I would like to follow up and finish up. You indicated that this piece of this 119 10/03/00 L&I - BILL 000103 $700,000-plus contract is a very small piece of what they provide. So, again, I'd like to get information about this contract, the services that they provide, the value of that piece of the enforcement, because as Councilman Mariano said, we use the word "quality of life," but my point is the lack of response from the SPCA. I've gotten other reports where people have had ten kittens that were abandoned in an abandoned house and it took a member of City Council to get the SPCA to respond to that very. It's very difficult, according to the constituents that I talk to, to get a response. So if we're spending $700,000, it sounds to me like in some cases that it's like a gift to the SPCA because I'm not sure we're getting our bang for our buck.
Councilman, I want to go on the record that I don't know if it's proper that we vilify the SPCA because -- (Unintelligible, parties talking over each other.)
It's been my personal experience that -- 120 10/03/00 L&I - BILL 000103
No, no, I just want to say that I have the same experience with the dog phenomenon, but the other stuff -- the SPCA is probably overwhelmed.
It's in my Council district and we've all been up there. I'm sure they do nine out of ten things perfect, maybe they're trying to do twelve and thirteen things.
So I just don't want it to be on the record that City Council's vilifying the SPCA.
I agree with you totally, but $700,000 is a lot of money, and I'd really -- I would like to have that information forwarded to the Chair on exactly what we get for that.
Councilman, I would like to add that although $700,000 sounds like a lot of money (inaudible), we spend less on animal control in the City of Philadelphia than any other ten largest city in this country. Some cities are 121 10/03/00 L&I - BILL 000103 spending as much as and $7 million. And the Pennsylvania SPCA performs a great amount of the services at their own cost. Their cost to administer this contract is approximately $1.5 million, of which we only pay --
Excuse me, Mr. Rafes. Could everybody in here at the switchboard -- are these microphones that terrible, or am I going deaf at age 45?
Councilman, (inaudible) if we all sat on the perimeter, we'd be able to hear a tremendous (inaudible), but for the folks in the center, we cannot (inaudible).
Again, as what Councilman Mariano said, there's no disrespect to 122 10/03/00 L&I - BILL 000103 the SPCA, but this is business here. If they need more money to do their job, then this could result in possibly additional funds for the SPCA. You indicated it's million, million, $4 million in other jurisdictions, so if we're not providing enough money for them to do what we need them to do in responding to calls, then that itself, that's a problem. And I'm willing to do whatever it takes to be of help there. But I'm tired, to tell you the truth, of hearing these stories about, in some cases, rudely hearing "Go out and buy your own cage to trap a rabid raccoon"?
This sounds like a (inaudible) in your response, Councilman. Our experience with the Pennsylvania SPCA is positive, and we would like to hear about any situation where that's not true, and we will investigate it immediately.
Thank you. Any other questions from committee members or Councilpeople? 123 10/03/00 L&I - BILL 000103 (No further questions.)
Yes. Just for the record, I conferred with Councilman Kenney and I would like to state for the record -- again, my name is Otis Haigler, Licenses and Inspections, for the stenographer. I would just like to state for the record, again, under the provisions of Title 10 related to animals, the responsibilities and duties for the enforcement of that section related to animals has been transferred to the Department of Health by virtue of a memorandum of understanding between L&I that was signed off by the Managing Director.
Sir, could you show us your way of holding that microphone? I could actually hear you. You have to hold it and actually put the microphone in your mouth to speak?
Thank you. Any other questions to any of the people on the panel? 124 10/03/00 L&I - BILL 000103 (No further questions.)
Is there anyone else here to testify on this bill? Come on up. (Witnesses come forward.)
Now, please use Mr. Haigler's method of speaking into the microphone 'cause I got to hear what you're saying. When you say your names, please spell it slowly for the stenographer cause she can't hear either.
