Committee Hearing, April 2, 2003

00001 COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - - - Room 696, City Hall Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Wednesday, April 2, 2003 9:55 a.m. - - - Bill Numbers 030002, 030003, 030004, 030005, 030006, 030008, 030009 030010, 030012, and 030013; -and- Resolution Number 030030 - - - PRESENT: COUNCIL PRESIDENT ANNA C. VERNA COUNCILWOMAN JANNIE BLACKWELL COUNCILWOMAN BLONDELL REYNOLDS BROWN COUNCILMAN DAVID COHEN COUNCILMAN JAMES KENNEY COUNCILMAN RICHARD T. MARIANO COUNCILMAN MICHAEL A. NUTTER COUNCILMAN BRIAN J. O'NEILL COUNCILMAN ANGEL L. ORTIZ COUNCILWOMAN DONNA REED-MILLER COUNCILMAN FRANK RIZZO COUNCILWOMAN MARIAN B. TASCO - - - V A R A L L O Incorporated Litigation Support Services 1835 Market Street, Suite 600 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103 215.561.2220 215.567.2670 00002

This is a continued hearing of the Committee of the Whole, regarding Bill Numbers 030002, 030003, 030004, 030005, 030006, 030008, 030009 030010, 030012, and 030013, and Resolution Number 030030. Our first department today is the Department of Records. I would ask the Commissioner to please approach the witness table. Good morning. Please identify yourself for the record and proceed with your testimony. COMMISSIONER DECKER: Good morning. My name is Joan Decker, Commissioner of Department of Records. I will not read the testimony. I think you have a written copy. I'd just like to make a couple of comments.

And we will give the stenographer a copy. COMMISSIONER DECKER: Okay. I have with me today Jeanne Reedy, Administrative Services Director; Diana Perry from our mail return group; and Hector Valentin, Senior Photographer. I'd like to acknowledge their presence. 00003 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole First I would like to thank City Council members for the support of the Records Department. During the past year you enabled us to pass a C increase which will enable us to continue to provide service improvements to our customers, and also to implement a number of productivity initiatives within our department. One of the initiatives that we will be implementing will be a document recording notice program which is really designed to notify the home property owners any time a deed or a mortgage is filed in our department, to give them advance notice in the event that there is some fraudulent activity that's occurring against their property, and give them enough notice so that they can prevent any subsequent fraudulent activity from occurring. The other initiatives that we have planned include converting a lot of our land records that are used by many of the citizens into electronic format to make them more convenient and accessible to our customers. We also are looking into pursuing electronic recording where documents will be 00004 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole submitted in electronic format, reducing the amount of paper that is handled both by the submitters as well as our department, and automating a lot of the operations within the document recording area. And with that I would like to answer any questions that you may have.

Thank you. How many of your employees are under the DROP program, and when will they be going out? COMMISSIONER DECKER: There are approximately ten employees in DROP.

I'm sorry. I didn't hear you. COMMISSIONER DECKER: Sure. Approximately ten employee enrolled in DROP, and three of them will be going out in FY '04. There are about --

So you would have eight vacancies? COMMISSIONER DECKER: That's correct. Over a period of years, that is. Most recent enrollees occurred this past January, so we still have about two or three individuals who 00005 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole recently signed up, and it's possible that they will stay --

But in your testimony you say the number of staff position changes from 90 positions to 85 full-time staff positions. COMMISSIONER DECKER: Yes. That's correct. That is through DROP, and also through just attrition and retirements. And we are able to do this through some of the productivity improvements that we've introduced in the department.

Okay. The Chair recognizees Councilman Cohen.

Thank you. Commissioner Decker, part of your duties involves dealing with banks and title companies; is that right? COMMISSIONER DECKER: Yes, Councilman, that's correct.

And they obtain records of deed transactions of movement of property from one owner to another? COMMISSIONER DECKER: That's 00006 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole correct.

And what arrangements are made for compensation? COMMISSIONER DECKER: The --

Do they pay for the service or is that a service the City makes available because there are benefits to the City? COMMISSIONER DECKER: The financial institutions, there are a number of mediums from which the data will be made available. And anyone who wants a computer extract of the information does pay a fee for purchasing copies of that. There are a number of companies who purchase complete copies of the microfilm that's generated from the documents that you're referencing, the deeds and mortgages and other land record transactions. So they can purchase microfilm. They can purchase electronic extracts of the information that's available.

Now, is the same information available to the public generally on the same terms and conditions that's available to banks? 00007 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole COMMISSIONER DECKER: The microfilm and purchase of microfilm and purchase of the electronic information is available to anyone who requests it, providing that they pay the fee for the cost of making the copy.

Now, what is the fee? COMMISSIONER DECKER: The fee is -- The microfilm is purchased through a vendor, so the vendor really is... I don't have the exact fee. It's actually -- The copies of microfilm are produced by a company. We make one copy available to that company. And any companies that are any of our customers, the financial institutions which you're referencing that are interested, contract directly that company to produce a copy of the microfilm, and the company sets the fee for the copy of the microfilm produced.

Do you mean the City doesn't furnish anything to the banks, that the banks have to deal with an outside company to get City records? COMMISSIONER DECKER: If they want a 00008 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole microfilm copy of the actual record.

Well, I don't know whether they need a microfilm copy. Whatever copy -- Whatever material they need. Let's not get technical so that later if a question comes up you say: Well, my answer was only with respect to microfilm. I didn't know you were referring to that -- to something else. COMMISSIONER DECKER: Sure.

What I'm concerned about is, we've been getting complaints that the public does not have available to it the same information that banks and title companies routinely get. And for years commissioners of record have said: This is about to change; we're going to make everything available so that the public can get information about real estate transactions. Maybe we could stop some of these improprieties that have taken place over the years. Whatever the reason is, it's public information. And we understand from complaints 00009 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole received -- we may be wrong; we're not making a judgment about it -- but the complaint is made that the banks and title companies receive favorable treatment that's not available to the public, and that these records are not easily available to the public. And it would seem to me that if that allegation is true, then it's a serious matter. If on the other hand, it's not true and records are made easily available, then it may be a problem of not getting out the right information to people. So, could you comment on that? COMMISSIONER DECKER: Yes.

Can you tell us whether the public has these records as available on the same basis as those companies that need these services for their professional purposes? COMMISSIONER DECKER: Yes. All of the information that the Records Department has that is public record is available to everyone and anyone, whether they are company or an individual citizen.

Right. So that 00010 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole any complaints we get, for example, that somebody who wants to make available on a web site the information. You're saying that that person, if he has complained about not having the same advantage as banks and real estate is wrong? COMMISSIONER DECKER: The information is available on site in City Hall to anyone and everyone. And I'm sorry to be technical, but there are different ways of producing the information and making it available. And I'll step through three ways, if you would bear with me.

I'm sorry. I'm having great trouble hearing you. If you would speak directly in the microphone your voice will come back. COMMISSIONER DECKER: Is this better?

Well, say a few more words. COMMISSIONER DECKER: Okay. The information --

Yes; better. COMMISSIONER DECKER: Thank you. 00011 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole All of the information that the Records Department has is public information -- if it is public information, it's made available to everyone, whether it's --

It's made available... Then I missed the next word. COMMISSIONER DECKER: And there are different ways of making it available. And there -- Let me step you through three ways. Companies and individuals can purchase copies of recorded records for the land records, which I think is what you're referring to, that are on microfilm. That's available to everyone. There is also --

At no charge? COMMISSIONER DECKER: No. That's paid through a company. A company --

Why does the company have rights? COMMISSIONER DECKER: Because we do not have the resources to produce that volume in-house, and the company was awarded the contract based on an open competitive bid.

What sort of -- 00012 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole Can you outline the nature of the contract? Is it $50, or $100, or $1,000, or $10,000? COMMISSIONER DECKER: It's based on the cost of a reel of tape, and it may be somewhere in the ballpark of $10 or $11 per reel. And I can get back to you with the exact figure.

$10 per $11 per what? COMMISSIONER DECKER: Per reel, per reel of microfilm.

And how many properties -- information about how many properties would be contained on a reel? COMMISSIONER DECKER: I would say a week's worth of data may include anywhere from three to five reels, depending upon the volume of documents that we've recorded in that week.

And about how many properties would it cover? COMMISSIONER DECKER: We -- About -- I think deeds is -- the reel contains all land records. So, that would include deeds and mortgages, any kind of land record that was filed for a particular property. We record in the 00013 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole vicinity of 200,000 documents on an annual basis. We can get the math. 200,000 divided by 52 weeks.

Can we get the information for the purpose of this hearing? It doesn't help to us have you send a letter telling us what the information is. COMMISSIONER DECKER: Sure.

Because then we can't ask you any questions and get clarification about things. COMMISSIONER DECKER: We process 200,000 -- approximately 200,000 documents on an annual basis, divided by 52 weeks, is about 4,000 transactions a week. So someone who is purchasing a week's worth of data, which could be anywhere from three to five reels, at $10 a reel, would be $30 to $50, I would imagine. And --

Well, has the City ever decided that it ought to make that information public directly? COMMISSIONER DECKER: It is available in our public service rooms in City Hall every day, Monday through Friday. 00014 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole

How is it available? COMMISSIONER DECKER: We --

Somebody can come in and look at the records? COMMISSIONER DECKER: Yes. Yes, sir. We have a number of staff who assist customers, and we also have a number of public service terminals.

Now, do banks use that technique of getting their information? COMMISSIONER DECKER: They use a combination of techniques. Some use --

They use a what? COMMISSIONER DECKER: Combination of methods of acquiring the data. They send searchers into our department on site. They additionally purchase copies of microfilm of the recorded transactions. They also purchase electronic extracts of the electronic index, the index of information that gives you index information about the actual copy of the document.

Companies use 00015 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole that for purposes of their business; and they make money on it, right? COMMISSIONER DECKER: That's correct.

Now, suppose -- does the City of Philadelphia make that material available so that someone sitting at home with a computer can access that material? COMMISSIONER DECKER: If they want to purchase the electronic index, yes.

Well, would that be -- Would that make sense? Wouldn't that be very costly if they wanted to keep track of every transaction that occurred? How costly would that be? COMMISSIONER DECKER: They would have to do some programming to make that usable for them, that's correct.

Well, then it would be quite expensive, wouldn't it? COMMISSIONER DECKER: Yes.

