Madam President, you reminded me, and I don't want to steal Councilman Jones' thunder, but I'll ask the question. The commitment that the Administration made to Council and to the near neighbors of the temporary facility, am I starting to hear that we might not make the schedule to be out of there, the 166 3/31/09 - WHOLE - BILLS 090212, 090213 temporary facility? (Witness approached witness table.) DEPUTY
Good afternoon, Madam President, and good afternoon, Councilman Rizzo. No. We are still going forward on our timeline, both the timeline that I have made public to both the Councilman, Councilman Jones, and also to Councilwoman Blackwell and as well as everyone, is that we are still on target.
Could you for the record tell us the dates that we committed to be out of there? DEPUTY
We are trying to make sure that we start the project no later than the end of June or early July, and we're looking at a two-year build process. We want to have a shakedown period sometime beginning in July of 2011 and then get into the building no later than October of that year. 167 3/31/09 - WHOLE - BILLS 090212, 090213
And that temporary facility is currently a state facility? DEPUTY
We have committed to that building being turned over to the community in that area, and the ultimate reuse is going to be part and parcel of a bigger plan that City Planning is actually coming up with working in conjunction with the neighbors that are out there. That's something we've also been working with very diligently with Councilman Jones.
I'd appreciate being communicated with also with that information.
Councilman, I can mention to you that about a month ago we received notice that we were receiving a grant from the state to do the plan for 168 3/31/09 - WHOLE - BILLS 090212, 090213 that area, and in that proposal, it particularly cites that parcel as needing special attention for reuse.
Thank you. Sounds like you're on top of it. Thanks. DEPUTY
You're welcome, sir. The Division of Technology, , network infrastructure stabilization and enhancement, will someone please explain what this means and how the $3.6 million in new funds will be used?
Oh, 40. Sorry. Is Allan Frank here to answer 169 3/31/09 - WHOLE - BILLS 090212, 090213 for this? (No response.)
Can we come back to that question? We'll see if we can get Allan Frank in to talk about that.
Very well. Under the Fire Department, Lines 31 and 31-A, fire computer communication system improvements, total of $4 million in CR operating revenue. Where are these funds budgeted for in the Operating Budget and what is their funding source?
Line 31-A is a carryover from FY09. Can you tell us why haven't these funds been 170 3/31/09 - WHOLE - BILLS 090212, 090213 spent?
Council President, we're going to ask Frank Punzo from Public Property to come and answer that question.
All right. What we'll do is, we'll go back to that. We're not going to wait.
The Free Library, the total amount requested 171 3/31/09 - WHOLE - BILLS 090212, 090213 for the Library in the FY2010 Capital Budget is $14,000,687, of which only 965,000 is new funding. The balance of the 13,722,000 goes as far back as 2002. Why does it take so long for us to spend this money?
We're going -- I'm sorry. We're probably -- I'd like to have someone from the Library come talk to that.
We'll come back to that, too. Would I dare go to the Health Department? Would somebody be here? MR. McPHERSON: Give it a go.
Great. Lines 37 and 37-A are for Health Department equipment and repair, and each 172 3/31/09 - WHOLE - BILLS 090212, 090213 line is requesting $1.8 million in CR funding. What is the source of these funds and where is it budgeted in the Operating Budget? (Witness approached witness table.)
Don Schwarz, Deputy Mayor for Health and Opportunity and the Commissioner --
Good afternoon. I believe that these are two items. Most of this is for the Philadelphia Nursing Home. It has to do with boilers and other equipment, I believe. No. 19
It would be Lines 37 and 37-A, Doctor. I believe it's .
I'm being told that the Nursing Home is separate. 173 3/31/09 - WHOLE - BILLS 090212, 090213
Council President, I believe these are reimbursements from the state that are then allowed to be appropriated in the Capital Budget for various improvements at health centers, and the maximum amount that we've received in prior years was that 1.8 million.
No. 13 That's each line is requesting. Is it a grant?
It's not a grant per se. I don't know the details behind it, but the Health Department let's us know when they've gotten the reimbursements and then we allocate the funds in the budget. It's generally used for equipment and renovations at the health centers.
I can get more 174 3/31/09 - WHOLE - BILLS 090212, 090213 details --
Okay. We'll get back to that one, too. Line 37-A is a carryover from FY09. Can you tell us why haven't these funds been spent?
And I would also like an explanation, please, of the previous question in the Health Department.
Thank 175 3/31/09 - WHOLE - BILLS 090212, 090213 you.