Mr. Chairman, my name is Elaine Matheos. Matheos is spelled M-A-T-H-E-O-S, an Ellis Island mistake, so. . . Talking about the SPCA, I think it may be about time that some of that money went for vans that would go to different neighborhoods for spays, neuters, and shots, and I think that would be a wonderful possibility. I have taught for -- or I did teach for 30 years at Strawberry Mansion, and I didn't become aware of animal problems until, I think, my last ten years there, and it's horrendous. And 125 10/03/00 L&I - BILL 000103 I've seen it all over the City in different areas, where puppies and kittens are live toys for the children. And when they're not a puppy and a kitten anymore, they either get moved into the cellar or moved out into the streets or into the park. And part of this is a sad process. When they go into the cellar, they go into a filthy cellar, where it's dark. And then they go into a filthy backyard. You're talking about feces being cleaned? Nothing is cleaned back there. And often they're very lucky if have a shelter or food and, less of all, water. In fact, if you can get a dog from one of the backyards, they'll take water before they take food even if they're starving to death. The other thing that happens, there is -- dogs are put in the backyard to protect the house, the family. They think if the dog barks, they will know someone is around, and I think that's where you get the barking. But part of the barking consists because parents no longer look at their children and they no longer say to them, You may get bitten if you tease that dog. And those children love to go down those alleys and poke 126 10/03/00 L&I - BILL 000103 sticks and throw kittens over the fences and bottles and rocks. So, therefore, you get barking dogs, and that's what you are listening to at night, the barking dogs, and I know there are some that are barkers. But when they get out, you see the pictures on television of a dog being let down that bit a child because they hate children by then. If you have been poked with sticks and had stones thrown at you, you don't like children. So you'll see them let off or shot like those were the other day. We have some really serious problems with animals. These people throw them out (inaudible) or they let them breed and they throw out the mother and keep one or two of the puppies and give the other puppies away, and they keep breeding and breeding and breeding them, because it's almost a physical offense to them, a great affront to say to them, Why don't you spay and neuter your pets? So I think that would be an excellent idea for the SPCA to take charge of things like that, and maybe licensing animals should be more 127 10/03/00 L&I - BILL 000103 stringent, which it is not now. I've seen horrendous things. Unfortunately, I rescue now and it's a very costly thing, and I don't want to do it. I'm older, I don't want to do it. I've only done it maybe in the last ten years, but I've seen everything from gasoline poured on puppies and then set on fire to animals that had chains that were abandoned out on the streets, with the chain growing into its neck because it was abandoned a few months ago and it's grown since then, and the skin is a part of the chain. So people don't know what they're doing, and it's kind of a disgusting picture. And, unfortunately, these people want protection for their houses and they use the dogs for protection. And they think if they're nice to them, they will not take care of guarding their house. I don't know if you have any questions for me.
Any questions for this witness? (No questions.) 128 10/03/00 L&I - BILL 000103
Anyone else HERE to testify? Come on up. You can come up in pairs if you want, come on up. You can come up. Come up here and just one at a time say your name and spell it. (Witnesses come forward.)
Hello. My name is Linda Mellish, M-E-L-L-I-S-H, from Darrell Clarke's District Council, he's my District Councilman. I spent two years trying to get the SPCA to address issues in my neighborhood. I lost a tenant, I lost my income, I lost my business, I lost my health, I could not sleep for a year and a half, and nobody would do anything. I have called every office that had anything to do with anything in the City that involved animals, noise, feces, abuse, neglect, the gamut. I had 11 dogs barking in my backyard for a year and a half. The SPCA has been known around this study to do (unintelligible) in terms of dealing with animal issues. It's a joke. They should not 129 10/03/00 L&I - BILL 000103 be in charge of this department, you should not be giving them money. If they want the job, then they should be handling it, and they are not and they know it, and why aren't they here today? I have a file of letters and photographs if you're interested on all my attempts at resolving these issues.
I will. And you know where I finally got a response? Two weeks now, I've had no dogs barking, and it was because I went to Representative's Frank Oliver's office, because he's the ward leader, and that's where I got a response. Anything for me?
Well, I was dealing with an issue where I had a man arrested for assaulting me, and his brother said to me, when I talked about these other problems I had in the neighborhood, he said, Well, you should be going to Frank Oliver's office because he's a ward leader, and it's his concern that these issues get resolved. And I wasn't the only complainant (inaudible). Nothing happened.
I shouldn't have to go to a state representative to get a dog to stop barking in my backyard.
It's four and a half people who are tying them up for four days, 131 10/03/00 L&I - BILL 000103 without food, water, attention, in all weather, on a two-foot chain.
