIONER DiBERARDINIS:5 Absolutely. We are prepared to --6 preparing to, like I said earlier, to7 have most of the thinking and planning8 and internal structuring complete by the9 end of this calendar year in order to10 present the budget. And the presentation11 of the budget, budget -- respond to the12 budget call, we would be putting13 ourselves on that schedule. So we will14 be very aggressive in the next six or15 eight months to move this process forward16 and to be here roughly this time next17 year presenting a single budget.18
Okay. All19 right, then.20 In addition to -- I'll ask that21 on the next go-around. Let me get this22 round of questions in. I was going to23 ask about the strategic plan, but I'll do24 that on the next round. On this round I25 35 4/21/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.1 want to ask about the Fairmount Park2 trust funds that are left to Fairmount3 Park with varying levels of mandate.4 Some are very specific mandating the5 exact patch of land, type of foliage that6 must be planted, and some are more7 loosely mandated. How much money8 currently does the Fairmount Park have in9 its trust funds?10
The trust funds'11 total, including the investments, are12 about $11 million. That's 38 different13 funds.14
Can you15 please provide to Council President a16 listing of those trust fund dollars to17 the Chair?18
If you had20 an extra $5 million in funding -- that's21 the ball we like to look into -- what22 would be the most effective way you will23 spend it so that citizens could actually24 see it?25 36 4/21/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.1
I think it would be2 part of what I talked about in my opening3 remarks as to how we were initially going4 to use the two and a half million dollar5 increase, which is to increase the number6 of front-line personnel, getting the men7 and women in both our landscape8 operations and our facilities maintenance9 group. They're the individuals that on a10 day-to-day basis provide the upkeep and11 maintenance of the Park and its assets,12 and that is what I think is most visible13 to the citizens day in and day out.14
What about15 the Fairmount Park Rangers? Where are16 they in the life of the Park right now?17
The Fairmount Park18 Rangers are funded by this -- through our19 operating budget at $850,000 a year in20 Class 500 money. That goes to the21 non-profit Fairmount Park Ranger Corps.22 It's blended with a little bit of other23 money that we have in an endowment. So24 we have an operating budget of about25 37 4/21/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.1 $925,000 a year for the Rangers, which2 employ 21 full-time Rangers and eight3 seasonal Rangers.4
No. That's been7 actually very constant for the last six8 years or so. If you go back a decade or9 more, it was much larger, but in the last10 six to eight years, it's been around that11 same level of funding and that same12 number of employees.13 I will add, we actually have14 added several Rangers recently through15 some, I'd like to think, innovative16 partnerships. The Philadelphia Water17 Department, for example, now funds two18 full-time Rangers at the Fairmount19 Waterworks, so that complex behind the20 Art Museum specifically to provide21 security and visitor interpretation to22 that site. And those are funded in23 addition to the 21 I mentioned that are24 funded through this budget.25 38 4/21/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.1
What is2 the Department's involvement and3 interaction with the Office of4 Sustainability?5
Our involvement is6 extensive. I serve, in addition to my7 role at Fairmount Park, I serve as Chair8 for GreenPlan Philadelphia, the City's9 comprehensive open space plan, and as10 part of that, I and a number of my11 colleagues serve on the Sustainability12 Working Group that's helping guiding the13 development of Greenworks, the City's14 sustainability plan that will be launched15 next week.16
Yes. I'm17 aware of that announcement.18 With the procurement that is19 being posted today for the vendors, just20 discuss, walk through that process,21 because it appears to vary from22 department to department, but you don't23 know unless you ask.24
I'm sorry. Which25 39 4/21/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.1 process?2
You said3 there's a bid being posted today, a4 procurement bid that's being posted5 today -- Procurement is posting a bid6 today with regard to the vendors.7
Right. This is an8 eContract process, and the way it works9 is for us at Fairmount Park, we identify10 something we want to do, in this case the11 mobile vending. We work with Procurement12 on developing the proper forms. It goes13 to the Office of Economic Opportunity,14 and they assign the participation ranges.15 And then it's posted by Procurement16 through the eContract process, and as I17 noted, that's coincidentally being posted18 today.19
-- as an operating24 department. They get the bids. We25 40 4/21/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.1 evaluate the bids with them. They award2 the contract. It's a City procurement3 process.4
But it's a5 collaborative process at the point that6 prospective candidates have been7 identified and then the department head,8 plus Procurement sits down -- or is it9 the department head and OEO? Who is it?10
Okay. So13 the legislation has happened last14 November. Where are we with the15 strategic plan, with the other16 recommendations cited in the strategic17 plan?18
The Fairmount Park19 strategic plan completed in 2005 has 8220 major recommendations in it. As of the21 last status report, which I sent to22 Council late last fall --23