For some individual who, say, was concerned about stories of favoritism that might exist with respect to any 00016 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole number of things, with respect, say, to assessments by the Board of Revision of Taxes. Somebody might want to check out is it true. You know, we have political organizations which in turn are run by committee people. And committee members often will report to the ward leader that in doing their work contacting neighbors, handling problems for them, one charge is frequently made that same neighbor down the street is getting preferential treatment. And that may or may not be true. Nobody knows. It would be good if there were some way of accessing that material and correcting misinformation or correcting the situation if it needs correction. How can that be done if the City doesn't make that material available to people directly through their computers? COMMISSIONER DECKER: Councilman, we do not have assessment data. That data belongs to the Board of Revision of Taxes.

Say that again. I didn't get that. COMMISSIONER DECKER: The Records 00017 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole Department does not have tax assessment information. That information is really from the Board of Revision of Taxes. It's not the Records Department.

Well, suppose somebody wanted to check. They were told their house was bought by a slum lord who's well known in the City and who does not take care of his property. And they want to find out did that empty house down the block that was boarded up that recently sold, has it been sold to a slum lord. How would that be found out easily by the public? COMMISSIONER DECKER: They could come into the Records Department and look up the owner of the property. If they know the property address, they could come into the Records Department, use the terminals there, or ask our staff, public service staff, to assist them to look up the owner of the property.

And there would be no fee charged? COMMISSIONER DECKER: Not to 00018 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole retrieve and view the information, that's correct, there is no fee.

All right. Then are you saying broadly -- Tell me if I'm right or wrong with my conclusion or vary it, if you feel it needs variation. You're saying that material is made as easily available to the public as it is to anyone else. COMMISSIONER DECKER: The information exists in the system, and that system is available in the Records Department. We are open Monday through Friday. Viewing the information is available at no cost to the public.

Councilman Rizzo has a point of information, Councilman Cohen.

Councilman Cohen?

Yes.

Will you recognize me for a Point of information?

If it's truly a Point of Information, yes.

It truly is. It's enlightening. 00019 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole

Go ahead. I yield.

I just want to follow up on...

Councilman, did you ask if it was a Point of Information, or a Point of Inquiry or a Point of Order?

Well, I'm not sure which it is but it's --

All of three.

-- it's a point.

Defer to the Councilman's opportunity to speak.

It's all three. Why would this not be -- Why wouldn't this information be available on the internet? COMMISSIONER DECKER: The information is not available on the internet -- to -- We have... The system that was developed for this information requires a number of licenses to deploy it widely. And it also requires a certain network capacity to open up to a broad audience. And we are not in a position at this point in time 00020 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole to deploy it on a wide -- the internet application on a wider basis.

Because of all the departments that have information on using technology, you would think the Records Department would be the most automated of all, because people like Councilman Cohen would like to get information. Tell me: Is there an opportunity to get this any other way from... through the internet, through another department, through L&I? COMMISSIONER DECKER: Well --

Is there another way in? COMMISSIONER DECKER: The information that we have, the application that is used on the internet is also available in our public service rooms in City Hall. So it's a very user friendly automated system that is open to the public. Anyone can come in to view the information

Commissioner, that was fine 20 years ago. People don't come in to the Public Information Office to look up an 00021 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole address like Councilman Cohen just addressed. Are you telling me that this is something we can do? And if we can't -- If you can, then tell us what you need to get it accomplished, because we need to really get up to speed on making technology and information available to people. So explain to me what you need to do. And I'm finished, Councilman Cohen. COMMISSIONER DECKER: Okay.

What you need to accomplish that. COMMISSIONER DECKER: The deployment on a wider basis would require a larger network capacity to come in to access the information, and also the procurement of additional licenses to make that available, based on a larger number of users who would access that information.

Madam Chair, if I may follow up.

As a former Commissioner of Records, I yield to Councilman Ortiz.

The Chair recognizes Councilman Ortiz. 00022 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole

Thank you, Madam Chair. What is PHILADOCS? COMMISSIONER DECKER: PHILADOCS is the automated recording system. So, it's an automated system that enables the Records Department to process documents that need to be recorded as part of the Recorder of Deeds Office.

If I'm an individual that runs a real estate firm and I need to check on certain things, is that available to be at my office? COMMISSIONER DECKER: There is limited access to approximately 50 companies that is available. That access is available to high usage users.

So you make this off center, out of office service that you can do within your -- remotely from your own office, available to 50 companies. Could you tell me, do you have a list of the 50 companies? COMMISSIONER DECKER: I could get that to you, Councilman. 00023 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole

And do you charge these 50 companies anything for it? COMMISSIONER DECKER: A pilot -- When we implemented an automated system, the year after we implemented the automated system, we --

Could you speak into the microphone, please. COMMISSIONER DECKER: Sorry.

When you speak into the microphone, I hear you without any problem; but as soon as you vary away from it, your voice gets lost. COMMISSIONER DECKER: Sure. Is this better?

Yes, much better. COMMISSIONER DECKER: Okay. When we implemented the automated recording system, a year after the implementation, we produced a pilot that was -- we had a limited number of licenses that were available to make this information available, so we wanted to test that pilot. To expand -- And let me also --

My question was: You have 50 companies that you make this available 00024 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole to. One, I'd like to see the list of those companies.

Commissioner, I think the gentleman that you're looking for is right behind you. COMMISSIONER DECKER: I'm sorry.

One, I'd like to see the list of those companies, who they are; and two, do you charge those 50 companies anything for the service? COMMISSIONER DECKER: No, we do not. This was envisioned to be a pilot, Councilman.

But they get it for free? COMMISSIONER DECKER: Mm-hmm.

50 big companies? COMMISSIONER DECKER: I don't know that they're all big companies. But can I add a little bit of context to this, please?

You can add context to it, but just get a service for free that is not available to citizens of Philadelphia when it should be. And other citizens that want to access that service have to come in to City 00025 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole Hall and then pay a very large fee for that. COMMISSIONER DECKER: No. No, Councilman. The companies generally in order -- The companies that are engaged in title insurance business or financial institutions that are engaged in recording mortgages and other kinds of mortgage-related instruments, generally establish title plants. And they generally establish folders of records with transactions against particular properties.

I know what title companies do. I'm an attorney. This is a service that should be provided to people, citizens, that want information about what real transactions are happening. If a citizen is only concerned as to what is going on in his or her neighborhood, for example: A few houses have been bought, boarded up; nobody knows who did it; and they left there; all of a sudden another house happens. And a citizen gets concerned. And he may not want or she may not want to come down or cannot come down 00026 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole to City Hall. He should be able to get into a computer and access that information. If it is available to these companies, it should be available to that citizen. COMMISSIONER DECKER: And it is available. If an individual is not able to come into the department, we respond to mail requests, we respond to telephone requests.

But you see what I'm talking about.

Do these companies have to do the same thing? They mail in a request for each item of information they want? COMMISSIONER DECKER: Yes, we do. Yes, we do.

No, I didn't ask whether you do. I said, is it a requirement of your office that each of these 50 companies mail in separately each request?

No. They can access immediately, right? COMMISSIONER DECKER: They generally establish a title plan. And the online system is 00027 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole of use to them only to see the last -- latest transaction of record. All of the companies that generally do business with us -- Having the internet in itself is --

I'm not getting your voice at all. Could you speak directly into the microphone. When you do, there's no problem at all hearing you. COMMISSIONER DECKER: The companies that need this information also purchase the information. They establish a file of data. They purchase microfilm, and they also purchase electronic extracts.

Does the City make a profit on what's purchased from them? COMMISSIONER DECKER: No, sir. We do not make a profit.

All right. So that the City gains nothing except they get paid the costs? Why does the City charge a fee, to cover what? COMMISSIONER DECKER: To cover the cost of producing a copy.

The City's costs. 00028 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole COMMISSIONER DECKER: Yes, Councilman.

It's my understanding of the law that the City is limited in its charges to recouping the cost. Now, what would be the cost of preparing it so that people in the public who may not want it to be known that they're checking on something. If there's public information, it means people have a right to check on it without making an announcement to the world that they are checking on the certain property. They ought to be able to check it, decide whether or not they want to release information that makes it clear to everybody else that this is a problem that needs attention. They may just want to look at it; say, oh, it's okay, and forgot about it. Why should they have to write so that you can notify the homeowner, or the owner of the property, or the title company that somebody's checking on something? COMMISSIONER DECKER: They don't 00029 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole need to -- They can come into the Records Department Monday through Friday --

But citizens don't come in. Why do you erect such a barrier? Why don't you tell the realties, 50 companies, that you're eliminating them from remote access, and any information they want they're going to have to get by coming in? You don't do that because it's not convenient to the companies. And we say that's okay. COMMISSIONER DECKER: The company --

Point of Inquiry.

Excuse me. The Chair recognizes Councilman Nutter for a Point of Inquiry.

Thank you. Councilman Cohen, are you all right with that?

Yes. Sure. Go ahead.

Commissioner Decker, you have and continue to be -- You have been and continue to be one of the stars in this 00030 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole Administration. You and your staff, I believe, have moved the Records Department leaps and bounds over the years, from a technology standpoint, from an efficiency standpoint, from a management standpoint. And I think many of us, including those who are asking questions, have praised your work and your service. As we continue to move into this age of increasing technology and increasing access, I wondered, based on the questions that are being asked, whether or not you would be agreeable to -- And I know we have our Budget Director here who is possibly the highest ranking member of the Administration -- Well, I don't want to get into that. I think, actually, commissioners outrank budget directors, but they never get what they want. Is it possible for us with a number of Council Members who are asking questions, and the President or representative from the President, to sit down and talk about all of these issues and seek to come to a reasonable resolution 00031 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole to the increasing need for access to public information by regular citizens, as well as business people, and talk through who's paying for what or who's getting access for what? And to some extent get you out of a complete negotiation right here at the table, where you might not have all of the information that you need to do what you need to do under the circumstances? Would you be amenable -- COMMISSIONER DECKER: Yes. Thank you very much.

-- to that kind of process and procedure, working in conjunction with members of Council and the Administration? COMMISSIONER DECKER: Yes. We'd be very happy to do that.

But Councilman, I won't at this point be amenable to that.