I just wanted to say that you went to the right person, though.
Any other questions for this witness? (No further questions.)
Good afternoon, Councilman Mariano and the other members of the committee. My name is Virginia Barishek, and that's B-A-R-I-S-H-E-K. And with me is Bruce Cohen, and we represent Greater Philadelphia Dog Fanciers Association, which is an all-breed dog club and which has been based in Philadelphia for 30 years. We're here to comment on Bill 103, on the proposed amendments to Chapter 10-100, Animals, in City Code Section 10-105, dealing with animal nuisances. We believe that the amendments pertaining to noise are unreasonable, 132 10/03/00 L&I - BILL 000103 discriminatory, and overly punitive to dog owners. Section 10-105, paragraph 3 proposes that no person shall permit the dog or allow them to make any noise which causes unreasonable annoyance to a person or persons residing within one thousand feet. Now, in practical terms, this means that a complaint could be lodged against you by someone living a distance of more three Veterans Stadiums from your house. We refer back to Chapter 10-400, Noise and Excessive Vibration. Section 10-404, Paragraph 3 specifies that, for example, radios and tape players should not be played at a level producing a sound audible at a distance greater than 100 feet. We ask why the proposed ordinance 17 relating to animal noise specifies a distance ten times greater than the existing ordinance on radios. With electronic amplification, and especially in the case of car radios, such devices cause annoyance and disturbances at greater distances than a barking dog. It is unreasonable and discriminatory that dog owners under the proposal would be obligated to meet a more rigid standard, including 133 10/03/00 L&I - BILL 000103 harsher penalties, for noise that already exists elsewhere in the code. The personalities specified in the proposal are more harsh than those listed in Section 10-403 for noise. In addition, the higher monetary penalties, the proposal states that a third violation will result in removal of animal. In essence, three strikes and you're out. However, existing noise ordinances define a repeat offender as any person who commits on more than three occasions any of the above violations. And, finally, the existing noise ordinances, unlike the proposal, do not mandate removing a source of the noise; yet, it would be far cheaper to warehouse seized car radios, for example, than it would be to kennel, feed, and water seized dogs. As responsible dog owners and trainers, we know dogs bark for reasons that people define as good or bad. A good reason is because there's a stranger on your front porch at 11 p.m.; a bad reason is because the dog has been banished to the backyard by owners who don't know how to train them to behave in the house. We advocate 134 10/03/00 L&I - BILL 000103 educating dog owners on responsible ownership, which includes training your dogs humanely to (inaudible) to the household. As to the proposal on ways (inaudible) public education about cleaning up after one's own dog is needed. For example, have there ever been any local public service announcement about dog licensing, leash and nuisance laws? Education, combined with the enforcement of existing laws, which are already very detailed, will have a more lasting effect than revising the law to include the owner's property as an area of violation. What's needed is an approach that reminds people that a liveable community requires neighborly attitudes, and that being a good dog neighbor is a part of this. In closing, we emphasize again that pet owners need education about existing laws, why they are important to human and animal well-being, and why it's important to be a good neighbor. And we would look to remind you that as experienced and responsible dog owners, Philadelphia Dog Fanciers is ready to help in any way possible with this. 135 10/03/00 L&I - BILL 000264 Thank you.
Thank you, ma'am. Any questions for this witness? (No questions.)
Seeing none, we're going to go into the last. THE CLERK; Bill No. 000264, an ordinance amending Section 10-1200 of the Philadelphia Code, entitled "Posting a Temporary Sign," by adding a new section prohibiting the placement of any temporary sign that will cause damage upon removal or application, and all stickers to any street signs erected after January 1, 1995 on Broad Street between Lombard Street and Glenview Avenue, under certain terms and conditions.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, at this time, I'd like to withdraw this bill based on several consultations with the Department of L&I and the Department of Streets, an which was cosponsored by Councilman DiCicco. For the record, we will be coming back with a revised bill.
Thank you, Councilman. Is there another bill? (Witness comes forward.)