Yes. I24 remember that.25 41 4/21/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.1
-- we have2 achieved -- we have completed or are in3 progress on about, if I remember the4 number correctly, Councilwoman, 42 of the5 81 or so. It's right about the 506 percent mark, are either done or in7 progress, and the balance are either just8 beginning or we haven't begun them yet.9 So remembering that the strategic plan is10 a ten-year strategic plan. We're at the11 end of year four. So we're pretty much12 on target, having accomplished over 5013 percent of the recommendations and about14 40 percent of the ten-year horizon.15
I commend16 you on that.17 That's no longer relevant,18 because our new Commissioner is here.19 That's it for this round.20 Thank you, Madam Chair.21
Thank22 you.23 The Chair recognizes Councilman24 Green.25 42 4/21/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.1
Thank you,2 Madam Chair.3 Good morning. I think it's4 still morning.5
I have a7 general question and it's sort of been8 touched on, but I was hoping you'd be9 able to be specific about it, and, that10 is, we're all very glad to see Mr.11 DiBerardinis take responsibility for this12 area, and I assume he'll have some people13 working directly for him that aren't in14 the departments, but I am wondering if15 instead of saving money through a16 combination by creating another level17 above the Commission heads, yourself and18 Ms. Slawson, we are costing the taxpayers19 half a million more or so dollars a year,20 and I just wonder what the plan is to21 have savings in the departments to pay22 for that. Do we need a head of Fairmount23 Park and a Rec Commissioner when we have24 Mr. DiBerardinis? You know what I mean?25 43 4/21/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.1 Like something has to give to pay for2 this, and I'm just wondering how we're3 going to pay for it.4 COMMISSIONER DiBERARDINIS:5 Well, let me just say, first of all, that6 I won't be hiring anybody, so there won't7 be any additional cost. The legislation,8 as far as I understand it, calls for all9 three positions. So the legislation -- I10 don't know how bound we are to this, but11 certainly it calls for the Commissioner12 and then the two Directors underneath,13 and so it keeps that the same. So I14 don't -- besides what I'm getting paid,15 that's the only, as far as I can tell,16 the only new money that's in play here.17
And are18 there synergies that are going to be19 created in the building management aspect20 in terms of -- each department currently21 has, the Commission and the Rec22 Department, currently have people who are23 in charge of maintaining buildings. They24 currently have -- is that going to be25 44 4/21/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.1 combined?2 COMMISSIONER DiBERARDINIS:3 Yes. Absolutely.4
How much5 does that save us?6 COMMISSIONER DiBERARDINIS:7 Right now -- let me just be straight8 about this. There will be some savings,9 but I don't think it's going to be10 astronomical. I think a lot of the11 efficiencies around the Administration12 and operation of the two departments, a13 lot of that has been instituted over the14 last few years, and some meaningful15 savings have been accrued in that16 process. I suspect that there will be17 some more efficiencies that we can meet18 as we operate under a combined agency.19 What they are right now, quite20 frankly, we don't know, but I think to21 assume that this is the reason why the22 agencies are put together, is about23 money, I think it's about the quality of24 service to the citizens. We're not going25 45 4/21/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.1 to cost more. We probably will cost2 less, but the payoff here is that we have3 two powerful systems working together to4 serve the citizens of the City, to take5 care of these facilities in a way that is6 at the highest quality and to program for7 children and families throughout the City8 in a way that we haven't been able to do9 in the past, either with the same or with10 less money. I think that's the -- and in11 a way to engage citizens directly in that12 work.13
No, no. I14 completely subscribe to that, but part of15 the selling process and every single16 editorial and every single speech17 promoting this was synergies.18 COMMISSIONER DiBERARDINIS:19 Yeah.20
So people do21 expect some synergies as a result of this22 or they expect to know exactly how23 service is going to be improved.24 COMMISSIONER DiBERARDINIS:25 46 4/21/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.1 Exactly.2
So what I3 want to say is, next year when you come4 back, I'd like you to be able to answer5 one or the other of those questions: How6 are citizens going to get more service7 for the same money or what are our8 savings going to be.9 COMMISSIONER DiBERARDINIS: I10 agree. If I can't come in here to answer11 those questions to some degree, you12 should be mad at me. You should be --13 you should take --14
I'd never be15 mad.16 COMMISSIONER DiBERARDINIS: But17 it's true. We have to perform. I mean,18 my point is, we have to perform and we19 have to meet the demands of the20 legislation and the expectations of the21 citizens.22
I'd love23 to -- if there was some plan that's24 currently in operation -- I mean, when25 47 4/21/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.1 you come back before us next year for2 additional funds, how will we have judged3 whether or not this year has been a4 success? What are the goals of the5 Department in terms of where you're6 going? In other words, we were supposed7 to have budgeting for outcomes this year8 or zero-based budgeting. I wrote a paper9 on it in 2007, which was how we measure10 the effect of different programs.11 Could you provide to the12 Chair -- and I'm not asking you to go13 through it right now -- how we should, in14 your view, measure the success of one15 year to another in terms of the different16 programs and services provided by both17 departments.18 COMMISSIONER DiBERARDINIS:19 Yes. And I think again --20