Councilman Cohen, I assume you're going to continue to ask all your questions

No. No, not necessarily. You have a very interesting idea. But before I feel that question would be 00032 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole appropriate, we have here today a person who makes it his public business, his participation in the City affairs, things we'd like to see many other citizens do. He makes available, at the expense to himself, certain public information which I think the City itself ought to make available. But since the City doesn't, I would like to know whether or not before -- May we hear from him to see whether or not what his view would be on this, and whether we're dealing with the issues. He makes available things publicly that often I don't like, and I fight with him. You know, all of us in public life kind of feel we wanted a lot of publicity in everybody else's business. But when it comes to things we're involved in, we like to assert privacy. So I have any own disputes with the gentleman involved. But basically he's doing a very useful public service. He makes available, whether we in public life like it or not, things that he feels are important to the public. And when they are public issues, I think he's dead 00033 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole right. So I would like to suggest, Madam President, if we could hear from Ed Goppelt, I think his name is, who makes information available to citizens of Philadelphia on a web site, public information that's clearly public but that the City does not make available easily. I'd like to ask whether he thinks such an arrangement would be useful. If so, I would be happy to accept Councilman Nutter's suggestion. But I feel he's the expert in this area, and I would like him to be participating in any negotiations. Is it all right, Madam President? Could he be called while commissioner Decker is -- so we know we've joined the issue.

That would be fine.

Mr. Goppelt, would you come forward. Commissioner, stay at your desk, at your seat. Can we have the Sergeant-at-Arms provide a chair?

There is a chair. 00034 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole

There is a chair.

Yes.

Well, identify yourself for the record, Mr. Goppelt. Spell your last name, so that they'll have it, and tell us your reaction.

Okay. Good morning, City Council. Councilman Cohen, can you hear me?

Yes. Fine.

Okay. I'm Ed Goppelt. My last name is spelled G as in George, o double p as in Peter e-l-t as in Thomas. And I run the good government web site, hallwatch.org.

Has the discussion that's taken place reflect consideration of your concerns? Have we been dealing with the issue as you see it or do you want to rephrase what you think is not being made available to the public?

Well, clearly, PHILADOCS is not being made available to the public.

What was that again? 00035 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole

PHILADOCS.

Will you explain what that is.

It's information about deeds, mortgages, real estate transactions that is available to the title companies, to a select group of title companies, law firms, and banks. My concern about this arrangement is that it's not fair, services being provided to private companies that is not being made available to the public. I think one relevant fact which hasn't been brought out at this point is, at least according to the Records Department's previous budget messages, they implemented this so-called pilot just about three years ago. Now, I don't know about the Records Department, but it usually takes me about two days to test a web page to see whether it works or not, and they've had three years. So I think the question has to be asked: At what point is enough enough? And are you either going to go with this thing full bore and make it available to the public, or stop 00036 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole giving these companies a special break. It's not fair.

Would you have a comment to that? I'll adopt that as my question, Mr. Goppelt. With your permission, I'd like to appropriate your question and make it mine, and ask the Commissioner for her response. COMMISSIONER DECKER: Sure. And Councilman, on advice of counsel, since Mr. Goppelt has filed a lawsuit against the City and is suing the City, I really would prefer not to answer this in a public session, but I'd be more than happy to answer all of your questions in a meeting with City Council.

Well, unfortunately, City Council has a legislative chore to do; and the fact that somebody sues or doesn't sue is of no relevance to us. We don't think that insulates the material from public intrusion by City Council. We don't think you can employ a lawsuit against your department as an excuse to deny Council the information it must have. So we don't recognize that or else 00037 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole every department in the government would easily arrange to have lawsuits filed against it, because nobody likes to testify before City Council.

The question is simple. The pilot has been in effect for three years. Why doesn't it become a program? I think the issue is simple. The pilot has been in effect for three years. Why this program has not been expanded so that the public can have access to it? COMMISSIONER DECKER: And I mentioned that we do not have -- Again, I'm going against the advice of counsel. This is a suit that's filed --

Who is counsel? And who does he represent?

The issue is, what information is going to be made available to the public that is made available to a private company under the guise of a pilot program that is now three years old. Now, to me that is not a pilot program any longer. That is a program. That is a program that is ongoing. And a pilot program does not take that long to be done. 00038 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole And how long is it going to be made available for free to the companies, and the citizens are made to come down to City Hall to go through that expense, and then to pay something else other, and go through all that inconvenience to get that same service. I don't think it's fair. The answer is yes or no. When is it going to be done? Is it going to be done within the next month, or the next week, the next six months, the next year? COMMISSIONER DECKER: As I previously --

Who is the attorney advising you? COMMISSIONER DECKER: Joe Bradica from the City's Law Department.

What's the name? COMMISSIONER DECKER: Joseph Bradica.

Of the Law Department. COMMISSIONER DECKER: Yes, the City's Law Department.

Okay. 00039 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole COMMISSIONER DECKER: As I mentioned previously, the wider deployment is based on license issues and some network capacity.

Where's Councilman Ortiz. He raised that question. Councilman Ortiz.

Councilman Ortiz.

We received an answer. Do you want to comment on the answer?

Councilman Ortiz.

Yes, ma'am.

You received an answer to your question. Is it a satisfactory answer or not?

I didn't hear it.

Could you repeat your answer? COMMISSIONER DECKER: Would you like me to repeat it?

Yes. COMMISSIONER DECKER: The wider deployment of the internet application is based on 00040 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole two items: On license issues procuring the number of licenses, and also on network -- City network capacity.

Explain that license issue. Because a citizen -- a citizen -- certain real estate transactions is going on around him. Houses are being sold. He doesn't know to whom they're being sold to. And he wants to really -- He's concerned, because it's his neighborhood. And he wants -- He knows that there's PHILADOCS program and pilot program that companies -- real estate companies can go into and find out who is doing what in buying of properties. And he doesn't have the time to come down, but he wants to find out. Does he have to get a license? COMMISSIONER DECKER: No, Councilman. Neither the public -- members of the public nor anyone who uses this on the outside do not need to procure a license.

Well, you're talking about licensing. COMMISSIONER DECKER: The City has 00041 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole to purchase a certain number of database licenses. The database product that the system is built around has license issues. You purchase a license based on a number of users. If you increase the number of users, you must increase the number of licenses. that --

So you now have a license for 50 users. COMMISSIONER DECKER: That's correct.

And you need a license for --

Who is using a license? COMMISSIONER DECKER: The automated systems have data bases that are part of the automated system. So whenever a system is developed, there is software that accompanies --

How much is that license for 50 people? COMMISSIONER DECKER: I don't have the figure with me right now. It's thousands. It would be thousands of dollars. 00042 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole

Point of Information, Councilman.

Your point is recognized by me.

Commissioner Decker. COMMISSIONER DECKER: Yes.

You have 50 people that are in a pilot program. COMMISSIONER DECKER: That's correct.

I'm a guy that likes to keep it simple. Why can't we make Hallwatch 51? COMMISSIONER DECKER: Again, we have a limited number of licenses.

I'll get one of those folks to give up their subscription or their... whatever. Honestly, Commissioner, it just sounds like there's more to this than we're hearing today. I can't understand why we can't make this information available to a credible organization that provides a unique service to the 00043 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole residents of this region. I'd like you to have the technology people or whoever answer the question why we can't add one more person to this issue, one more organization. Could you get someone to answer that question? COMMISSIONER DECKER: I will.

Madam President, May I?

I still have the floor.

The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Brown.

Okay.

Thank you, Councilman Cohen. This new procedure, was it this way at the door, what we viewed to be an inequity in the process? When the program started three years ago, was it structured in such a way where citizens had to pay and businesses did not? COMMISSIONER DECKER: The pilot was made available when it was implemented several years ago to companies. 00044 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole

To companies. COMMISSIONER DECKER: That's correct. This is -- And I understand your basic point, the point that you're trying to make. This setup is not unusual across recorders' offices and other counties. The composition of your customer base is such that probably more than 90 percent of our users, 90 percent of our transactions, are really transactions that are filed by companies, including such companies like title insurance companies, banks, mortgage institutions, other kinds of financial institutions. They generally submit documents in bulk. They perform title searches against properties. So there is a rationale behind why things are structured in a certain way. And again, I understand the point that you're all making --

What was the --

Those are the very types of businesses that are in the best position to pay for that type of service. 00045 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole COMMISSIONER DECKER: And they do pay for -- They purchase copies of microfilm and copies of the electronic index. They are paying and procuring other -- the information in other formats. The internet on its own is not going to enable them to conduct the business that they want. We deal -- As I mentioned, our customer base is predominantly large groups of companies.

I thought your main customer base would be the public. Isn't that who you're supposed to be serving? COMMISSIONER DECKER: The customer -- The companies generally perform --

You mean you're not concerned about serving the people of Philadelphia? COMMISSIONER DECKER: Of course we are. We have a number of public service terminals and a number of public service rooms that are open every day to citizens. We --

And you think 00046 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole that's enough for them, but you're always open to make changes for the convenience of these private companies and law firms. COMMISSIONER DECKER: The companies and law firms are actually -- Their customers are members of the public. They are representing --

Who could be more important a customer than a citizen of the City of Philadelphia? COMMISSIONER DECKER: The citizens are very important, and we do -- we service a lot of the companies --

Why do you put such obstacles in the way? COMMISSIONER DECKER: We're not putting obstacles, Councilman.

Why would Mr. Goppelt have this complaint? COMMISSIONER DECKER: All of our information is available to the public. That's what we do. We're in the business of making public information available to the public. We have been complimented by the state legislature for the availability of the 00047 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole records and the turnaround time that we provide.

Because they probably don't understand that you're denying the citizens of Philadelphia the information. COMMISSIONER DECKER: We are providing the services. As I am stating, these --

But not the kind of services that are needed. Mr. Goppelt, on his own without charging the public, is giving the public a valuable new information service. And it seems to me that you're finding every justification to try to say the people that deserve this information are the 50 companies, including the law firms that make money out of it, but that even though you're a City agency, you don't feel obligated to make that information easily available to the public. COMMISSIONER DECKER: No, Councilman. I'm definitely not saying that. Our function is to make public records available. And we do -- we do very much fulfill that mandate. We are very concerned about the citizens in the City. All of our staff -- 00048 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole

Then what is your objection to making the information available to Mr. Goppelt that he spoke about? Why can't you make that information -- COMMISSIONER DECKER: Mr. Goppelt has requested a number -- the information in various formats, and he is not willing to pay the fee that other citizens and companies are --

But he's not making a -- You mean you don't understand that he's servicing the people of Philadelphia without cost to the City? And you're saying to him, you've got to be -- find a way to make money before we're going to let you service the people of Philadelphia? COMMISSIONER DECKER: We cannot produce services at no cost. There is a cost to us. The other companies that want to procure -- The other companies and individuals that want to purchase microfilm or electronic records, they pay the fees that are involved.