My name is Larry Victor. I've been fighting with bills on the -- with stickers on the streets for about years. And 17 I'd just like to make a suggestion to the -- for 18 the new bill. Rather than sort of attach together 19 the entire -- the bills that we have for the 20 stickers posted make absolutely no sense. You can pick out any portion that will either make the thing illegal or you can use it to say that it is legal. The entire bill should be seriously looked at, sit down with the committee, and have 137 10/03/00 L&I - BILL 000264 witnesses if you wish, and figure out a bill at all take care of everything, instead of just a (inaudible) because, obviously, what we have here is just patch work that didn't make too much sense, but it would be possible to really clean this up once and for all, 'cause there's words like, "You cannot put a figure except that you can. . ." The actual fact is, every -- according to the code that we have now, no poster, bill, sticker, anything can go anywhere unless it has a sticker issued by L&I. And then even after you have the sticker saying that it's legal, you must get permission from where you're going to put it, and the City says you can't put it anywhere without a specific okay for it, and the same goes for private properties. So the point is, I respectfully ask for you to sit down and come up with something that makes more sense.
I think we need to make sure that you can't put anything up on any of the (inaudible).
And more important, sir, is that there's enforcement. And I have to tell you how easy it is to enforce it. Councilman Kenney, in his wisdom, made me special assistant to his L&I Committee. And just on the phone, calling up people who have put posters up, telling them it was illegal, they apologized and took it down. So you will see no more theaters --
Now, did Councilman Kenney pay you to be a special assistant?
Did Councilman Kenney pay you any funds to be special assistant when he was the L&I Chair?
Because there's no salary. (Unintelligible, parties talking over each other.) 139 10/03/00 L&I - BILL 000264
Raise your right hand, you are now special assistant, okay? (Laughter.)
Now to L&I, Councilman Kenney will probably let you swing over to this aisle on the committee. See, as long as he's not paying you, it's fine. You know, we're always looking for volunteers. Thank you for volunteering.
Thanks a lot. (Inaudible discussion among Committee members off-mic.) (Councilman Clarke chairs committee.)
Are we now getting information that either the Law Department or Law and L&I are coming back specifically to talk about Bill 000278 for the purpose of trying to move this bill today? Is that the purpose of you guys 140 10/03/00 L&I - BILL 000264 coming back?
I have made a phone call and I was informed that the bill may be held because of the question related whether or not we can actually go into a liquor establishment to keep minors out, to address that question. So I have made a call to the Law Department to see if I could get maybe one of their legal persons over here to explain that provision to the committee.
Well, I understand all of that but, I mean, that wasn't the only question that was outstanding. I mean, there's still not a legitimate answer, as far as I'm concerned, to the question that I raised with regard to extending the license from one year to three years. I think Councilwoman Krajewski was very concerned about that and had issues with that, and I think Councilman DiCicco did as well (inaudible) the regulations that you may or may not promulgate. You say you don't necessarily have any today. If you do have some, I'd certainly be 141 10/03/00 L&I - BILL 000264 interested in seeing them. So, I mean, it wasn't for me just the issue of minors; that was raised primarily by other Councilmembers and I jumped in that discussion.
Councilman, my understanding is, at the call of the Chair, in consultation with other members of the committee, that this bill was going to be held today.
All right, that was my impression, and I had a sidebar conversation with the Chief of Staff, who was up here trying to figure out what was going on it, and it was not my impression that this bill was ready to vote.
My apologies. And, of course, you can hold the bill today. My apologies.
That's okay. The clerk will read the title of the next bill.
Bill No. O00404, an ordinance amending Subcode PM of Title 4 of the 142 10/03/00 L&I - BILL 000404 Philadelphia Code, entitled "The Philadelphia Property Maintenance Code," by amending Section PM 306.0, which requires owners of vacant buildings to prevent unauthorized entry to the buildings by securing or sealing doors, windows, or other entrances and openings to the buildings, by providing that a separate penalty may be imposed for each such entrance or opening that the owner has to secure after notice has been issued, all under certain terms and conditions.
Yes. Good day, Councilman Clarke and members of the committee. I am Otis Haigler, Jr., Legislative and Regulatory Affairs Manager for the Department of Licenses and Inspections. Today I am here to provide testimony on Bill 000404, which, if enacted, will amend Section 21 PM 306 of the Philadelphia Property Maintenance Code to provide for a separate penalty to be imposed on the owner of a property for their failure to secure the property after notice has been given by the Department of Licenses and 143 10/03/00 L&I - BILL 000404 Inspections. The Department of Licenses and Inspections has no objection to the proposed bill, which shall include the amendments as submitted by the Department. I have amendments that I would like to submit. I had submitted the amendments before to -- I don't know if you have a copy of the amendments, but I have some amendments.