Thank you.21 COMMISSIONER DiBERARDINIS: --22 that's a challenge that I put out before23 to staffs and the leadership both in and24 outside the departments. That's a25 48 4/21/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.1 challenge that I think we have to meet.2 I'd be happy to over time share that with3 this body, how the process is going, what4 are the outcomes and how are we going to5 know we met them.6
Before the7 budget process I'd like to have something8 to the Chair.9 COMMISSIONER DiBERARDINIS:10 Sure.11
Okay. I12 want to commend you and one of my13 favorite Council staffers, who is not on14 my staff, for getting out to Fernhill15 Park with a bunch of people and16 leveraging a lot of different resources,17 different community groups, different18 things to clean that up, and I want to19 ask you, is there going to be a proactive20 plan in the future for leveraging21 resources like this?22 COMMISSIONER DiBERARDINIS:23 Well, I think it goes back to your early24 point, Councilman. When you know what it25 49 4/21/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.1 is you want to accomplish, then you know2 who it is you're going to do it with and3 what are the resources, what are the4 aligned interests, who are all the5 partners. So I always struggle when I am6 sort of in a position sort of as a public7 administrator. I think they have to8 struggle for what is the product, how do9 we communicate that, how do we engage10 people, staff and others, in delivering11 that product and how do we measure12 success. When you can do that, then your13 relationships and who you work with14 become very clear. And then that's15 really when I found anyway new resources16 come into play, new connections come into17 play, greater connection and contact with18 community.19 So I think that the challenge20 for both departments at this moment is to21 answer that question that you asked me22 just a minute ago and then to proceed23 with the structure and the budget and the24 relationships and the collaborations from25 50 4/21/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.1 there.2
Thank you.3 We talked during last year's4 budget hearings about the need for the5 Park to implement a modern asset6 management system. There are members of7 the Commission that have been pushing8 this strongly for the last couple of9 years, and last year you testified that10 you had an interim rudimentary database11 and that you were going to be changing12 that. Where are you with that?13
We're still working14 with the interim database. The funding15 for the -- to move into a larger -- to do16 the function services requirement for the17 larger asset management system was18 contained in the two and a half million19 dollar increase which we had received and20 then was part of the budget rebalancing.21 So we don't have the funding in Class 20022 to take on the larger study. So we23 continue to manage what we do with paper24 forms, Excel spreadsheets and this25 51 4/21/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.1 database.2
Have you3 looked at commercial off-the-shelf4 property management systems?5
We have. We've6 actually been looking specifically for7 our street tree, which is the largest8 component of our asset management,9 managing all of our street tree work, at10 some commercial software that some other11 cities have been using. You still need12 the money to purchase that software and13 to have the annual license, which can run14 well into the six figures, and it's15 simply funding we don't have right now.16
Okay. I17 would suggest that there are property18 management systems that other people use19 that would cost you far less than $50,00020 a year and also have the ability to21 GPS -- take GPS data, which you could use22 for your street tree program, and that23 you ought to maybe go back to Allan24 Frank, talk to him about this, and also25 52 4/21/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.1 maybe combine your efforts with the RDA,2 which is also putting together a property3 asset management database. They've --4 not this Administration, but millions5 have been wasted on a proprietary system,6 and hopefully they'll be soon considering7 going to a commercial off-the-shelf8 system as well. And the City itself,9 Public Property, has assets that we don't10 manage in anything but rudimentary11 databases. So maybe by combining the12 Class 200 funds of three departments we13 can actually accomplish something rather14 than having each department trying to15 create its own solution.16 I would like to know -- next17 year hopefully we won't be talking about18 a rudimentary database. I certainly will19 be judging your success over this past20 year by whether or not you have got a21 property management system.22 You testified that if Plan B23 was implemented, the Park would eliminate24 92,000 in Class 200 funds for functional25 53 4/21/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.1 requirements contracts for the asset2 management system.3 (Bell rung.)4
So we're7 continuing to spend money on the8 rudimentary system or is this on a new9 system?10
This is on the new11 system we were just discussing. The12 functional requirements contract is the13 first phase to determining the extent of14 the system to be purchased in your case15 or developed.16