Council President, I have the detail line by line, so I can make it available to you, I can recite it for the record, whatever you would prefer.
Doctor, perhaps we can have copies made and distributed.
Absolutely. I believe that the source of most of this funding is previous years' capital that hasn't been expensed.
Council President, I was informed too that the reimbursements from the state usually occur in May or June and, therefore, the new Line 37 stays unfunded until May or June of this year, and then it carries forward into next year. And that's when 176 3/31/09 - WHOLE - BILLS 090212, 090213 the funds are normally used. If they're not, then that's lapsed. So that's why you'll see two lines, one for FY10 and one to carry forward the funds that we'll get in May or June of this year.
We're going to take your word for that. We'll take your word for that.
I can provide a written summary for you that makes it more clear.
Please. Thank you. The Chair at this time recognizes Councilwoman Brown.
I see that two of the answers just walked in to two of your questions.
Okay. We'll 177 3/31/09 - WHOLE - BILLS 090212, 090213 wait on those later. That's fine.
Thank you, Madam President. I'll put my question in context. There was an article in the Daily News on March 17th that talked about a contractor in North Philadelphia. He employs African American men and is 12 one of several African American 13 contractors that protested outside of the 14 Convention Center after being shut out of 15 the contracts. When questioned by the Daily News, Mr. Keating, the general contractor for the expansion effort, said, and I quote, "If I have a $500,000 masonry job, I actually think of five guys who can do a job like that. These are guys who have a track record with me," end quote. The reality is, the City no 24 longer has a reach to the Convention Center because we signed off on that once 178 3/31/09 - WHOLE - BILLS 090212, 090213 they consented to the EOP plan. The broader question is, with all of the infrastructure dollars being proposed, like the $7.5 million to the Navy Yard, 3.6 million to upgrade prisons and $630,000 to renovate health centers, what procedures or processes are in place that will help achieve Mayor Nutter's goal of increasing minority inclusion from 11 percent to 32 percent? Is OEO at the 12 table? Is the Office of Equal 13 Opportunity at your table? 14 (Witness approached witness 15 table.) 16
I was 17 referencing the general contractor who 18 had a legitimate complaint against 19 Mr. Keating, and that's a private sector 20 piece and Council no longer has a reach with that, but government has to lead by example, and so when we look at the infrastructure dollars that are slated to be spent, 7.5 million to the Navy Yard, 3.6 million to upgrade prisons, $630,000 179 3/31/09 - WHOLE - BILLS 090212, 090213 to renovate health centers, and we look at these pending stimulus dollars, how or what do you have in place that sort of ensures inclusion, thus helping the Mayor achieve his goal of raising the numbers from percent to 32 percent? 8 DEPUTY
Andy 9 Altman, Deputy Mayor for Planning and 10 Economic Development. 11 I'll speak today related to the 12 Office of Economic Opportunity, which 13 is -- we're under the -- within the 14 Commerce Department now, coordinating 15 with Commerce. As you know, Michael Bell 16 is the Director of the Office of Equal 17 Opportunity. 18 We are -- I think the answer to 19 your question, there are two answers. 20 One is, on the local dollars, which is on our capital dollars, the Mayor has convened an office -- an economic opportunity cabinet, and the importance of that is that all of the Deputy Mayors and the Finance Director, the City 180 3/31/09 - WHOLE - BILLS 090212, 090213 Solicitor and Chief Integrity Officer and a number of other members of the cabinet are all part of this, and we are -- the Mayor is holding us accountable to make sure that as these dollars are going out, we are doing everything at the Office of Economic Opportunity, which staffs that cabinet, is bringing forward before the list of all major contracts to make sure that we're meeting goals; in other words, of all the pending dollars that will go out, setting goals and targets with each of the departments, and then the Mayor is holding them accountable to those accounts. Now, on some of the stimulus dollars, I can't speak to all of those, because many of those are dictated by federal guidelines and federal participation. So those dollars that go to the airport or dollars that go through formula through the state, for infrastructure dollars, they tend to be governed by a different set of 181 3/31/09 - WHOLE - BILLS 090212, 090213 regulations. We're still interacting with them, but there it's less -- it's more they have goals that are set, and our role then is more how do we get people into the pipeline of the opportunities that are created through those new investments.
Okay. Well, if you look at the numbers -- well, let me ask a different question. Is OEO at the table of the Planning Commission? Where I see a number of departments that sit with you, Office of Budget, Programming Evaluation, Department of Public Property, the MDO's Office, is the Office of Equal Opportunity at that table, the Planning Commissioner?