Mr. Chairman, I have to leave. I'd like to leave my vote as voting aye on the two bills being reported out.
Mr. Chairman, are there amendments circulated on this particular bill?
I did submit those amendments to our chief of staff's office, and I have copies of the amendments here.
You have the amendments here? 144 10/03/00 L&I - BILL 000404
Mr. Chairman, can I ask a question while we're getting copies of the amendments?
This was a bill 10 that was -- the prime sponsor of this bill is, I believe, Councilman DiCicco.
And I see that the vice chair of the committee was the second signer. Have these amendments been discussed with the sponsor of the bill?
Yes, they have. And I have submitted these to his office several days ago.
And also I believe you may have gotten the amendments as well, Councilman Clarke. I'm not sure.
If you say I've got them, I've got them. 145 10/03/00 L&I - BILL 000404
I'm not sure, but I did submit the amendments (inaudible), and the primary sponsor of the bill did see a copy of the amendments, and I understand that they have conferred with your office. I'm not exactly sure if --
Sir? UNIDENTIFIED WITNESS: (Later identified as Mr. Lacey.) I'm a representative of the Department of Licenses and Inspections, a supervisor and inspector. I was just here to answer whatever questions may have came up.
Any questions of the gentlemen from this committee? (No questions.)
Sorry. You can't get away that quickly. Councilman Rizzo has a question.
I just want to take advantage of you being here and save a phone call. I had a letter from a constituent the other day in reference to what we seal buildings with, that we put sheets of plywood in that really just looks terrible, because it's just -- it looks like a boarded-up building. Has there ever been any consideration -- and I know that painting that in advance would probably be not practical, but is there any technique out there that kind of gives the community, even though we have boarded-up properties -- I know that they've done some things, some test things, where they put up like a picture of a window in a boarded-up house, but just having a plain-old plywood, you know, in a boarded up window, especially when it's not every house, when it's just like maybe one in the block, is there anything we can do esthetically to make it look a little bit better than just having 147 10/03/00 L&I - BILL 000404 boarded-up windows?
That's a clean-and-seal issue that I'm not directly involved in, but I do believe there's something that's developed would make it look better.
That would be an issue for the Deputy Commissioner Robert Solvibile, who's in charge of our clean-and-seal unit.
Thank you, Councilman. Are there any other questions? (No further questions.)
Miss Robinson? Thank you, gentlemen. (Witness comes forward.)
Good afternoon, members of the committee. 148 10/03/00 L&I - BILL 000404
Good afternoon. Please state your name for the record.
My name is Judy Robinson, and I'm here to testify on the bill in question. I understand that you all are amending laws that have been on the books for a substantial period of time. I have some pictures, I would like to just have these in front of you as I speak, please. Two are City-owned properties that have some of the boards on the upstairs windows, and then one is a picture of properties that are being demolished at this time as a result of the laws that have been on the books from Licenses and Inspections for many years but have not been enforced. I look at the amendment and all it's doing is really just adding a penalty. I sell real estate and I travel all over the whole city. 149 10/03/00 L&I - BILL 000404 There is no area that has more vacant properties than in the 5th District, where I live. And some of those, or a substantial portion of those, are City-owned properties that are open on the upper floors, that's why we have the disrepair and some of the buildings falling now, because they have been open for a substantial number of years. And I'm really concerned about how that's going to be enforced when it's a City-owned property or a PHA property. In addition, I find that a substantial number of these properties are estate properties. So to penalize a property that is an estate property is not going to help us in the neighborhood that are trying to do whatever we can to maintain our neighborhoods when the person is deceased. Having another penalty put on them because Licenses and Inspections comes around again and sees that the house is still open, it's not a benefit to us. So my question is, how is this going to help in the areas where there are estate properties? I think it's good and I will give you 150 10/03/00 L&I - BILL 000404 all credit for prevention because I sell in those areas and I never want to see a another neighborhood devastated like the 5th District is, so I appreciate of the fact that it can help with prevention. However, I'm concerned about those properties that are estate properties, City-owned, PHA-owned, and what is this going to do? Because we do have a substantial number of properties that are in the condition, but nothing is really being done. I do have some suggestions that Licenses and Inspections would do more encapsuling to preserve these properties while we work through the process of trying to get them back into the hands of a tax-paying citizen. I guess that's the area that I'm really mostly concerned about. So if you all could give me a little insight as to what your thinking was when you were sitting down to amend this bill.