You could17 pay for a commercial off-the-shelf system18 for the amount of money we're talking19 about here, $92,000.20 Who is doing the functional21 requirements? Are you hiring a22 consultant for that?23
That's what I'm24 saying. We are not moving ahead on that25 54 4/21/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.1 because we don't have the funding to2 implement the system. About ten years --3
Well, you do4 in the original plan. Only if Plan B5 comes will you not spend this.6
No, Councilman. We7 have the money to do the functional8 requirements, but we don't have the money9 to implement the system and --10
If I may, about ten12 years ago, we did a functional13 requirements contract that defined what14 type of system we should have, and then15 we never received the money to actually16 purchase the system to manage our assets.17 So we don't want to spend the money doing18 the functional services requirement --19
You should20 never spend money doing. It is a waste21 of money. It is a boondoggle for22 departments to do this. There's23 commercial software that does it. It is24 very simple. Issue a request for25 55 4/21/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.1 information to the private sector, tell2 them what your needs are, and you will3 get 15 proposals from 15 different4 softwares from all over this country that5 are going to tell you that you can pay6 for what you're looking for for less than7 $92,000. There's no need to do a study.8 You know what you need.9 Who is getting that consulting10 contract? Have you done an RFP for it?11
No. I'm saying, we12 have not done an RFP for that. We have13 not started any process to expend those14 funds.15
Thank18 you.19 The Chair recognizes Councilman20 Jones.21
Thank you,22 Madam President.23 My colleague, Bill Green, asked24 how you measure success from one year to25 56 4/21/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.1 the next, and I would only weigh in to2 say that I measure it in part by the3 minority participation that you brought4 before us. I measure it in part by the5 number of permits that I hear are6 increasing every year for use of Park7 facilities. I measure it by simple8 things like the grass being cut on a9 regular basis. I measure it by the10 number of suburbanites that now want to11 participate in joint ventures with the12 City of Philadelphia on the Manayunk13 Bridge and how we connect suburbs to14 urbs. And so I believe that we are15 making progress. Sometimes baby steps,16 sometimes giant steps, but we are making17 progress, and I look forward to measuring18 it every year as we go forward.19 I would also want to know in20 that regard that early on we talked about21 the growing problem of events being on22 the Parkway between the Art Museum and23 the impact it has on a lot of the24 museums. I believe a figure of 3025 57 4/21/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.1 weekends a year we shut down the Parkway,2 which stops vehicular traffic from3 getting to some of those institutions,4 and I wanted to know in your planning,5 are you moving some of those events to6 other locations inclusive of the7 Concourse and Centennial areas in my8 district, and, if so, how do you blend9 that and how do you make that10 logistically make sense?11
Thank you,12 Councilman. I would like to address the13 often cited 30 weekends a year, because14 that's actually not an accurate number,15 and we will supply to the Council16 President the list of the weekends that17 are programmed for 2009. Because we18 frequently hear that and it actually has19 not been 30 weekends in many years,20 because we've been very cognizant. I21 will tell you that in the last ten years,22 we have only permitted three new events23 on the Parkway, because we're very24 cognizant of the impact of those events25 58 4/21/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.1 on our partners.2
It's about 16 days,5 so it could be a Saturday or a Sunday and6 sometimes it's a Saturday and a Sunday,7 so that's one weekend. About 16 days in8 the year.9 I sit on the Board of Parkway10 Council Foundation. Of all the11 institutions on the Parkway, that is a12 frequent point of conversation. So we'll13 get you updated numbers on those.14 But to the second portion of15 your question, yes, we have been --16 everyone that comes to Fairmount Park17 that wants to do a first-time special18 event wants to do it on the Parkway,19 because it is the quintessential20 Philadelphia setting. Everyone wants a21 backdrop of the Art Museum and City Hall.22 We steer all first-time special events23 away from the Parkway, largely because24 they're not large enough to justify going25 59 4/21/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.1 on the Parkway. And if they're not2 specific to a Parkway institution -- for3 example, one of the three new events on4 the Parkway in the last ten years is in5 fact the Free Library's Book Festival,6 which happened last weekend for the third7 year. So that's obviously appropriate to8 be on the Parkway -- (continued) we9 direct them to a number of places. We've10 been directing some athletic-focused11 events up to Pennypack on the Delaware in12 Pennypack in the Northeast. Most of our13 benefit walks and runs we've been14 redirecting to Martin Luther King, Jr.15 Drive, since that's closed for16 recreational activity anyway on Saturdays17 and Sundays, and into the Centennial18 District in West Park. And in the19 Centennial District, we've developed a20 new five kilometer course that does not21 impact the operations of Please Touch,22 and, in fact, just last night I got an23 e-mail from the Director of Operations at24 Please Touch praising Park staff for this25 60 4/21/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.1 past weekend, beautiful weekend, lots of2 folks, lots of activities in the Park,3 and Please Touch was able to open and4 function while still special events5 occurred on their front door.6