Are you asking are they a member of the Planning 182 3/31/09 - WHOLE - BILLS 090212, 090213 Commission?
Yes. Are they at the table as decisions are made around these capital expenditures?
Okay. Here's a fact that you should be aware of: In 2008, the Capital Program Office, total contract, $24 million, and the amount -- the goal, of course, was -- MBE/WBE dollars were 4 million. The goal was 25 percent. The actual activity was percent, which means the Capital 16 Program Office fell six percent below its 17 goal. 18 (Bell rung.)
With each of the departments that are coming before us as we go through this budget process, a letter is going to go to the Mayor asking departments to come prepared to tell us how you're spending City dollars when it comes to MBE/WBE activity. And 183 3/31/09 - WHOLE - BILLS 090212, 090213 when I look at 2008, it's abysmal. So it starts with leadership. It starts with leadership at those collaborative sessions making it clear if we're going to be serious about this inclusionary goal, then these numbers really need to begin to look different. So I'm putting that on the record and expecting that when individual departments come before us, you're telling us either what you're doing internally to meet those goals and/or what the numbers are. We have a long way to go. DEPUTY
And I just want to say, Councilmember, we agree and that's why we've restructured this to create the Office of Economic Opportunity and create this equal opportunity cabinet, so that it's been elevated and the Mayor's attention, all the Deputy Mayors, we're literally doing -- going through those numbers, how can we increase those this year, be more 184 3/31/09 - WHOLE - BILLS 090212, 090213 aggressive and having OEO at the table in those decisions.
Okay. My only final comment is, I am sensitive to the fact that new leadership is new leadership, but there are people in government who have been there for years and are okay with the status quo. So the expectation is with this new goal, that the new leadership will make it plain and make it clear the numbers need to look different. There's some departments I could call out but won't and where it's not new leadership. So it's despicable that we are still having -- Councilman Goode has introduced three dozen bills that deal with inclusion, and unless we raise it here and look at numbers and put them on the record, nothing happens. So it needs to be understood with the new leadership that we're serious about moving the needle. Thank you very much, gentlemen. 185 3/31/09 - WHOLE - BILLS 090212, 090213 Thank you, Madam President.
You're welcome. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Sanchez.
Thank you, Madam President. I wanted to add one thing that I think is important, going back to the earlier discussion before our break. I think it's real important that the Administration understand that we have some questions that we expect to be answered before we approve this budget, and I think that we are trying -- the fact that we're asking some of these questions I think goes back to the lack of information or communication that's coming from some of the departments. So if this is the only place where we have to ask those questions, this is where we're going to ask them, but I think it's important that for the purposes of the Administration, that they review some of 186 3/31/09 - WHOLE - BILLS 090212, 090213 the large, what I call, large-ticket items that we talked about last year, so that as these departments come forward -- the minority participation being one that we talked about last year that's really important, and we're talking about $2 billion in capital -- those questions should be part of the presentation and for the record. So I think it's important. I wanted to go to the issue of -- and I'm very encouraged by the investment in commercial corridors, but I think for my purposes, it would be very important to look at this Capital Budget from what's carryover, because I think on one hand, we say to folks, money is tight; on the other hand, the Administration has publicly put out some monies for some infrastructure investments, and folks ask me all the time, do we have money, do we not have money. For my purposes, I think it 187 3/31/09 - WHOLE - BILLS 090212, 090213 will be important that as the list that we requested before around projects by Council District, that we be very specific to what is carryover money and what is new money so that it's clear for us in terms of analyzing the information. Because if you look at this 2010 number, for instance, in some of these investments, it's kind of not in the context of how much of that was leftover money. And so my question specifically is, we're making significant infrastructure investments in our commercial corridors. What are we doing with infrastructure investments for our manufacturers? One of the things that I've heard from the manufacturers -- I have about 6,500 jobs in the district -- is, what is the City's articulated plan, especially with the economic stimulus, for helping manufacturers retain jobs and potentially expand jobs?