But -- And you want the people of Philadelphia have to pay an additional load of taxes, citizens of Philadelphia 00049 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole are subject to, you want them to pay an extra fee in order to be able to get public information from your department. Is that what you're saying to us? COMMISSIONER DECKER: No, sir.

Because Mr. Goppelt does not charge the public for the use of his web site. COMMISSIONER DECKER: No, Councilman. That's not what we're saying. We're very interested in -- COUNCIMAN COHEN: Well, that's the way it's coming out.

Councilman Cohen, may I?

I'll yield.

Commissioner Decker --

I'm just having great difficulty in understanding why, when it comes to public information, the public is being denied that information.

Commissioner, if you're not willing to share this information with 00050 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole Hallwatch, then why don't you just tell us today. You indicated how pleased the House of Representatives to the State Legislature is. If you want your Council to be happy with you, why don't you make this available so we don't need to give it to Hallwatch? Why don't you just make it available through the internet? Do what you need to do. I honestly think there's no -- there's no intelligent rhyme or reason here to deny this information. You have 50 people that you're giving -- From what I understand -- correct me if I'm wrong -- there are 50 people that are provided the same information at no cost in a pilot program that Mr. Goppelt wants, Hallwatch wants. There's no intelligent rationale here not to provide this organization that information, other than you don't want them to have it. Maybe it embarrasses certain agencies in this government. Shame on them. Occasionally they need it, and so do some of the elected officials. 00051 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole But I can tell you: To give this guy a workout, to give this organization a workout and make them have to go and take a lawsuit to me is, from what I know of this organization, it's unjustified. And like I said, why don't you just make it 51 people in the pilot and be done with this. COMMISSIONER DECKER: Okay. We'll be happy to do that.

You're going to make 51 people in the pilot? COMMISSIONER DECKER: Yes.

And we're done with it. COMMISSIONER DECKER: Yes.

He's got the information, withdraws the lawsuit? COMMISSIONER DECKER: Mm-hmm.

Fine. Thank you, Commissioner.

The Chair recognizes you.

Would that it were 00052 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole that simple, Councilman Rizzo. I certainly would appreciate being added to PHILADOCS. But I have also requested the electronic version of the recorders index. And that has -- We have run into problems of cost. The Records Department has -- says that they want $400 for this information. I followed the same steps on my home computer that I believe the Records Department would have to follow in theirs. And it took less than two minutes for me to do. Maybe two lines of computer code and one CD. So I estimate that the cost to be $1.74, less than $2.00. So where is this $400 figure coming from? I have asked the Records Department or suggested on several times that we get together to discuss a fair price for these records, for the electronic version of the recorders index, and all of my offers have been rebuffed, both by Commissioner Decker, as well as the Law Department. I mean, I would be happy to meet with these folks. But every time I offer it, I 00053 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole hear nothing back, nothing.

Because apparently the Law Department, as well as the Commissioner wants the public information to be held privately by a select group of people. We don't know why they permitted these particular 50. We might have to go into that at some point. But we don't understand why they're posing this. Are you hiding things? It's hard for me to believe that, because Commissioner, as Councilman Nutter and others have remarked, we do like your records generally. And we're stunned to learn of this problem that developed. It was so inconsistent with the record of performance that you've established for yourself in this office. We don't think you have a right -- and I'm going to ask that the lawyer for the City come to the table as soon as we're finished here, because I would like to know whether he's advising a City agency that it does not have to answer questions by City Council. Because that would be very interesting if the City Solicitor's Office wants to protect agencies from questioning 00054 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole publicly by City Council. And if that's his purpose, I would like to know that so we can deal with that situation. Could we have the attorney, Madam President, come to the desk and identify himself?

He's approaching the table, Councilman. Please identify yourself for the record.

My name is Joseph Bradica. I work in the Commercial Litigation Unit at the City of Philadelphia Law Department. Councilman, I did not advise Miss Decker not to answer your question. I advised her not to answer a question from a plaintiff of an active lawsuit against the City Records Department.

I adopted his question as my question, sir.

And that's fine. And once you did that, Commissioner Decker did indeed answer that question.

All right. Thank 00055 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole you for clarifying that.

Okay.

And I believe she did that. I believe she did, in fact, answer that question.

Once the question was adopted from you, sir, yes, sir, she did indeed --

Yes,

-- answer that question.

That's my understanding.

I would like to state, while I have this opportunity --

I just want to have it clear on the record as to what your advice was on behalf of the Law Development.

Yes, sir.

And I accept that.

Thank you.

Thank you. I don't understand why we're having this problem, Miss Decker. You may be excused, 00056 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole attorney, or you can stay with your client, either way. I don't understand why we're having this problem, why you don't say that since he's making information available to the public, of course we'll work with him and give him the same privileges and rights that you're giving these 50 people or companies or lawyers or whoever they may be, when he is acting on behalf of the public interest, something I think you should be looking for and you should be thankful that there's something doing it without charging the City for that service, because he is servicing the informational needs of the public without taxes, without charging anything to anybody in the City. Is there anybody else who makes the decisions in the Department of Records other than you? I'm wondering why we don't get a reply from you. COMMISSIONER DECKER: I'm sorry. Are there other -- anybody else that makes decisions? It depends on the nature of the decision, that I would check some issues with the Law Department and whatever other entity might be 00057 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole appropriate in the decision-making process.

Well, tell me on this one. It seems to me you have full authority to make this decision; do you not? COMMISSIONER DECKER: As I explained, Councilman, we did -- we will make Mr. Goppelt a user on the online system. But to open the internet up to a very wide -- just an open access, we are not positioned currently to do that. In order to do that, it will require a number of licenses, as well as a different network capacity. At this point in time we simply are not in a position to do that. All of the information, again, is -- the system is available on site for any individual that wants it. We work with members of the public. If they have difficulty coming in to City Hall our staff definitely works with them to get the information they need when they need it, whether that be via telephone, mail or fax request. We fulfill many public service requests to the citizens. The staff is very 00058 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole committed to public service. We understand what our mandate and mission is, to make public records available to the public, and we have consistently done that with great diligence.

Madam President, in view of the answer given, I would like to put clearly in the motion that I think no 9 appropriation for the Record Department should be considered by this Council until this matter is cleared up. To be told by a public official that we have the right to put all the kinds of obstacles in the way of having the public get information, I think is a totally unsatisfactory answer. And I'm very disappointed, Commissioner Decker. But I'm going to be voting no on any effort to provide any appropriations for the Records Department until this matter is cleared up in a way that makes available to the public on the same terms as is available to the 50 private companies. And in fact, I think it ought to be much more preferential terms, to make it available 00059 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole to the public free of charge, than it is to make it available to 50 private companies. I would like that there be a response during this hearing time to the question raised by Councilman Ortiz. I would like to ask that the names of the 50 groups now having access be made available today, not later. I would like to ask that this hearing be continued until some time this afternoon or tomorrow for the receipt of that information, including the law firms that get this material free of charge.

At this time the Chair recognizes Councilwoman Tasco.

I'd just like to ask a question. The service that this pilot program, you provide to these companies, that information is specific to them and their customers, right? COMMISSIONER DECKER: They have access -- They look up the -- They have access to all the recordings that have taken place. And they -- And they generally research the properties 00060 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole for which they are conducting business about, that's correct.

So the information that they have access to on our system is not available to the general public through them. COMMISSIONER DECKER: That's correct.

All right. So, and if I want some information, I can't go in on the internet and get the same information that they have access to. I have to call your office and get that information? COMMISSIONER DECKER: Or you can come in, call our office, send in a mail request, or a fax request.

Okay. So, now, what is the difficulty in providing it to the general public? In setting up the pilot program, was there any thought given to providing the information on the internet for the public? COMMISSIONER DECKER: Yes, it was. And as I have mentioned previously, we have two 00061 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole issues that need to be resolved in order to do that. And that is a number of licensing issues.

What does that mean? COMMISSIONER DECKER: It means that the data base -- an automated system has a number of components. One of them is a data base, and customer software. Licenses have to be purchased for that software. We are under a contractual obligation for the system. We work with vendors who provide the data base services. In order for us to -- and all of those licenses are based on cost. Most typical setup is, the license cost is based on the number of users. We right now do not have the unlimited license capacity to support open internet access from all members -- from anyone who wants to access this information. The second issue that's of concern is network capacity. We simply are not positioned to accept all of that traffic coming in to the system. So they are two -- two issues that at this point make us unable to open this up on a wider basis. 00062 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole

If you opened it up and put it on the internet, then you would no longer have the fees and money coming in from the companies, right? Because then they could go on the internet and access it without coming to you to pay a fee; is that true? COMMISSIONER DECKER: I'm sorry?

The companies that you have the special program with would no 11 longer have to come and pay a special fee to access the services. They would be able to go in on the internet and get that, right? COMMISSIONER DECKER: Anyone -- in this scenario --

Anybody would be able? COMMISSIONER DECKER: -- anyone would be able to come in to access the information, that's correct.

Okay. So what is the income from the companies that you receive? COMMISSIONER DECKER: We do not have income from the internet component. Many of the companies purchase our microfilm copies of 00063 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole recorded documents, and also they purchase electronic extracts of -- it's known as the recorders index information.

Is that what Mr. Goppelt is asking for? COMMISSIONER DECKER: Mr. Goppelt has asked for a number of things, and those components are part of his request.

And so, if he gets that and puts it on the internet on his Hallwatch, it's open to everybody. COMMISSIONER DECKER: I don't know what his intentions are. I can't answer that.

But I mean, you can go on and program in Hallwatch and you'd get all kinds of information. So the pilot program would no longer be necessary, because they could log on to Hallwatch and get the information. COMMISSIONER DECKER: I don't know what kind of information and how he would make that available. So, I'm sorry. I'm not in a position to answer that.