I would like7 to follow that up with are we still8 anticipating the approximate $45 million9 from the federal government for that10 particular area, and how does that impact11 specific projects that may be identified12 in that area? And one near and dear to13 me would be Centennial Lake and Concourse14 Lakes, which are the first15 concrete-bedded manmade lakes in the16 country, which hasn't seen a dredging in17 20 years. So I'm saying all this not for18 you, because you already know where they19 are. I'm saying it for future purposes,20 and that wouldn't those lakes be a21 wonderful outdoor environmental classroom22 for kids and wouldn't those lakes be a23 wonderful urban fishing experience for24 youth from around the City to take a pole25 61 4/21/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.1 to be right in an urban environment,2 actually catch a trout or something like3 that? And these aren't really expensive4 kinds of capital improvements. These5 are -- and if we're talking about all of6 this prosperity in a one-mile area, we7 can't just leapfrog over those two lakes.8 So I wanted to know what the status of9 those projects were.10
The Centennial11 District Authorization Act, which died in12 the last Congress with the election, has13 been reintroduced by Congressman Fattah.14 It's been reintroduced in the House. It15 is to be reintroduced this week in the16 Senate by Senator Casey. Both Senator17 Casey and Congressman Fattah are very18 positive on its future passage. They're19 both committed to working on it.20 As you're aware, Councilman,21 that's an authorization act that does not22 give us money, but that gives us the23 right to apply through the National Park24 Service in the federal authorization25 62 4/21/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.1 process for money.2 So the authorization process is3 moving very well. Separately, though, on4 the lakes, we have worked -- Joan5 Blaustein on my staff, Director of6 Environmental Resources for the Park, has7 worked with the Water Department on a8 dredging plan that we'll be implementing9 late summer, early fall to dredge10 Concourse Lake.11
I'm excited.12 And are the red-bellied turtles -- I13 learned about them.14
The17 red-bellied turtles, are they going to be18 okay?19
They'll be good.20 In fact, the dredging plan -- and we've21 encountered them both on the Manayunk22 Canal and at the lake. So they're all23 over your district. They will be -- the24 dredging plan is around -- separate from25 63 4/21/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.1 the mating season for the red-bellied2 turtles so we don't disturb their habitat3 during their critical spring season.4 That's why the dredging is summer, early5 fall.6
Just one7 other comment on that. Within the8 Concourse Lake, there is a little island9 and one of the things that I thought that10 Commissioner DiBerardinis would11 appreciate is that there are 80 different12 species of hardwood which are indigenous13 to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. It14 would be nice to be able to have those15 species represented on that island and16 markers, placards or signage be able to17 have young people identify the difference18 between an oak and the difference between19 pine and know those kinds of species as a20 part of their outdoor experience.21 Thank you, Madam President --22 or Madam Chair.23
Thank you24 very much.25 64 4/21/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.1 The Chair recognizes2 Councilwoman Brown.3
Thank you4 very much.5 I would be very remiss to let6 these hearings go this year and not7 acknowledge the work of Bob Allen, who8 worked very, very, very, very, very9 closely over a long extended period of10 time with Councilman Clarke and I as we11 looked to see how we could find12 efficiencies long before the issue went13 before the voters, and this was the14 earliest time since then that I've had a15 chance to make that acknowledgment.16 I'm pleased to hear not that17 the number of events have been reduced,18 but to know exactly what the number is,19 number one.20 Number two, there may be a role21 for us to help in getting the word out22 that the events are on the Parkway so23 that citizens and visitors alike can24 rearrange their lives when it comes to25 65 4/21/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.1 the traffic issues that we have to2 confront on the Parkway. So is that a3 consideration when -- what is your4 strategy for getting the word out that,5 A, they're happening and, B, you need to6 be aware of this because lives have to be7 moved around because of the traffic8 issues?9
All of the10 information on events on both King Drive,11 Kelly Drive and the Parkway are posted on12 our website, right on the home page at13 fairmountpark.org. There's a link to the14 complete event listings for all three and15 the hours of either closure or detour,16 depending on the situation. So that's17 publicly posted mid-March every year. So18 that's there for the whole event season,19 updated as need be. And then20 specifically on the Parkway, we actually21 work fairly extensively with the Parkway22 Council Foundation. We use that23 organization as the vehicle to get out to24 the CEOs of the leadership of each, and25 66 4/21/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.1 as recently as yesterday, I was2 corresponding with the leadership at the3 Philadelphia Condominium right on the4 Parkway. They had a question about one5 specific special event. But all the6 information for all three venues, King,7 Kelly and the Parkway, are posted right8 on our home page.9