I can answer 188 3/31/09 - WHOLE - BILLS 090212, 090213 a piece of that question, and if we need some more people here, we'll do that. One of the things that we're doing in conjunction with PIDC at the moment is something called the Industrial Land Survey, and essentially that's a comprehensive -- we just saw an interim presentation about it actually this last week, a few days ago. What that is attempting to do is to go through every major industrial corridor in the City. We have about, inclusive of airports -- well, let's do it the other way. Exclusive of airports, 17,000 acres of industrially zoned land, and the consultant team is methodically going through at least 90 percent of that that exists within sort of known industrial areas that the City has identified as such, is identifying who are the businesses that are there, what's active, which buildings are used, which buildings are vacant, how much land is fallow, how much land is in use. And then another 189 3/31/09 - WHOLE - BILLS 090212, 090213 piece of the consulting team is looking at questions of, well, what are they doing, in what areas is the industrial use happening, which of them are stronger relative to peer cities, which of them are weaker. And the ultimate goal of the study is to start to coordinate which are the industrial segments of the -- which of them are the strongest, which needs support, are they in the right location and is there a better strategy for how to identify them and identify where they ought to be to get sort of the maximum synergy out of uses. Right now it's market driven. People are where they are. This is an attempt to coordinate, use the industrial land we have better, presumably also identify land that is not appropriate anymore for such uses and to start to concentrate these areas a little better, with the belief that they will be more productive and be able to attract more like businesses. That study will be done in approximately June or July. 190 3/31/09 - WHOLE - BILLS 090212, 090213
I think one of the things that's important to note is, we've designated lands KOZs and others, and I think that we have to use the stimulus as an opportunity, especially where we got to convert brown fields for future development, I'd like to see an articulated plan in terms of what we're going to do with those sites that I believe is ripe for development. With the issue of the planning -- and I think this is very important -- I happen to be the beneficiary -- and I had this conversation with Mr. Altman -- recently of six Wachovia planning grants, recipients who are anywhere between year one and year ten, and it is very important that any consultants looking at redevelopment of these sites meet with the stakeholders, who in many cases have created an infrastructure for development, whose plans need to be somehow recognized by the Planning 191 3/31/09 - WHOLE - BILLS 090212, 090213 Commission in some part or in totality, because unlike your consultant who is going to come in and say this is highest and best use, they've actually done a neighborhood process with community input about what the community would like to see around when we do these conversions. So I think there needs to be strength in communication between the planning and these folks who are doing -- who have been doing it. (Bell rung.)
I have some planning grants that are year seven, who have not communicated with the Planning Commission. There is no kind of articulated sense of where their plans stand as it relates to how the City --
Councilwoman, do you have a contact point that you can share with me on that?
Yeah. The Association of CDCs could do that. And I think this is crucially important 192 3/31/09 - WHOLE - BILLS 090212, 090213 given that Wachovia has invested millions of dollars in this process. And, again, it's a process that we will never have the resources to duplicate, because it entailed a lot of community discussions and so forth. So I think it's important, and I'm very concerned, because no one disagrees with where you want to go, but I think that there has to be some thoughtfulness to the work that's been done in play, because one of the reasons we have some ripe redevelopment opportunities is because of some of that work, so it kind of needs to be brought together. I'll wait until the next round.
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman Jones.
Thank you, Madam President. My interest is in the capital allocations that are going to be for 193 3/31/09 - WHOLE - BILLS 090212, 090213 bridges. I think it's . And you talk about bridges in Leverington Avenue over the Manayunk Canal and in year FY11 and FY12. I wanted to get some clarity on that, as well as the Montgomery Avenue bridge over the Amtrak facility for 2.6 million and the 59th Street bridge at 59th, I believe, and Lancaster and get a sense of when they're coming online. I know Councilwoman Blackwell has a particular interest in the 40th Street bridge. So while you're updating, you might want to address those items.
Good afternoon. Steve Buckley, Department of Streets. I'm sorry, Councilman. Can you repeat -- the bridge orders was Manayunk?
I've got the list here for you. 194 3/31/09 - WHOLE - BILLS 090212, 090213 You were looking at ?
There's the Montgomery Avenue bridge -- I think this is on -- Amtrak bridge. There's the Leverington Avenue and Manayunk Canal appropriation and the 59th Street bridge, 59th and Lancaster going over the Amtrak property. Also there was the 40th Street bridge in Councilwoman Blackwell's district.
Thank you, Councilman. The first one, Montgomery Avenue over Amtrak, the project is to remove and reconstruct the existing bridge over Amtrak and CSX. The current construction start date is anticipated to be October 1, 2011, with construction ending on September 30, 2013.
Now, that Montgomery Avenue is which Montgomery Avenue? Where does that intersect? Do you happen to have a better location?