Thank you, Miss Robinson. Miss Robinson, the primary sponsor of the bill is not here but I can speak to my cosponsorship of this particular bill as it 151 10/03/00 L&I - BILL 000404 relates to the penalty side. One of the problems, as you know, (inaudible) real estate and also being a constituent and a friend of mine in the 5th District, is that the real-estate taxes are relatively low, and too often, we cannot get to that threshold where we're able to either condemn a property or acquire it at sheriff's sale because it does not meet the guidelines associated, which is $800 and $1,000. What we've attempted to bill in this particular bill and also on the non-utilization bill is impose an additional tax on vacant property. It's to expedite level of liens on those properties so we can quickly take them to sheriff's sale or to condemnation. We also want to create, where there are active owners, a disincentive for people to allow vacant properties to sit and the create problems that they create in those particular neighborhoods, so that's my personal reason for signing on to this particular piece of legislation. As it relates to the municipally-owned 152 10/03/00 L&I - BILL 000404 and the Philadelphia Housing Authority-owned, the reality is that there is no excuse for us not to maintain our properties, and I agree with you, when we seal a property, we should in fact seal the property on the upper floors, because it does cause deterioration. As a result of that you, you see several buildings collapsing because of rain and the weather has gone through those other floors of those buildings, and I think we should change those policies. But this is, hopefully, another tool in our constant fight against blight in our communities.
In addition, I just wondered if, while you were waiting to get that process, to the sheriff's sale, is Licenses and Inspections going to encapsule these properties to protect them, as you make it through that process? Otherwise, we're going to keep perpetuating what we have at this time.
Yes. There's currently a program that's kind of done on an ad hoc basis by the Department of Licenses and Inspections, where they encapsulate properties. I 153 10/03/00 L&I - BILL 000404 think that they traditionally do them when, in their opinion, the property could potentially be saved for future rehabilitation. I understand that the Philadelphia Housing Authority has actually submitted a proposal to the mayor's office to encapsulate upwards of 1,000 buildings citywide, in the hopes of saving them for future rehabilitation, and that is being taken under consideration.
And I'm concerned too that Licenses and Inspections is the only entity that's determining what properties should be saved and what can be salvaged, with no assistance from people in the community that may have the resources or the skills to salvage these properties. Is there any way that citizens in a community in an organized way can have some input? When a block, say, for instance, is 80 percent or less than 75 percent occupied, when there's high home ownership, for instance, and there are a small amount of vacant properties that are open, is there any way that the community organizations can have more input as to what 154 10/03/00 L&I - BILL 000404 property will be salvaged?
Yes, there is, and now I'm actually starting to feel like I'm testifying now. Maybe I should switch chairs with you. Yeah, my understanding is that the Mayor's office is working on a process that will allow community organizations, along with the City Planning Department, to discuss all demolitions, all encapsulations, and ultimately the Blight Removal Program. I know personally I have had discussions with the Administration about setting up dates and times and locations in my Councilmatic District. And I understand that they have reached out to other District Councilpeople. So, hopefully, that process will be taking place very shortly. And the primary purpose of that is to make sure that individuals who live on blocks who have some firsthand knowledge of any particular property which is in disrepair can be a part of that process.
Well, I really would appreciate that and I really hope that we do that 155 10/03/00 L&I - BILL 000404 ASAP, because I just got on the board of my community development corporation, Advocate Community Development Corp., and I really would like to be able to have these tools and be able also to use our knowledge and information to add to what the City is trying to do, because I contend that if the community is not a part of this planning, then we are not going to have the knowledge and the skills to maintain whatever is supposedly being transformed. So I would really appreciate it if you could really move swiftly with that so that we can be involved and determine what we can salvage in our community and also add to us being partners really in this new transformation that's going on in Philadelphia. Thank you all very much.