Is there10 some connection with the neighborhood11 residents for the --12
Logan Square13 neighbors and the Fairmount Civic14 Association both, yes. They both receive15 all these lists.16
Give us an17 update on Dell East just for this record.18
That's actually a19 Recreation Department facility, so20 Commissioner Slawson will be able to --21
I believe25 67 4/21/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.1 that that's it, Madam Chair.2
Thank you3 very much.4 The Chair recognizes Councilman5 Clarke.6
Real quick,11 I just want to briefly kind of -- some12 earlier conversations around the13 basis/purpose, the intent on the merger14 as a co-sponsor of the bill, along with15 Councilwoman Brown, I just wanted to say16 one of the issues that came up in that17 discussion was in fact the realization of18 potential cost savings, and I want to say19 that there were actually a significant20 amount of cost savings realized during21 the course of the operational mergers22 that did not require any legislation, and23 hopefully that more than pays for24 Commissioner DiBerardinis' salary. I25 68 4/21/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.1 think we're okay in the Five-Year Plan2 also with respect to that.3 But there were actually a4 number of other issues that I think were5 if not equally, maybe even more6 important. This whole issue of7 transparency in terms of the selection8 process was very high up as it related to9 how we select the Commissioners of the10 newly formed entity, and as earlier11 referenced by the Commissioner, that12 caused more people to apply for the13 Commission of Parks and Recreation I14 think more than any other commission in15 the City of Philadelphia has ever, and16 the qualifications of those people caused17 us to try to come up with a strategy to18 figure out how we keep those people19 engaged. So I say if nothing else, it20 achieved that goal of getting people21 engaged in the parks.22 The other issue related to the23 level of responsibility, because at the24 end of the day, during the course of the25 69 4/21/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.1 old park system, in particular it was2 never clear who was responsible and who3 had jurisdiction over the Park. It was4 an issue about Park Commissioners at the5 end of the day, and I know, Mark, you6 won't say it today, but, frankly7 speaking, the lines of communication as8 to who was your supervisor was quite9 difficult, because you'd get calls from10 the Park Commissioners, and there were a11 number of them. You'd get calls from12 Councilmembers and you'd get calls from13 state reps and you'd get calls from14 friends groups, and at the end of the15 day, it's like who did you really answer16 to. I think this sets up the lines of17 responsibility quite clearly. And then18 this whole issue about funding.19 (Bell rung.)20
And I'll21 wrap up. It was never really clear at22 end of the day from the general public23 who was responsible for funding the Park,24 because it's kind of -- and I don't think25 70 4/21/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.1 that the elected officials were pressured2 enough to fund parks in the appropriate3 way because of that whole confusion4 around funding. So this pretty much set5 it quite clear who is responsible, who6 has jurisdiction over what, and has a7 significant transparency issue as it8 relates to making sure that those people9 who make those decisions.10 And one last thing. With11 respect to the newly formed Commission, I12 think that newly formed Commission will13 give us a clear vision on Park policy.14 Unlike before, there was kind of every15 time you had a Park meeting, depending on16 what committee that the issue went to,17 the kind of -- and I'm not being critical18 of the former Park Commissioners, because19 they were really hard-working people, but20 there was no real guidelines as it21 relates to Park disposition, acquisition,22 watershed management, things of those23 nature, and I believe that this newly24 formed Commission will clearly establish25 71 4/21/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.1 those guidelines for us to enact in the2 City of Philadelphia.3 So I just wanted to just put4 that out there as one of the sponsors why5 we did what we did, and I'm sure6 Councilwoman will probably add some7 things when her turn comes up.8 Thank you, Madam Chair.9
Thank you10 very much.11 The Chair recognizes Councilman12 O'Neill.13
Thank you,14 Madam Chair.15 Commissioner, welcome back.16 COMMISSIONER DiBERARDINIS:17 Thanks.18