29th and Glenwood. 195 3/31/09 - WHOLE - BILLS 090212, 090213
Well, that will be Darrell Clarke's district. Go ahead, next bridge. I know he's glad to hear that. It's an important bridge, important bridge.
Leverington Avenue over Manayunk Canal and Conrail, this is a rehabilitation of the existing bridge over Conrail, and the current construction start date is anticipated to be June 1, 2011 and construction end date of April 30, 2012.
Councilman Jones, just a moment. Councilwoman Sanchez.
I had a point of information that I think it's important as we talk about capital and Conrail and Amtrak. How is the Administration working -- what's the communication between the Administration and Conrail 196 3/31/09 - WHOLE - BILLS 090212, 090213 around this situation across the City? Because like Councilman Jones -- and I don't want to go to specific ones -- I'm very frustrated with our inability to get Conrail to move on some of this stuff, and sometimes we're going back and forth for a few thousand dollars. Is there a formal communication and a wish list from them in terms of some of these bridges, which ones should be removed because they're dangerous? Because I'm getting caught in there's talk about litigation. So who is our contact and how are we moving through that? DEPUTY
Good afternoon. Rina Cutler, Deputy Mayor for Transportation and Utilities. I am unaware of specific bridges you're speaking about, so I'm not sure who's talking to whom. There is a somewhat coordinated effort, better with Amtrak than with CSX, but we certainly have the ability to get to CSX and bring 197 3/31/09 - WHOLE - BILLS 090212, 090213 them to the table. I think part of the problem -- and you will hear it when we talk about the 40th and 41st Street bridges -- we do not control their repair schedule. So part of the problem is when we've got bridges that are going over their tracks, we're going to have to wait until they get us programmed on their list. For bridges that are theirs that are over City streets, if we deem those structures unsafe from our end, then we will communicate that to the appropriate railroad. Most of my dealings with Amtrak are either around City bridge construction issues that I need to go over their tracks or some discussions have happened relative to what their sites and right-of-way look like, which are generally a mess in terms of cleaning.
So we 198 3/31/09 - WHOLE - BILLS 090212, 090213 don't have a point person that we communicate with? DEPUTY
You can communicate with the Streets Department if you need a point person to communicate with any of those railroad entities.
I guess I want to get to process, because in terms --
I'm sorry. I'll give it to you. Because this is a bridge issue, and I have situations where we have bridges that they had agreed to remove. They don't remove them. So I kind of want to know, do we have a coordinated kind of function with them where we look at these lists? Because what's convenient for them may not be convenient for us as it relates to development. So what's -- DEPUTY
Well, 199 3/31/09 - WHOLE - BILLS 090212, 090213 that may be true. It is unclear to me who you are speaking to at those entities or who they have agreed with to remove certain bridges. So I am assuming you're not coordinating those discussions with the Streets Department or the Bridge Unit, because I am unaware of them.
Okay. Then I need -- we're working on a redevelopment project around the bridge on Allegheny, and Commerce has been involved, so I guess -- that's why I wanted to know what the process is between the City and Conrail, because it doesn't -- DEPUTY
Well, I don't know if the Commerce Department is speaking to Conrail or not. If you have an issue with any of the railroads and you communicate that to my office, we will gladly intervene.
That's 200 3/31/09 - WHOLE - BILLS 090212, 090213 all right. I'm sorry.
Thank you, Councilwoman Sanchez. I was getting to that. And one of the things that CNN came down and did a special on the aging infrastructure of our bridges with an approximate ten-year backlog on construction, ten years, with the money allocated, with the money appropriated, backlog on construction. And if we're talking about a stimulus package and we're talking about moving this economy forward, if we have the appropriations, yet don't have the administrative capability to communicate, if you look at the bridge at 52nd and Jefferson, we put $80 million worth of construction into the Lowe's Center, yet there are pieces of metal that fall on the streets almost every time someone goes across that bridge, every time a train goes across that bridge, and there is no constant communication, because this has been an 201 3/31/09 - WHOLE - BILLS 090212, 090213 issue not just in this Administration but in the one before it, and we need to do something differently to get their attention, and maybe it's time for a class-action suit against some of these entities, because these bridges are dangerous. DEPUTY
Yes. Let me respond. I think there are two different issues here, Councilman. The first is, if your issues with Amtrak; that is, an Amtrak bridge, go back to the last Administration, I do not have any recollection of anyone bringing it to my attention or asking me to have a conversation with Amtrak. So before we sue them, I would just prefer to see if we can have a discussion with them. Now, that doesn't mean we won't ultimately have to sue them, but we should at least have a conversation with them first. Secondly, I think there are two different issues you raised, both very good points. The first is, the backlog 202 3/31/09 - WHOLE - BILLS 090212, 090213 both nationally and in the state and even locally of needs, particularly bridge needs, is astronomical. Most of them are unfunded at this point. While we originally thought -- this was before the stimulus bill got passed -- that it in fact would be an infrastructure bill and, therefore, it would focus much more of the dollars on roads and bridges, the initial infrastructure bill morphed into a jobs bill, which morphed into a-little-bit-of- everything-for-everybody bill, and the problem with it is because its focus was on jobs, they said you have to have projects that you can spend the money within 180 days. (Bell rung.) DEPUTY
And so there is not a bridge project in the world that can clear environmental clearance, much less the rest of the problems to do it. So most of the needs did not get addressed in the stimulus 203 3/31/09 - WHOLE - BILLS 090212, 090213 bill. I am cautiously optimistic that at some point the federal government will go back to look at an infrastructure bill 5 specifically for roads, bridges and transit.