Okay. Let's forget Mr. Goppelt. Let's just talk about Joe 00064 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole Public. I'm with David -- Councilman Cohen in trying to see what information... We don't give access to the channels on T.V. We've been fighting that. We won't give the public access to the government T.V. stations. Now we won't give the public access to the information from the Records Department on the internet. I mean, you know, we're supposed to be a public institution that provides services to taxpayers. They pay for your department. They're not begging. They shouldn't have to come down. I shouldn't have to go down to your office. If I'm in my house and I have a computer, I should be able to access whatever information I want, as a taxpayer. And it seems to me, instead of trying to block that, every effort should be made to give public access to the information. And I think it's awful that we're having a lawsuit, spending taxpayers' dollars, to prevent someone getting information who is a citizen and entitled to the information. Whether you get it off the internet 00065 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole or you walk down the street and come into your office and get it, it's just like the old days when we were fighting to get voter registration forms. You know, those days are gone. And we had to fight those days. I thought we had moved into the 20th century. So I think you ought to go back and figure out how you're going to do it. And I think the lawsuit ought to be settled. I don't like paying for my tax dollars on a frivolous suit on something that you all can work out. I think it's a waste of tax dollars. So, I agree with Councilman Cohen. You all better figure it out. Thank you, Madam President.

You're welcome. The Chair recognizes Councilman Ortiz.

No, ma'am. I'm fine.

Councilman Nutter. 00066 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole

Thank you, Madam Chair. Commissioner Decker, let me ask a couple of questions as a follow-up to Councilwoman Tasco. The information that we're talking about -- And if I get the terminology incorrect, you'll tell me. This PHILADOCS, what is it? COMMISSIONER DECKER: PHILADOCS is an automated system. It's used both -- in two ways. It's used to process the documents that come -- land documents that come into our department to be recorded, such as deeds and mortgages. And once that information is processed through a series of work flow steps, a record is stored, and that information is then made available. It becomes public record. So that would include the most recent real estate transactions that have occurred against particular properties and with certain individuals.

At what point does the information become public record, after 00067 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole your department has processed it or while it's still in a processing status? COMMISSIONER DECKER: After -- Immediately after it has become processed.

Okay. And is any of the information within this PHILADOCS system either proprietary or confidential? COMMISSIONER DECKER: The public record component is not proprietary -- it is not proprietary, and it is public information.

Okay. When the companies access PHILADOCS, are they accessing the now processed records that are at that point public information? COMMISSIONER DECKER: That's correct.

Okay. So there's nothing in the system that either the companies or an individual citizen should not see. COMMISSIONER DECKER: That's correct.

Let's talk about the licensing issue, as well as the network capacity issue. 00068 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole In a smaller way -- And you obviously work directly with the Mayor's Office of Information Services. We have a consultant that works with us here in City Council, and they work with Moise. It's my understanding, even for our computers in our offices, in our Council offices, that when you want to put internet access or a variety of other programs on our computers, it only happens after there is a license agreement established either for the entire system in City Council or even for that particular office. Is that the issue that you're dealing with, with regard to licensing? COMMISSIONER DECKER: That's correct.

And Councilwoman Tasco's point was very interesting. How did you decide on the 50 companies or 50 users? COMMISSIONER DECKER: It was based on what we -- the funding that was available. That's how much money we had to purchase 50 licenses, that number of licenses.

So the city had 00069 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole to buy 50 licenses to allow these 50 companies to have access? COMMISSIONER DECKER: That's correct.

Okay. Now, do you have any knowledge or information with regard to the City's web site, and whether or not there are any licensing issues related to -- I mean, obviously, the general public can access the City's web site. COMMISSIONER DECKER: Mm-hmm.

Do you have any information about that? Is that mixing apples and oranges in this discussion? COMMISSIONER DECKER: Yes, I believe it is.

Okay. If the public was going to have access to PHILADOCS, how would something like that be handled in the context of the licensing issue? COMMISSIONER DECKER: We would need the resources to be able to purchase additional licenses, assuming the objective is unlimited access to the system. 00070 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole We would need the resources to enable to us purchase an unlimited number of licenses into that system.

How would you know how many licenses to purchase? Because you never really know how many people are going to use the system. COMMISSIONER DECKER: We would look at -- work the data base licensing structure to determine whether they offer a structure, a purchasing structure that would enable unlimited usage.

Okay. So if this were going to be open to the public, what's your estimate on what it would cost, from a licensing standpoint, to allow the entire public access? COMMISSIONER DECKER: I don't have an exact figure, but we're probably talking about tens of thousands of dollars.

For the 50 companies and the 50 licenses that you purchased, how much did each license cost? COMMISSIONER DECKER: I'm sorry, 00071 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole Councilman.

You have 50 companies. COMMISSIONER DECKER: Yes.

You bought 50 licenses. How much did each license cost? COMMISSIONER DECKER: Our total -- I'm sorry, Councilman. I don't have that number at this point, but we do have -- I can get that to you. I can get the annual maintenance cost for the number of licenses that is currently supporting the system.

Okay. You can send that to the Chair, and we'll then have that. But you believe that to open the system to the entire public we're talking tens of thousands of dollars, is that -- COMMISSIONER DECKER: That's correct.

-- is that your belief? COMMISSIONER DECKER: For the licenses. 00072 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole

For the licenses. COMMISSIONER DECKER: Which is one of the issues.

Okay. The second issue is network capacity; is that correct? COMMISSIONER DECKER: That's correct.

Now, the City, again, has a server. It has a web site. And I think all of us have had the experience that at certain points in the day when there's particularly heavy traffic within the government, the system either slows down or from time to time stops. Was your system set up to deal with some estimated amount of, quote, unquote, traffic in the system? COMMISSIONER DECKER: Yes. Yes, it was, Councilman.

Do you know what the capacity is? COMMISSIONER DECKER: Yes. 50 users. 00073 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole

That's a coincidence. And so, if a decision was made to open this access, there are two things that would have to happen: One, the City would have to purchase enough licenses to allow for the access; and two, it sounds like you will probably need some upgrade in either hardware or software. I'm assuming working either with Moise or through whatever consultant Department of Records utilizes, to allow the system to then function for the possibly thousands of people, additional people to use the system; is that right? COMMISSIONER DECKER: That's correct.

Okay. I'm not sure if you'll be able to answer this question, but is there a particular position of the Administration on this issue of complete and open access by the public to the PHILADOCS system? I mean, if there's not a position, don't try to create one at the moment. COMMISSIONER DECKER: At this point 00074 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole there is not a position.

Okay. So there are actually three things that need to happen: One, the City Administration has to make a decision that they wish to make available this information to the general public, one; two, the City Administration and in conjunction with City Council would have to decide to pay for it, because you need the licenses; and three, the administration would then have to decide to acquire either the necessary software and/or hardware to allow the system -- Because once you make the first decision, and once you make the second decision, you're on your way toward making this happen. But it then makes no sense to buy all the licenses, having made a decision to open the system to the public, and it doesn't then have the capacity to function. So there's a third cost and procedure that you need to go through to open the system to the entire public; is that correct? COMMISSIONER DECKER: That's correct. 00075 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole

All right.

Point of Information.

This is a point of information, not to be confused with a Point of Inquiry.

Well, I understand it. And maybe I have it wrong. And if so, I'd like to be corrected. I understand there's a request by Mr. Goppelt that that would involve a single license. It would not involve everything that's been talked about, about making it available to thousands and thousands of users. It would be made available to Mr. Goppelt who on his own is making it available to the public. Isn't that the fact here, Mr. Goppelt?

Well, the Commissioner has mentioned problems with network capacity, or cited network capacity and licensing issues as a reason for not making this information available to the public. And I would offer her and this City 00076 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole Council, if she gives me the electronic form of the recorders index, I will make that information available to the public tomorrow. If she gives it to me today, I will make it available to the public tomorrow. If she can't do it, for whatever reason, I can.

And without this huge extra cost of licenses?

Councilman, I've used free software, as opposed to paid software which the City uses. So for me, I don't face a user limit the way that they might do. However, I did want to make one observation about the licensing issue. In my experience, the limit on the number of licenses usually refers to the number of simultaneous users. In other words, the number of people who can access the system at one time --

Mm-hmm.

-- can't be any higher than a certain number, in this case perhaps 50. I don't know what the details of their license is. But in that particular case, all you need to do is not to say: Okay, these 50 00077 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole companies are permanently assigned licenses. You just buy enough licenses for your peak demand, and just let any member of the public use it. So, I don't know what the details of the licensing are --

But, Mr. Goppelt...

Yeah.

I think that that goes back to item number two, which -- and Councilman, I'm sorry to talk across your Point of Information. I just want to keep track of the traffic. It sounds like Mr. Goppelt is even saying, there will be a need for the City to buy some additional licenses. The question is, how many. And I think his point is, you know, whether you buy 10,000 of them, whether you buy 5,000 of them, maybe -- I mean, from a computer standpoint, you figure out what your peak times are, try to estimate how many licenses you need. But I don't think we get around the discussion or the reality that the City will have 00078 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole to buy some additional number of licenses, the number which we do not know at the moment. Is that a fair statement?

Well, before they answer, I would like to raise this one question. It seems to me that if you picked 50, go through the 50, get rid of one of them, and have Mr. Goppelt be the 50th, I think that would deal with the situation now. That's as I see it. I'd like Mr. Goppelt, when he answers the... portion of the question, to also answer that.

I appreciate that. Or we just buy one more license. I mean, if you have 50... And this, I think, all goes back to my earlier point of inquiry, which is, it appears that we've identified the three main issues. City has to decide it wants to do it. City has to buy some additional number of licenses which we won't figure out at this --

I don't concede the second point.

I'm sorry, 00079 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole Councilman?

I don't concede this second point. I don't concede that the City has to buy any additional licenses.

I understand, Councilman.

I think that may be true, Councilman Nutter. 50 simultaneous users on a web site is a lot. On my web site, which is visited by 500 people a day, I would say that the maximum number of people who access the web site at any one time is maybe 8 or 10.

Mm-hmm.

And I think another thing to keep in mind --

Well, we would probably benefit -- And I don't know that the Commissioner is going to have this at her fingertips. I'm not sure that any of us who are talking about this know how many of the 50 are simultaneously using the system at any one point in time, nor do we know what the general usage of the PHILADOCS system is in general. But I'll go 00080 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole back to my earlier point of inquiry, which is, the City has to decide to open the system up.