Good to19 have you, and I think we're fortunate20 that what would have been in an RFP21 nationally and may not have existed other22 than your unique combination of city and23 state, not just having the jobs, but24 having excelled at both of them is our25 72 4/21/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.1 good fortune. So welcome back. And I2 just wanted to ask you, as I was sitting3 here listening to the talk about4 consolidation, one of the major things I5 remember as reasons that the Parks6 Alliance and others wanted the7 consolidation, wanted a change in8 governance was that the -- what was at9 that time the new Park Commission that10 came after some reform that people11 thought was going to happen, new people12 were put on, there was sort of a citywide13 movement, including the Alliance, to get14 new blood in the Commission. They did a15 strategic plan. The Commission engaged a16 strategic plan and then didn't follow it.17 At least that's what I remember. And one18 of the things was, there were key areas19 they didn't follow, and I've sat next to20 my colleague, Councilman Clarke, who told21 me he moved into a new area a few years22 back in Northwood and he has a23 three-block park, except it looks like a24 park, it acts like a park, but it's the25 73 4/21/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.1 Department of Recreation. And then2 there's examples of that elsewhere, but I3 just remember that one conversation,4 because it was frustrating. And then we5 have rec centers that look like rec6 centers, but they're Fairmount Park7 facilities. And it seemed like one of8 the simplest things that would help9 citizens and help the government and let10 people know if it's Fairmount Park, if11 it's a rec center, it never got done, for12 whatever reason. Is there a chance we13 can see that under the new consolidation?14 COMMISSIONER DiBERARDINIS:15 Yes. We have to do that. I mean, that's16 where those programmatic or structural17 alliances are. We have to do that quick18 and early. I mean, that has to be19 something we get right, and, in fact, I20 think that will be one of the easier21 tasks --22
Okay.23 COMMISSIONER DiBERARDINIS: --24 in the process. But certainly that has25 74 4/21/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.1 to happen.2
Thank you.3 COMMISSIONER DiBERARDINIS: And4 then the management has to -- we have to5 improve the quality of the services and6 the management as we identify them as a7 responsibility of the single entity.8
Is that9 strategic plan still relevant to the new10 consolidated --11 COMMISSIONER DiBERARDINIS: I'd12 have to defer to Mark on that.13
Yes, Councilman.14 The strategic plan done in 2005 had,15 again, 82 major recommendations. About16 41 of them have been implemented, have17 been completed or in progress, and it was18 a ten-year plan. And one of the19 recommendations in that plan was this20 possible merger with Recreation. So the21 process that the Commissioner is about to22 lead us through is actually continuing23 the implementation of that strategic24 plan, which does address the issues you25 75 4/21/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.1 raise about the transfer of facilities2 and land.3
Okay.4 Well, thank you very much, both of you.5 Good luck.6
Thank you.8 Moving along. Let me just9 announce that we are not going to take a10 break. We are going to continue on with11 the hearing. After Fairmount Park we12 will have Recreation Department, the13 Atwater Kent and then the Art Museum. So14 thank you.15 The Chair recognizes Councilman16 Green.17
Thank you,18 Madam Chair.19 So if you could just,20 Mr. Focht, if you could provide the Chair21 with the functional requirements that22 were discovered that you needed ten years23 ago. Because I can't imagine they've24 changed.25 76 4/21/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.1 So the operating budget summary2 indicates a 37.5 percent reduction from3 320 to 200 between FY09 and FY10 and4 other revenues to Fairmount Park. What5 are these other revenues?6
Budget13 summary, , there's a 37 and a half14 percent reduction in, quote/unquote,15 "other revenues" to the Park. Why are16 they dropping and what are they?17 If you don't have the answer18 now, you can provide it to the Chair.19
In your21 testimony you noted that if Plan B was22 implemented, the Park would generate23 additional revenue amounting to 83,550.24 Park staff would work to identify25 77 4/21/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.1 additional revenue-generating2 opportunities which would also ideally3 provide amenities for park users.4 I appreciate that the Park5 staff is stretched thin, but why would we6 wait for Plan B?7
Well, as I said in8 my testimony, we're not waiting for Plan9 B. At the top of of my testimony,10 I said that we are pursuing additional11 revenue-generating, on the third12 paragraph on , additional13 revenue-generating opportunities such as14 the food and vending, the professional --15 the parking, the organic material. We're16 doing all that now.17
To within the20 capacity of the staff we have, which is21 one and a half people to administer all22 the contracts and agreements in Fairmount23 Park. If Plan B is implemented -- we're24 already taking it to a certain level,25 78 4/21/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.1 pushing ourselves. If Plan B is2 implemented, we'd simply have to push3 ourselves further. I don't know the4 details of how we'll accomplish that5 right now.6
But what7 you're testifying to is, you can generate8 an additional $83,550 and you're not9 going to do it unless Plan B is needed.10 It doesn't make sense to me. I mean, you11 should be able to do it, and the way12 maybe we can motivate you to generate the13 additional $83,550 is to appropriate you14 $83,550 less and then maybe the15 motivation will be there to get that16 done.17
I mean, you19 say you can do it. I'm going to take you20 at your word.21 I have more questions, Madam22 Chair.23
I think24 you have a couple more minutes. I didn't25 79 4/21/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.1 set the clock right. About three2 minutes, I think.3