Well, I guess to my colleague's point, is there a task force, is there a work group that sits around and looks at the condition of our bridges that -- and I don't mean just city, but state and federal, privately owned enterprises that says, Here's the condition of the bridges in the City of Philadelphia, here's where we are, here's where the dollars are, and estimate when construction or groundbreaking will begin? DEPUTY
I think we have a very good handle on the condition and the needs of the City-owned bridges. I think we have a good handle on the condition and needs of the state-owned bridges, and there is a lot of collaboration between the City and 204 3/31/09 - WHOLE - BILLS 090212, 090213 PennDOT. I do not know the requirements, although we'll check for you, as to how often the railroads are required to do a state-of-good-repair analysis, but I will certainly find that out, and if there is such a report that's been done recently, I will try to get one.
In addition, 40th Street is -- 42nd Street, is it, Councilwoman Blackwell, is a concern and 59th Street. These were the subject of a national CNN story. DEPUTY
And what we'd like to know is just who owns the bridge and was there at 52nd and Jefferson an appropriation meant for that and when are we going to get started, 52nd and Jefferson? DEPUTY
It's not ours. It's a railroad bridge. We believe it's Amtrak, and CSX has one.
I would urge 205 3/31/09 - WHOLE - BILLS 090212, 090213 you to go out there and just take a look at it. When we went out there -- and I still have the metal stake that was on the ground right below on the pedestrian walkway, and I'm saying to you, God forbid, mother and daughter walk under there and someone gets hurt, then it will draw national attention. But this has been that way in that community for over a decade, and I'm just hopeful that at some point we at least get it on the radar of someone to fix. DEPUTY
I will be happy to try to get some bridge condition information from both CSX and Amtrak, and if necessary, perhaps we might need to have a hearing on that subject.
Madam President? 206 3/31/09 - WHOLE - BILLS 090212, 090213
Yes. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Blackwell.
Thank you. Our bridge on 42nd Street opened in '08. Our bridge on 40th Street is not due to open until '11, and our bridge on 41st Street is due to open in 2013, and as my colleague was just saying, Councilman Greenlee, whenever it involves different entities, Amtrak or Conrail or SEPTA, whenever there are different entities involved, it makes it impossible. When I go to meetings, I don't even tell people when the bridges will be fixed. I tell them they're working on it, because you wait ten years to get bridges fixed, which really 207 3/31/09 - WHOLE - BILLS 090212, 090213 isolates your community and that isolates everybody's community. Anybody who has a bridge knows what I mean. I got three, and it really isolates your community from being involved and it hurts development and everything else. So I would only advocate for a closer process, once funds are allocated, a closer process to move these things along in a more expeditious manner. DEPUTY
We share your frustration, Councilwoman, particularly on those three bridges, which have been in some state of closure for --
-- for a very long time. I think -- and I think you hit it. I mean, frankly, it does take somewhere between, depending on the complexity and the environmental review required, somewhere between six and eight years to do a bridge project. Sometimes 208 3/31/09 - WHOLE - BILLS 090212, 090213 money is allocated for the design portion, sometimes for preliminary, sometimes for final, and then money obviously for construction. And partly because the money has to be cash-flowed in a certain way is the schedule set and partly it's because -- particularly on the east coast corridor, particularly with Amtrak and CSX, we are but one entity along that corridor that's requesting they close -- that they shut train service off in order to do some level of repair. So from New York truly to Philadelphia through New Jersey, maybe even up to Boston, they work on a schedule which includes all of that region, and so for us -- and also includes those state DOTs as well, all of whom are looking to get into their right-of-way and have them either shut off electrical service or provide their staff as required by their labor contracts to accompany us onto the site. So it is a scheduling 209 3/31/09 - WHOLE - BILLS 090212, 090213 nightmare, and we have been having some discussions with PennDOT and the railroads to try to figure out if there is a better way or there is a different way to schedule it, because we would, for example, prefer to move 41st Street up, but we are stuck in a cue with Amtrak in terms of when they will give us access to the system. So it is way more complicated, sadly, than it needs to be. But we agree with you, it is a long time.