I don't think the City has any choice. I think the City's under a legal obligation.

I understand that. I'm not making the City's argument. I'm just trying to identify the issues. Decision on opening the system up; continued discussion about the licensing issue, whether you need any more licenses: one more, ten more, fifty more. Doesn't really matter to me; and three, if there's a traffic issue and a network capacity issue, that has to be dealt with. So I'm going to go back to my original point, which is, somewhere between the Commissioner, Mr. Goppelt, Rob Dubow, Moise, and probably the Managing Director's Office, and possibly the Law Department at City Council, it appears that there can be an answer and a resolution to the public's benefit to this particular issue.

Well, like you, Councilman, I'm optimistic that a resolution is 00081 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole possible. The B.R.T. has recently substantially improved their web site. I don't think we heard anything from them complaining about insurmountable issues in licensing, and so on.

I understand that. I'm very familiar with their recent upgrade.

I mean, not that I'm best buddies with the B.R.T., but in this particular case I think they did a good job, and the Records Department would be well to follow their example.

Mr. Dubow, will you take some level of responsibility for making sure that all these parties get together and seek to resolve this issue? Councilman Cohen has raised a very serious matter here this morning, not only with regard to the funding issue for records, but you've heard all of the comments and questions by the Council Members on this particular issue. There needs to be a resolution. The 00082 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole public should have access. I wanted to be sure the information we're talking about here is not private, proprietary, or confidential information; it is all public record and information. You know, if we're not going to be in the 21st century, we can at least be in the later part of the 20th century with this. And, I mean, we don't have to make this into a Federal case before we can get a resolution.

Rob Dubow, the Budget Director. Yes, I will make sure we work on this with Council and make sure the issue is resolved.

But you understand, I mean, because I know you keep track of the budget process.

Yes. Time is of the essence.

There's a timeliness to this.

Yes.

This is not the 00083 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole general -- I'm not accusing you of this -- This is not the general: We'll work on it; we'll get back to you the second of nowhere. I mean, this is an actual real, live issue.

I don't know what you mean by that.

Yeah. This is a real live issue that needs a resolution as quickly as possible. And we're going to need to hear back from you and from the Commissioner that there's been a resolution. And I'm sure many of the Members are going to want to know formally or informally from Mr. Goppelt or anyone else that's concerned about this, that there is a legitimate, workable resolution to this particular issue.

I understand the time constraints and how it ties into the budget process.

All right. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair.

You're welcome. The chair recognizes Councilman 00084 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole Rizzo.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I'd just like to go back over what I believe we agreed on today. You're going to authorize Mr. Goppelt to be the 51st member of this group. But I'd like to back up a minute and ask about this three-year-long pilot program. I question the appropriateness of providing this service to 50 people with no revenue or no 12 reimbursement at all to the City of Philadelphia. So I'd like you to check with the Law Department to see what the appropriateness of this lengthy -- I can understand, like Mr. Goppelt said, a short pilot program, but to have one that's lasted three years and spend taxpayers money to support the private sector in many cases. And I think also what you need to do is look at these 50 users to see -- And I'm sure the technology people can look at the actual usages of those 50 customers, those free customers, to make sure that they're just, you know, they have it, they don't use it, we're paying something for it. 00085 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole I'd rather see someone have it that's going to use it. So, I think you really need to look at the usages of those 50 to see, just because they're in the deal doesn't mean they should stay in it. I'm sure that there have been other people that have had an interest, that you're saying, well, we have our 50, there's no room for you. But if you have people that have used it once a month or once a day or once a week, I question the need for an organization to have that, especially for free. The other issue that Mr. Goppelt brought up was the fact that you want to charge him. And I'd like to understand that better. Is that a one-time charge of $400, or is this an ongoing charge? And Commissioner, since you've been so gracious to agree Hallwatch to come on, isn't there some accommodation that you could give to make this problem go away, get the lawyer doing something else rather than fooling around with this? 00086 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole I'd really like you to try to, if you're going to go 90 percent here, go the extra little effort, and let's make everybody happy here today. COMMISSIONER DECKER: To answer your two questions: First question, about the pilot being made available to companies at no cost, I would like to point out, the reason that that was done is because we knew that the capacity, the network capacity simply was not there, and we are unable to guarantee performance. So we do experience some down time. And for that reason, we did not establish a charge for that service.

Well, you might want to reconsider that. And I would appreciate you providing to the Chair a report for information systems or your own technology people -- I'd like to see a report on exactly in the last three years what the usages have been. And let's come up with a capacity recommendation. And if there's some that haven't been using it, maybe you need to call that list and don't need the 51st license. And that's an interesting subject in 00087 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole itself, being a government. I'm sure -- I hope that we're absolutely required to operate with those constraints to buy licenses, just like the private sector. I would hope the Law Department has looked at that very carefully to see exactly what we're required to do and what we're not doing. I don't know if licensing always applies to the degree that it does in the private sector, for our government. So, I'd like that issue. But I would like to see, when you're providing the names of the 50 organizations, what exactly they're doing, their utilization of this arrangement that they have. And also, I didn't mean to interrupt you, but if you could answer the rest of the questions in the monetary requirement that Hallwatch may have to get this online; and to give it to them in the format that he needs it to make it work, Commissioner; no obstacles here, if you could, please. COMMISSIONER DECKER: I think your second question was about a $400 charge. That was 00088 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole for procuring copies, electronic copies of index information. And there is a calculation that's used. When we establish a fee, it's really based on labor costs, on materials and usage time, computer usage time. So, there are three basic categories of costs that are used in an algorithm to determine fees. The computer usage time is based on each hour of wall clock computer time. And that's a certain fee which is established. The extract comes from a mainframe, and that the fee is based on that particular extract, what is generated by that extract. And the labor cost, if there's any labor involved in monitoring the job, submitting a job, entering variable information. All those charges are also included in that. The other element is the amount of data that someone is requesting. So, there's a difference -- I don't know where $400 is coming from. There's no, in a sense, set fee. The fee is based on the amount of data. Someone may request an extract of 00089 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole the entire data base, which goes back to... The electronic database goes back to 1976. Another requester may request a month's worth of data. Another requester may request a year's worth of data. So the actual cost for... called a job run, really depends on the amount of data that is being requested.

Commissioner, is Mr. Goppelt asking for anything different than the other 50 people? And if he isn't, then let's give it to him. COMMISSIONER DECKER: Sure.

Because you're not charging 50 other people for what you just described to me. So I don't understand why we need to be aggressive in this particular case, when you're not being aggressive at all in the other 50 situations here. COMMISSIONER DECKER: We already said we would give Mr. Goppelt online access to the system. He had a number of other requests, and I was merely trying to explain what his other 00090 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole requests were.

I understand that. And that's my question. Is he asking for anything above and beyond what you're giving the other 50 people? If he is, then that we have to negotiate. COMMISSIONER DECKER: He's asking for extracts of other kinds of data, and for which he does not want to pay a fee, which other individuals and companies are willing to pay.

Are any of those 50 people paying you for any additional information? COMMISSIONER DECKER: The online system is a different system. We've already agreed to give him access to that.

Okay. Mr. Goppelt?

All I want to do is pay a fair price for the data. The Commissioner has cited a price and cited components in the price of labor and computer wall time. I guess my home computer must be really fast, because I was able to do a month's 00091 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole worth of data in under two minutes. So I don't know what the matter with the City mainframe is that, you know, this is going to require hours and hours of wall time. I think what I would like to see from the Records Department is for them to, quote, unquote, come clean about what their costs are. I think it's a positive step forward to talk about labor cost, materials and computer time. And I liked Councilman Nutter's suggestion that all of us get together and talk about these things. I have offered in the past to speak with the Commissioner and the Department about negotiating a fair price. My offers were ignored. So I think that's the way to go, for me to sit down with them and negotiate a fair price with the computer people present so that knowledgeable people are talking about the true costs.

I agree that since you're providing this as a public service, that the costs should be fair, the costs should be not inflated, there should be -- Especially when 00092 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole we are giving this to 50 people at no cost at this moment. If it's a matter of revenue, then let's start sending the 50 people a bill in the pilot. If they want it, they can keep it. And maybe they need to start paying for it or doing whatever -- whatever is required here. But I just don't understand a three-year pilot with no end in sight. Commissioner, I suggest you end it and come up with a reasonable cost to --

Point of information.

Point of Information.

The Chair recognizes Councilman Cohen.

In the public interest, the Zoning Board, after going through the same kind of contortions that I believe the Records Department is going through, agreed to make available to community organizations without charge the cost of transcripts wherever a community organization had opposition to a zoning 00093 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole change and lost before the Board and was appealing it. Because it's in the interests of the public. The City ought to be paying Mr. Goppelt. The nerve of you compelling somebody who's doing a public service to pay for it is outrageous. Why should Mr. Goppelt, who's taking over what the City ought to be doing to make this available, saving the City, but according to your testimony, Commissioner, thousands upon thousands upon thousands of dollars. He's doing it and you're quibbling with him over a few dollars? It makes absolutely no sense whatever to be involved in this situation. There ought to be no need to work out anything. Mr. Goppelt isn't going to be charging the people of Philadelphia a service fee. He's doing it for nothing. So the City doesn't want the taxpayer to know what's going on? The City wants to keep taxpayers from having the benefit of volunteer citizens contribution to their knowledge? You ought to be encouraging 00094 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole Mr. Goppelt. You ought to be asking him: What is it costing you, and the City will pay it? It's a tremendous bargain for the City and for the citizens. And I resent deeply your trying to keep my constituents in the 17th Ward, where I'm the Democratic Leader, from getting the necessary information. They pay millions and millions of dollars a year in taxes, yet you want to deny them this information. I just don't understand that kind of public service, Commissioner. I really don't. I think you ought to be negotiating with Mr. Goppelt what are his costs and how can the City make up to him for the wonderful service he's offering the citizens without taxing them, without requiring them to make a payment.

Commissioner, I would hope that you can work this out, because I can see a hearing on this specific issue coming, maybe even tomorrow, a resolution to ask for a hearing to have everybody in here. I would hope that we don't have to do that. But I would ask my colleague, Councilman 00095 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole Cohen and any other Councilman that's interested in this issue to join me. But I would hope, based on your response so far, I believe you're going to work this out. And I think you understand how important this is to your Council. Even though we talk about how pleased the State Legislature is, make this Council happy, make our constituents happy, and do what you need to do to get this thing working, please, or you'll have a hearing.