Thank you.4 The Majority Leader of this5 Council has tasked me with finding $25 to6 $50 million in savings in different7 departments, so I'm working on it.8 Okay. So you're going from 1589 people to 171 people, or another way to10 describe what's happening when you look11 at the two departments is that there's a12 2.5 million increase in Class 100 funding13 from FY10 to '11 in the Five-Year Plan,14 and then the Recreation Department is15 going down 1.3 million in Class 10016 funding. So essentially there's a net17 increase of 1.2 million overall. How18 were those decisions made?19
Can you talk21 about that in context or do we need Mr.22 DiBerardinis?23
Well, if I could24 address your first comment, the 158 and25 80 4/21/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.1 the 171. The 158 is the number of filled2 funded positions as of the date the3 budget was submitted. We are actually4 funded for 170 positions, so we're 185 positions -- excuse me; 12 positions6 unfunded -- excuse me; 12 positions7 funded but unfilled as of the date of8 when this budget was submitted. So we're9 not -- we're increasing the staff at10 Fairmount Park for next fiscal year by11 one position, from 170 to 171.12
Right, but13 if you're getting by with 158 people now14 in this budget crisis, the way I would15 look at that is that you're spending16 money for 13 positions that currently17 aren't filled and I haven't seen any sort18 of disastrous impact on citizens, when19 our other alternatives, like tax20 increases and other things, are far more21 severe. I think people want us to run22 government as efficiently as possible.23 So what would be the impact if you24 weren't able to hire those 13 people25 81 4/21/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.1 until 2011?2
Continued3 deterioration of the assets that we have.4 Some of those positions, as I've said5 several times so far this morning, are6 all of our front-line personnel, our7 skilled trades, the fact that we have 4608 structures in Fairmount Park and have one9 or two roofers. We simply don't have10 enough staff and we historically have not11 had enough staff to sustain the assets12 that we're charged with sustaining.13 (Bell rung.)14
And as I believe15 most folks are aware, if we don't make a16 maintenance investment in those assets,17 they become larger and more burdensome on18 the Capital Budget, because eventually19 they pass from Operating to Capital20 for -- if a roof falls in, it becomes a21 capital issue, not a maintenance issue.22
Sure. So if23 we appropriate the money for these24 positions, how much will you save in25 82 4/21/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.1 terms of maintenance in capital costs?2
Well, we'd be3 catching up on our backlog. We have4 about $70 million in deferred maintenance5 on our facilities that's a substantial6 backlog to catch up on. That would be7 done -- we would begin to chip away at it8 with these employees.9
Thank you,15 Madam Chair.16 Sometimes when we start to17 compare the federal government's edict to18 stimulate economic development and then19 our own local burden of deficits, they're20 at cross purposes. We say, Let's get21 shovel-ready projects ready to go, and22 you tell me you have $70 million worth,23 but for 13 people, we could be actually24 shovel-ready seems to me that we should25 83 4/21/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.1 hire those 13 people and start to do2 those projects to start to preserve our3 assets and not put ourselves in a4 situation where we're looking at valuable5 mansions, valuable historic mansions,6 that can't be replaced, and they are7 Philadelphia treasures. But I'll save8 that for another time.9 What I'd like to focus on in my10 time is to talk about as we start to look11 at that museum connection to the12 Schuylkill, connection to the Centennial13 District connection, are we considering14 alternate forms of transportation such as15 trains, such as some type of shuttle16 buses, and dare I even say some petty17 cabs? Would that be the kind of thing18 that might be useful along those19 particular stretches of park?20
Yes, Councilman,21 they would be beneficial. Our colleagues22 in the Centennial District, Please Touch23 and -- particularly Please Touch and the24 Zoo, have worked extensively this season25 84 4/21/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.1 or over the winter with the Center City2 District and SEPTA to expand the Phlash3 route. So the seasonal Phlash route when4 it starts on May 1st will, for the first5 time, go to the Zoo and Please Touch out6 in the Centennial District to provide7 that tourist connection.8
They'll go to -- on11 the regular route, they'll go to Please12 Touch and then on Mann events, they'll go13 to the Mann and then they'll loop back in14 down the Parkway.15
So will they16 hit the Horticultural Center, Japanese17 House, Ohio House?18
Couldn't we20 look at the possibility of extending it21 to them? Because those are valuable22 institutions out there as well.23
And take a25 85 4/21/09 - WHOLE - BILL 090212, etc.1 look at how and whether or not it would2 warrant doing so if the demand could be3 increased by people knowing coming into4 the City of Philadelphia and there's a5 piece of material on promotions that I6 can go out to the Horticultural Society7 or the Japanese House and those things8 are available to me through that mode of9 transportation.10 The other thing is, I heard11 about the trains. Is that a train that12 would be a part of a loop that would go13 that far west?14
I know there's been15 some discussion amongst the Mann and16 Please Touch with SEPTA about reopening17 the SEPTA Regional Rail stop at 52nd18 Street right there at the commercial19 development. I've not been part of those20 conversations. I don't know their21 status.22