Absolutely. And since the President allocated money in economic stimulus funds for bridges, everybody who has been waiting all these years is calling again. Well, there's money. And my staff says it's not a matter of money. The money was allocated. Well, I don't tell people that. You can't tell people it's not money and they're still not open and nobody is still working on them. DEPUTY
No. 25 Those bridges, sadly for us, those 210 3/31/09 - WHOLE - BILLS 090212, 090213 bridges are not eligible for the stimulus money, because we can't spend the money in the next 180 days.
Well, the money is there. The money has been committed for years, you know. I have a staff member whose one of her jobs is bridges, because, as you said, six or eight years it will be good. I mean, we've had ten years waiting for these bridges. So we have a bridge file. You know, it's just sad. I'm glad the President allocated the money, but it's difficult when it's not money. The money is there, but you can't spend it until, you know, now 2013 one bridge and the other is 2011. So thank God one is open. But it's just a process. Things shouldn't take ten years to happen. Thank you. Thank you, Madam President.
You're welcome. I believe Councilman Clarke had 211 3/31/09 - WHOLE - BILLS 090212, 090213 a point of information also.
Yes, Madam President. This point of information, I was walking in the room and I heard Councilman Jones reference a bridge that was going to be repaired in my district and I was just wondering which one that was. DEPUTY
Well, I think, Deputy, you should stay up there until my light comes on again since -- what was that? DEPUTY
29th and Montgomery. Commissioner, Clarena, thank 212 3/31/09 - WHOLE - BILLS 090212, 090213 you. Thank you. Thank you, Madam President.
First of all, I see Mr. Lutz in the room, so I'm going to take advantage, because it's coincidence this came up because I was just asked the question. I think it's assumed that every bridge that we see is a City-maintained or a state-maintained bridge. Mr. Lutz, specifically -- and thank you for always being so available when we need to get information. There's a little bridge, a vehicular and a pedestrian bridge in Manayunk in the restaurant district, in Councilman Jones' district, that goes over the Canal, and I was just asked who inspects that, does it get inspected. Because the reason, a very heavy small truck went over that bridge recently and 213 3/31/09 - WHOLE - BILLS 090212, 090213 the people were a little concerned. Do we inspect that little bridge that goes over -- are you familiar with where I am, 4000 Main? It's a parking lot in the back. I think there's a car wash facility back there. Both pedestrians and vehicles go over this little bridge. So is it out of sight, out of mind, or whose responsibility would it be to do that bridge?
Right in the heart of the restaurant district. Maybe 214 3/31/09 - WHOLE - BILLS 090212, 090213 Councilman Jones can help me with this. It is a parking lot, a few-hundred-space parking lot in the back of the restaurant district there, and it's a one-lane bridge that goes over the Canal to connect the parking lot to Main Street. It's on the east side, I guess. Well --
There's a series of bridges that cross the Manayunk Canal there. Some are private, some were built by Fairmount Park. Some at Lock Street, Cotton Street. There is a Connolly Container bridge.
I'll get you the exact address, but my point is, if they're private bridges, do they have requirements to inspect them the same as the City bridge?
Not to my knowledge, Councilman. 215 3/31/09 - WHOLE - BILLS 090212, 090213
Well, we'd better look at that, because some of those bridges --
But they're private, but they're public. You're going to a parking lot, you don't know that it's a private bridge when you're driving over it. DEPUTY
I don't know who regulates them, but it's certainly worth looking at.
Please. And I'll get back to you on the specifics of the bridge that I'm referring to.
Does anyone have any question regarding bridges? (No response.) 216 3/31/09 - WHOLE - BILLS 090212, 090213
Thank you, Madam Chair. There was an Executive Order on August 18, 2008 disestablishing the Capital Program Office. Can you tell me if any efficiencies have been realized by the Administration in dissolving the CPO and transferring its functions to other departments? (Witness approached witness table.)