Madam President, may I suggest that we pick a date no longer than two weeks from today for a report back at open hearing by the Department of Records as to the disposition of this question, earlier if possible, but a date no later. I don't, but you have the calendar, Madam President.

I'm looking at our calendar. April the 8th, at o'clock. Commissioner, would you be ready by then? COMMISSIONER DECKER: Yes.

Very well. 00096 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole Thank you. Are there any other questions or comments from Members of the Committee? (No response.)

Thank you very much, Mr. Goppelt. Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner.

The prison system is next. Good morning, Commissioner. COMMISSIONER KING: Good morning, Madam Council President.

Every member has a copy of your written testimony. We will make certain that the stenographer has it. He will transcribe it in full. I would ask you to please summarize your testimony, if you will. COMMISSIONER KING: I have a little something that I want to read very quickly.

That would be fine. I'm asking that you summarize rather than read the entire testimony. Thank you. COMMISSIONER KING: Good morning, President Verna and Members of City Council. I'm Leon King, Acting Commissioner of the Philadelphia Prison System. Thank you for 00097 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole this opportunity to present this testimony regarding our fiscal 2004 year operating budget, and to briefly share --

Could you speak a little slower, please.

Councilman, I'm sorry. We can't hear you. I don't know if your microphone is on. COMMISSIONER KING: He's asking me to slow down.

Oh, I'm sorry. Okay. Please slow down. COMMISSIONER KING: -- and to briefly share with you the new vision and goals of the Philadelphia Prison System. Sitting here with me at the table is Press Grooms, Deputy Commissioner for Policy and Operations; Dan Rakowski, Director of Administrative Services; and Ed Siemanski, Fiscal Officer. Also present in the room is our General Counsel and three other Deputy Commissioners who assist me in running the system. By way of background, I was appointed Acting Commissioner by Mayor Street on 00098 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole December 9, 2002, with the support of former Managing Director Estelle Richmond, at the recommendation of former Commissioner Thomas Costello, who retired in December after 30 years of service with the system. I began my employment with the City in 1991 as an Assistant City Solicitor in the Claims Division of the Law Department. In 1993 I was recruited to be one of the founding members of the Civil Rights Unit of the Law Department where I was later promoted to Deputy City Solicitor. While still litigating cases on behalf of the prison system, the Police Department, the Sheriff's Department, and the Clerk of Quarter Sessions, I was appointed General Counsel of the prison system in 1997 by then City Solicitor Stephanie Franklin Suber. In that capacity, I became the lead attorney representing the City in the Jackson vs. Hendrick consent decree litigation, and the primary attorney assisting our outside counsel in the Harris litigation. Late in 2001 I negotiated, along 00099 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole with Director Richmond and Commissioner Costello, the final settlement of the Jackson litigation, ending over 30 years of Court supervision over the system. Over the years in my capacity as General Counsel, and from my active involvement in the consent decree cases, I became familiar with almost all areas of prison operations, and have been an integral part of the management team since 1997. For about a year in 2001 I also served as a Deputy City Solicitor in the Labor and Employment Unit of the Law Department, becoming familiar with human resources issues as they relate to the Police Department, the prison system, and other City departments. Since being appointed Acting Commissioner, I, along with Deputy Commissioner Grooms, Deputy Commissioners John Murphy, Elsa Legessa, Allen Appel, and our new General Counsel Michael Resnick, have begun on a mission of accelerating the transformation and transition of the system from one overseen by the courts and not fully able to utilize its substantial internal 00100 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole talent, to one that has learned from the lessons of the past, recognizes that it cannot forgot those lessons, and is highly motivated to stress professionalism, excellence, adherence to the mandates of the United States Constitution, being even more in tune with the needs of our inmate population, and supporting and recognizing the strengths of our staff. At the same time we are sending a message to staff that behavior that does not comport with the system's goals will not be tolerated. We are also, of course, committed to grooming the leaders of the future who will have be to be ready to take on more responsibility in the next three years as we lose all four of our Deputy Commissioners due to the DROP program. With the full support of Deputy Commissioners Grooms, Murphy and Appel, I'm very proud to have acceded in obtaining the appointment of Deputy Commissioner Lagess, shortly after my appointment as acting Commissioner. She is an historic first and strong evidence of the change that has come about in the system. 00101 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole She was the first warden appointed in her own right -- female warden appointed in other own right in the 400-plus years of the system some years ago, and now she is the first female Deputy Commissioner.

Since my appointment we have also taken direct responsibility for supervising and overseeing health services within the system for the first time since 1979. Taking this responsibility very seriously and utilizing our heretofore largely untapped internal talent, we have taken decisive steps to improve the delivery of health care in the six short weeks since this responsibility was officially turned over to us. I have set the goal in the system to become a national model of health care in the correctional setting. I have instructed that the system move forward immediately to obtain accreditation with the American Correctional Association, and the National Commission on Correctional Health Care. We will also be fully implementing a 00102 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole new Hepatitis C policy within the system in the next week or so to more effectively treat those inmates who are affected by this disease. We have also taken limited steps to explore the feasibility of altering our system of health care by studying the delivery of health care in other jurisdictions. We are also committed to re-evaluating services available to inmates that may affect recidivism and are seeking to make re-entry and discharge planning an organized targeted process to reduce recidivism. Symbolic of our new mission and goals, we have moved our next correctional officer graduating exercises from the inside of the Philadelphia Industrial Correctional Center to a public ceremony which is going to be held at the Convention Center on April 11th. We are going to showcase our new correctional officer graduating class and publicly announce our new goals. The Mayor, the District Attorney, the City Controller, and the Police Commissioner are going to join us as we move forward to the future. 00103 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole We have extended an official invitation to each Member of Council to join us and show your support at our graduation. We would be honored to have all members attend. Our budget request for fiscal year '04 is $185,234,000, and represents a $10 million increase over our fiscal year '03 estimated budget request. This reflects a phase-in of additional full-time staff for our new women's detention facility which will open in the first half of fiscal '04, anticipated increases in the cost of improved medical care for inmates, and increased maintenance costs connected with the opening of the women's detention facility. This concludes my testimony. And I and my staff are available for any questions.

Thank you very much, Commissioner. Could you please explain how you are able to operate in FY '04 with 102 fewer positions than you were budgeted for in FY '03? Your FY '04 personnel services budget reflects approximately $1.2 million in 00104 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole delay in filling new positions and turnover reductions, which is equivalent to 40 vacancies for the entire year. I ask, is your budget sufficient to maintain a safe and secure environment in the prisons? COMMISSIONER KING: Yes. Our budget is sufficient to maintain a safe and secure environment in the prisons. Our budget is adequate to maintain a safe and secure environment in the prisons. And I'll ask Mr. Siemanski to explain that technical question about the staffing issue in the budget.

Edward Siemanski, Fiscal Officer. Regarding the question to the number of positions, those positions weren't filled during fiscal '03. And since the population has dropped considerably since the budget was proposed, we're going to reallocate the staff from various facilities. And we expect to be able to provide adequate security with the number in the fiscal 2004 budget.

You said 00105 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole the population has decreased? What is the population, and what was it last year?

The current population today is 7,107 inmates. And that's a decrease from back in September about 800 or 900 inmates.

I'm sorry?

800 or 900 less inmates than we had in September. This is the lowest population --

How do we account for it going down?

There are many --

That's quite a bit.

There are many suggestions going around. People have speculated that it may be Operation Safe Streets. It may have been the cold winter. We're not prepared to state on the record what it was. But those are the two things that come to mind that may be different than they were in past years.

Well, we'll be getting warm weather. 00106 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole

Right. And our prediction is that the end of March, we're going to look to see if the population starts to go up, and it looks like it's starting to go back up.

And you feel comfortable with the budget that you presently have, even if the population increases?

Well, it depends on how much the population increases.

Okay.

If it goes back up, you know, 1500 inmates or something like that, we'd have an issue.

All right. Commissioner, you are projecting to spend $7.6 million on maintenance contracts for C.F.C.F. and Women's Detention Facility. This represents an increase of almost 30 percent over last year's cost. Would you please tell us: Would it be better to bring the maintenance back in-house? Would it be more cost effective?

I don't think that it would be more cost effective to bring the 00107 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole maintenance in-house. I believe our experience has been that the service we get for the money we pay is pretty good service. And no, I don't think that that would be more cost effective.

How many people are in the maintenance contract?

For W.D.F. and C.F.C.F., how many people? Okay. Roseanne, could you come up. Do you know what that number is? We don't have that number. We can get it for you.

You'll provide it to us, please.

Sure.

Please explain the dramatic increase in prison health services. I believe on -30 it is now going to be over $42 million. So if we have less inmates, wouldn't that also be affected?

I believe that the increase in the additional funds for medical came 00108 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole about as a re-negotiation of the contract back in FY '03 when the population was higher. And Miss Steiker from the M.D.O.'s office, I believe, handled all of that, and she can answer that question more specifically.

This is Ellen Steiker, Deputy Managing Director. Good morning.

Good morning.

The major components of the increase are predominantly the opening of W.D.F., which had a significant staffing impact. Now, we'll be looking at that in light of some of the population declines. But when you open a new facility, you have to staff it properly with health workers. So that was one. The second piece is personnel cost, just the cost of living increases for personnel under the collective bargaining agreement. And the third area is malpractice insurance. That has been a real wild card for the prisons, as well as for the rest of Pennsylvania. It's not a problem that's related specifically to the prisons. But from 2002 to 2003 our 00109 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole malpractice premiums have more than doubled. And so, in this budget we're assuming that there will be continued growth of that. If that doesn't materialize, we won't pay it. Again, we only pay the actual costs that are incurred by the provider. We do not pay some fixed price. So if in fact our assumptions are not correct and the costs come down, then we won't have to pay these costs to the provider.

Thank you. Commissioner, on -30 of the detail you have $2.3 million for Philadelphia health management for drug treatment programs. Are they a direct provider?

What page is that again?

45-30.

I believe that is connected with the F.I.R. program. I'd ask Ellen or --

I'm sorry?