Thank you. Any other questions from members of the committee? (No further questions.)
Miss Robinson, did you want to submit these pictures for the record, or do you need them back? 156 10/03/00 L&I - BILL 000404
All right, thank you. And if you need them, you'll come and get them back, all right, thank you. Thank you, Miss Robinson. Any other witnesses? (No response.)
That concludes our public hearing on Bill No.'s 102, 103, 264, 278, and 404. Bill No. 102, at the request of the sponsor, has been held. Bill No. 264, at the request of the sponsor, has been withdrawn. Bill No. 278 has been held until further information is received from the Administration. At this time, we would like to -- are there amendments offered for Bill No. 103?
I'm sorry. We're now going into the public meeting. That concludes the hearing and we will now go into a public 157 10/03/00 L&I - PUBLIC MEETING meeting.
Councilman Nutter, can you offer amendments on Bill No. 103?
103? Mr. Chairman, on behalf of the sponsor of this bill, Councilman Kenney, I propose the following amendments on Bill 10 No. 103, which read as follows: Amend subsection 2, "Removal." At top of , Line 2, remove the word "immediately" and add the words "within 12 hours" between the words "feces" and "from." Second amendment is: amend Section 6, "Enforcement," subsection b, at the bottom of , by lowering the amount of the fine to $25. I move the adoption of both amendments to Bill No. 000103. (Duly seconded.)
All in favor? All opposed? The amendments pass. We will now vote on Bill No. 103, as 158 10/03/00 L&I - PUBLIC MEETING amended. I call for a motion.
Do you want a suspension on this? Mr. Chairman, I move that Bill No. 6 000103, as amended, be reported out of this committee with a favorable recommendation and a further recommendation that the rules of Council be suspended so as to permit first reading at our next session. (Duly seconded.)
All in favor? All opposed? Bill 103 has been reported out of committee with a favorable recommendation. Now there are, my understanding, amendments offered by the Administration on Bill 18 No. 404. Councilman Nutter?
Mr. Chairman, the following are the proposed amendments offered by the Administration to Bill No. 000404: The first amendment is, in Section 1 of the bill, on , Subsection PM 306.3. The last sentence is amended to read as follows: PM-306.3 Notice should read as follows: "Such 159 10/03/00 L&I - PUBLIC MEETING written notice shall indicate the number of doors, windows, or other entrances or openings to the building that the owner has failed to secure or seal, in violation of PM-306.2." The second amendment is on , Subsection PM-306.5, "Penalties," is amended to read as follows: "If the owner does not comply with the notice or fails to correct the conditions specified in the Department's notice within the required period of time, the owner shall be subject the penalties set forth in the Administrative Code, provided that it shall be a separate offense for which a separate fine may be imposed for the owner to fail to secure or seal each separate door, window, or other entrance or opening." Delete the word "listed" and insert the word "enumerated" in the written notice required by PM-306.3. As provided in A-601.2, each day that each separate offense continues after issuance of a notice or order shall also be deemed a separate offense for which a separate fine may be imposed. I move the adoption of these two 160 10/03/00 L&I - PUBLIC MEETING amendments to Bill No. 000404. (Duly seconded.)
All in favor? All opposed? The ayes have it. I now call for a motion on Bill No. 8 404.
Mr. Chairman, I move that Bill No. 000404, as amended, be reported out of committee with a favorable recommendation and a further recommendation that the rules of Council be suspended so as to permit first reading at our next session of Council. (Duly seconded.)
All in favor? All opposed? Bill No. 404, as amended, will be reported out with a favorable recommendation and a request is made for a suspension of the rules to allow for first reading at our next public meeting. This concludes the Licenses and Inspections Committee meeting. Thank you all very much. 161 10/03/00 L&I - PUBLIC MEETING (Adjourned at 12:54 p.m.) - - - 162 C E R T I F I C A T E I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing proceedings of the Council of the City of Philadelphia of Tuesday, October 3, 2000, were reported fully and accurately by me, and that this is a correct transcript of same. RE: COUNCIL COMMITTEE ON LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS BILL NO.'S 000103, 000178, 000404 __________________________________, JOSEPHINE CARDILLO, Registered Professional Reporter