Madam Chair, Councilmember, Steve Agostini, Budget Director. If I understood your question, the positions that were in the Capital -- formerly known Capital Program Office were transferred to two entities. One 217 3/31/09 - WHOLE - BILLS 090212, 090213 was Public Property, the other was the Office of Finance, specifically the Budget Office. The project coordination/project management was transferred to Public Property and the budgeting and financial oversight was transferred to Finance and Budget. With respect to the rationale, did I understand your question?
No. I just asked whether there were any efficiencies realized as a result of that.
We're still in the process of absorbing, and, yes, there were some efficiencies. In the '09 rebalancing plan, it allowed a number of positions to be eliminated from both Budget and the former Finance component of Capital Programs Office. I believe the total was about three positions. So we did generate efficiencies in that respect. The similar number of positions -- I actually think a little more than that -- were eliminated in the 218 3/31/09 - WHOLE - BILLS 090212, 090213 November rebalancing plan from Public Property in order to generate some savings.
Has the dissolution impacted capital planning or program completion?
Councilmember, at the moment, we don't believe so. We are in the process of getting a better handle on our projects. Now, having said that, I will admit to you that there are components of what we were doing as part of capital planning that many of you and your colleagues here have made reference to that is not functioning and had not been functioning in a manner that it should, and we've been trying to improve that over the months since that reorganization took place, better management, better program management, better project management, better budgeting, and that's going to take us some time to improve, but we're working to it. 219 3/31/09 - WHOLE - BILLS 090212, 090213
And the original intention was to transfer the cost of the people who were in those offices from the Capital Budget to the Operating Budget, and has that continued through the Plan or has that slowed down?
Unfortunately, that has slowed down. As you know, we had anticipated in every year moving forward we would transfer about a million dollars of the capital planning function to the General Fund so as not to be borrowing for those costs. That schedule was in place in the November budget that was brought before you and was adopted by you last spring. In the rebalancing plan, we managed to maintain that. We have not been able to do that for FY10 just given the severity of our financial challenges.
So you expect that in the current budget that you proposed, is that money that -- is it in the current Five-Year budget, the 220 3/31/09 - WHOLE - BILLS 090212, 090213 continued increase in operating expense as a result of this, or is that not in the five years?
Councilmember, it's not in for FY10. I'd have to go back and look -- and I can do that -- and get back to you on '11 through '14. But it's something we should be doing, as you know, not paying for operating expenses with respect to staff with capital borrowed funds and we'd like to move away from. It's just the severity of the crisis made that difficult.
Okay. If you could, I guess, get back to us on those questions when Budget or Public Property testify.
I actually think I have the answer right now. In '11 through '14 we have not continued that practice. So the '10 budget, which assumes a certain portion for the ramp down, if you will, and not using borrowed funds, that has stopped 221 3/31/09 - WHOLE - BILLS 090212, 090213 and we've continued that through '11 through '14. And hopefully if the economy improves, that's something we can pick back up. And I believe the funding level is slightly under 4 million. I think it's about 3.8, 3.9 in those years.
The PICA team that created the report in 2007 created a database with information about deficiencies and needed repairs in the facilities it assessed, and the team also designed a preventative maintenance program through which the City could in the future avoid backlogs of repairs it now faces. How, if at all, is the City using this database and preventative maintenance program provided by PICA? (Bell rung.)
Councilmember, a general response on the maintenance and then I will defer to the Commissioner of Public Property or Mr. Knappick. But we do look at the PICA assessments, particularly as they reference Police and 222 3/31/09 - WHOLE - BILLS 090212, 090213 Fire facilities, I believe Prisons as well. The idea was to elevate in our funding prioritization those elements that were high priorities in the PICA plan. So we are using that, and we are trying to get on top of the maintenance as well. But on that, I will turn over to Mr. Knappick and Commissioner Schlotterbeck. (Witnesses approached witness table.) DEPUTY COMMISSIONER KNAPPICK: Gary Knappick, Public Property. Councilman, we definitely look at that report. We did an analysis of the report relative to the various types, consistencies in the report relative to similarities and HVAC problems at the facilities. Each facility was ranked and we started to put together the types of projects we could do, prioritize those projects, and we implemented the ones we felt that had the highest level of importance within the funding available. 223 3/31/09 - WHOLE - BILLS 090212, 090213