I believe that's funding connected with the F.I.R. program, but I would ask Deputy Commissioner Appel to come up and explain that. 00110 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole

I have no 3 idea what the F.I.R. program is.

Forensic Intensive Recovery.

Okay. All right. Good.

Hello. I'm Allen Appel. I'm the Deputy Commissioner for Treatment. The F.I.R. program provides for the early parole of inmates to enter drug treatment in a variety of community agencies. And it removes those inmates directly from the prisons. So it helps to reduce the inmate population, while it also helps to reduce the numbers that come back through the drug treatment successes that it provides.

Are they community groups that you're referring to? Are they the ones that are outlined on -30?

They are a number of those. There are others that make up the F.I.R. network that receive their funding not through the prisons but through other agencies.

Okay. 00111 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole Well, of the $2.3 million for the Philadelphia health management, what portion of that contract is for administrative purposes?

We don't have that information right now, but we will certainly provide it to you.

You'll provide it to us, please. Thank you. Commissioner, on -31 of the detail, you request $400,000 for Philadelphia Urban Affairs Council for programming female inmates. Would you explain what that is?

I can explain it generally speaking. We have a facility at Cambria Avenue in North Philadelphia where we house 2,000 female inmates. That money goes to --

How many female inmates do we have?

200. No. 200 I meant. 200.

That's better. We're going to have to build a new prison.

And these female inmates 00112 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole receive treatment and counseling and other services. And that's what that money is for.

Okay. And on that same page of the detail, you have $33,981 for G.E.D. and basic skills education. Is this for your staff or is it for inmates?

It's more inmates.

And why has this program been reduced from its FY '02 level?

Edward Siemanski. That two payments doubled up in that fiscal year inadvertently. And that's why you see that double amount in fiscal 2002. And it's G.E.D. education for the inmates provided by the School District of Philadelphia. It's not for the Philadelphia prison staff. That money doesn't go to Philadelphia prison staff. It goes to the School District, teachers.

Fine. Thank you very much. The Chair recognizes Councilman Cohen. 00113 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole

Yes. Just a couple of questions. When did the population jump from the -- previously figures that I heard about were something like 5,000. And Judge Shapiro was complaining bitterly that that was way over the maximum allowed. When did it jump to 8,000? Was that during Commissioner Timoney's reign? Because there had been dealing in certain circles that arrests were going apace, people were going into jail, and cases were being thrown out of Court because they had -- either the arrests were improper, at least, not supported by the evidence in many cases, and in many cases they were. But there was an enormous increase. Was that when it took place?

Well, the 5,000 inmate population was back in 1995, 1996. The population jumped to the 8,000 level. Then it was back -- began to climb to that level in 1998. And that was when Commissioner Timoney first came to town.

When did the DROP begin? 00114 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole

In September of last year.

Was that the same time when the Safe Streets Program was being initiated?

Shortly thereafter.

Has anybody investigated the percentage of that? The current population is what, 7100?

Yes.

Do we know how many of that 7100 are in prison because of failure to pay bail, say, that's no higher than $5,000 which would require $500 in cash bail? Do we know how many prisoners are there?

I couldn't tell you that off the top of my head. I know we looked into that a few months back. I would have to research it again and get you the information.

Is there anybody assigned to the task of determining whether a prisoner is there solely because of the inability to pay bail, and what it costs the City to collect -- to have them put up $503, I think it 00115 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole was, for a $5,000 bail? How much does it cost the City to provide whatever services, you know, are needed for that prisoner? What does it cost the City to hold that person in confinement, and whether it would not in fact be cheaper if the City put up the bail.

There's no one specifically assigned to that task.

Would it make sense to do that? I believe that probably one-third of the prisoners are there simply because they're too poor to put up minimal bail. And the City spends many many times the amount that it would cost the City to put up the bail and have some control over the person when he's out on bail. And I don't see any purpose in the person staying in jail if the only thing keeping him there is because he's too poor to get $500 for bail.

No. And I --

I can understand 00116 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole if a judge commits somebody because they're fearful that the person may be a threat to society in one way or the other or presents some kind of a danger. But if the only thing keeping somebody in prison is an inability, say, to come up with something as small, say, as under $1,000, it seems to me to be a terrible waste of money for the City to insist on waiting for bail money while it's costing the City. What does it cost, do you think, per prisoner each day?

Well, the per diem cost in fiscal '02, I believe, was $75 a day per inmate.

On average $75 a day, considering all the costs, including the health and the maintenance, and everything else?

Yes.

Well, so, in seven days, in one week's confinement, the City pays the cost of bail. And what would be the human purpose, if somebody's being kept in jail simply because he or she cannot make the bail payment -- and I guess 00117 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole generally it's a he rather than a she, more often than not -- what use is being served by keeping that person? We know the dangers of jail confinement. The prisoner might learn new methods of committing a burglary or a theft or may become despondent, may develop health care problems, you know, all the terrible things that can happen. His children may have problems, if he has children. His wife may suffer from problems. What's the use of the cash bail system if the person can't make the cash payment? Is it to maintain a prison staff?

In answer to your question, that's an issue that's been discussed over the years within the prison system and the criminal justice system.

Well, has the prison system made any...

And the problem with -- We recognize the fact that it costs a lot of money to keep people there. But on the other hand, we have issues that people get bail because we want them to show up in Court. 00118 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole So if you pay their bail and they're not paying the bail, that means they might not come back. And we want them to come back.

Are there any statistical studies on that?

I could -- Sure; I could get you numbers from the Warrant Unit of the Court of Common Pleas and other sources about how many people, who even when they pay their bail, don't come back.

You know, the costs for a Prison Commissioner are paid really by the school system. The one -- At the state level, the one cost that keeps climbing indefinitely is the prison cost, while the amount of money appropriated for schools in real income has been declining, the state portion of the income. Seems to me that you all, because you're living the situation, you all have a responsibility to present material to us to help guide us in making the decisions. I think it's a terrible waste of money for the City to spend maybe $10,000 and maybe much more than that to maintain somebody in 00119 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole prison because he couldn't come up with the $500 bail payment.

Well, Councilman, we have a lot of other things in place to assist inmates to contact people and find different sources of money to come up with the bail.

Could you explain those to us in detail? Could you tell us --

We have social workers who work with them to try and find sources of money and information and contacts. That's part of the reason we have free phone calls for them when they come into the receiving room. They come in. They can make a phone call. We want them to make phone calls so that they can make contacts and get their bail money and leave the prison system.

Well, why can't the City set up a bail fund and have a few people that maintain contact with the prisoners? It would be so much cheaper.

I can't really answer that. But I'm not sure that the public would appreciate the fact that we arrest people 00120 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole and then pay for them to leave prison. That doesn't make any sense.

Well, but we're spending so much more money maintaining them.

I understand. It's a tough issue.

The public, I think, has great difficulty understanding that.

I agree.

At this point, Madam President, I would like to yield the floor because I know there are many other questions by other Council Members.

At this time I would like to recognize Councilman Rizzo, whose light's been on for some time.

Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner. Commissioner, I want to talk about PHILACOR. I want to tell you what experience I had this week. I went to visit a school. And in that particular school kids were sitting in the classroom with the sun beating through the 00121 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole windows, terribly distracted by the sunlight, and just not a good situation to try to educate kids. All the window shades were gone from the classroom. And they've been trying to get window shades -- I hope Mr. Vallas is listening -- for a long time. PHILACOR, because I'm familiar with the work that you do there, seems to be a secret to a lot of people.

A hidden treasure.

A hidden treasure. I bet that if the School District wanted to have you manufacture window shades that they're spending thousands and thousands of dollars to go out and purchase them -- I'm only suggesting that you send -- or I'd love to be part of the meeting -- I'd like the person that's responsible for maintenance in the School District of the City of Philadelphia where possibly items that need to be made: Book shelves, things that support that School District that they're going out presently and buying at Home Depot, Lowe's, you name it, that they get an education, maybe a 00122 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole little meeting to explain what you do. You know, I'm reading here what you do. You do -- I know that Camp William Penn, you've done some things for them. You do the laundry. There's so many things you do. But for the School District's top people not to be aware of what PHILACOR -- Is that how it's referred to, PHILACOR?

Yes.

PHILACOR. I'd like you to, you know, have a meeting, or suggest someone to have a meeting. And I'd love to attend it to see. And Plus, I'd like to get one of those updated catalogs of all the nice things for me.

Absolutely. We'd be he happy to provide that.

And I had some, I believe, stationery printed up there. And it turned out wonderfully. It was --

We do print, I believe, all the stationery for the City. We probably made all these name plates that you have here in City Council. 00123 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole And we actually are going to be presenting some legislation to City Council to request that you change the way we operate so we can expand our services. And we'd be happy to meet with you and the School District.

Yeah, I would love for you to call whoever the person that runs the maintenance. Am I off the wall to think that maybe your prison population could manufacture window shades?

I don't know about that specifically, but --

Well, why not? It's really a simple... Let's look at it, at least, because they're going out and spending a lot of money. They're going to do this one school completely over. It's like 250 different window shades. And what is a window shade? They staple material to a tube that's premanufactured, cut it to length. And if you can make some of the -- do some of the things you do, I think that that's something that maybe you could support. 00124 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole That's only just one of the probably dozens of things that I think, especially when the School District's up against it financially, that you might be able to save them a few bucks.

I'd be happy to do that.

Would you get me one of those catalogs?

Sure. Maybe Madam President would like one also.

I would. Why not?

I'll send one to everyone.

That would be wonderful. Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman Nutter.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Good afternoon, Commissioner.

Good afternoon.

This may have been raised earlier, but it's a pretty quick question. What's the current census? 00125 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole

7,107.

And what's the generally accepted maximum capacity?

How do I answer that question? The capacity of the prison is those number of people that we can find adequate space for and provide safety, security and health. There really is no number that I could quote off the top of my head. And not to be disingenuous, because the way the prison system operates, you know, there are permanent housing areas that were built in the beginning of time to be housing areas. And then there are housing areas that were converted from other uses to be housing areas. And then there are other areas that we can convert if we need to.

Commissioner?

Yes. Sorry.

I think there's been litigation on this subject. And I think some determination was made at some point in time as to how many people can be in the facility. What's that number? 00126 04/02/03 - Committee of the Whole

How many beds we have in the facilities?

Yes.

I'm told 7,288.