COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA COMMITTEE ON LAW AND GOVERNMENT - - - Room 400, City Hall Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Thursday, March 26, 2009 9:20 a.m. - - - PRESENT: COUNCILMAN WILLIAM GREENLEE, CHAIR COUNCILWOMAN JANNIE BLACKWELL COUNCILMAN FRANK DiCICCO COUNCILMAN W. WILSON GOODE, JR. COUNCILMAN BILL GREEN COUNCILMAN JACK KELLY COUNCILMAN JAMES F. KENNEY BILL 080748 - An ordinance providing for the submission to the qualified electors of the City of Philadelphia of the proposal set forth in a Resolution approved by Council proposing amendment to the Philadelphia Home Rule Charter to provide within civil service regulations for the posthumous promotion to the next rank for any Philadelphia police officer or firefighter who is killed or who dies in the line of duty... RESOLUTION 080765 - Resolution proposing an amendment to the Philadelphia Home Rule Charter to provide within civil service regulations for the posthumous... - - - V A R A L L O Incorporated Litigation Support Services Eleven Penn Center 1835 Market Street, Suite 600 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103 215.561.2220 215.567.2670 2
Good morning, everybody. We're running quite late, so we want to try to get started. Mr. Boyle, will you please read the -- this is the Committee on Law and Government. Just for the record, we have a quorum, with Councilman Kenney, the Vice-Chair of the Committee, Councilman DiCicco, Councilman Goode and Councilman Green. Mr. Boyle, will you please read the bill and resolution before us today, please.
Ordinance 080748, an ordinance providing for the submission to the qualified electors of the City of Philadelphia of the proposal set forth in a Resolution approved by Council proposing an amendment of the Philadelphia Home Rule Charter to provide within civil service regulations for the posthumous promotion to the next rank for any Philadelphia police officer or firefighter who is killed or who dies in 3 3/26/09 - LAW & GOV'T - BILL 080748, etc. the line of duty, and providing for the submission of the amendment to the electors of Philadelphia; fixing the date of a special election for such purpose; prescribing the form of ballot question to be voted on; and authorizing the appropriate officers to publish notice and to make arrangements for the special election. Resolution 080765, resolution 12 proposing an amendment to the Philadelphia Home Rule Charter to provide within civil service regulations for the posthumous promotion to the next rank for any Philadelphia police officer or firefighter who is killed or who dies in the line of duty, and providing for the submission of the amendment to the electors of Philadelphia.
Thank you very much. Councilwoman Blackwell, as the sponsor of the bill, would you like to say something first? 4 3/26/09 - LAW & GOV'T - BILL 080748, etc.
I absolutely would. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Good morning to all members of the Committee and all who are here in attendance.
I appreciate the opportunity to be here to speak here before City Council's Committee on Law and Government as it considers Bill 080748 and Resolution 15 080765, which would posthumously promote fallen police, firemen and paramedics killed or who die in the line of duty. While it has generally been the practice of this city to make these promotions, I believe that at a time when we've lost five police officers just during the past 15 months, we should make these promotions the law. On a daily basis we ask our law enforcement officers, firefighters and 5 3/26/09 - LAW & GOV'T - BILL 080748, etc. paramedics to put their lives on the line for the protection of others. They selflessly serve and protect the citizens of our great city, and this legislation presents only a small token of our true debt to the brave men and women who serve this city. I also would like to offer for adoption an amendment to the bill to allow -- that is being amended to indicate May 19th as Election Day when voters will consider the ballot question. Resolution 080765 is being amended to include paramedics. As such, we're asking that the Committee give favorable consideration to this legislation in terms of reporting it out with a favorable recommendation with a suspension of the rules. May I also add that I learned just last evening as I was coming out of an affair downstairs in the Mayor's Reception Room -- one of a few of our own members in Council were being honored -- 6 3/26/09 - LAW & GOV'T - BILL 080748, etc. I saw the Mayor and ran into him and he asked to see me and told me that there was an issue, because we've been doing this since 2006. I had a discussion with him when he asked me what my interest was and why I introduced this. I technically introduced this in October, but I've been dealing with this as an issue for many years under the last Administration. I don't know how many years. Maybe five, maybe six. For years I've been dealing with this as an issue, even before we had the issue with police officers that we see in the news today. As all of you know, the money that the families, widows and others receive and their families receive is negligible. So it's not an issue of money, but it does let them know we care. A little more money during these harsh economic times is helpful for everyone, but it would not have any impact on our budget. And I talked to the Mayor and said I have no problem staying in my 7 3/26/09 - LAW & GOV'T - BILL 080748, etc. lane. I understand that we are three equal branches of government, may I add, executive, legislative and judicial. I have no problem staying in my lane. He says that they did it with two officers and that it is a negotiation, a labor issue, and I have no problem. It is not my intention, nor has it been, that we try to involve ourselves in the Mayor's negotiations. I respect his right to do that. But when I come in and I learn that there's -- and this was last evening, I don't know, maybe around 6 o'clock or something like that. But when I come in and I learned that all of the sudden we have the Committee of Seventy opposing it -- I mean, we introduced this last October -- all of a sudden, it is being spoken against. I told the Mayor I was happy to work with him, and he said he would send someone up here to talk about it. But when they put us in the position that 8 3/26/09 - LAW & GOV'T - BILL 080748, etc. there's something negative about this legislation, there isn't. This is just some small token to support families who suffer the horrible tragedy of losing their loved one. And if the tone changes that we're doing something wrong, then it forces me to stick with our legislation, and I certainly ask that the Committee would consider this and, again, report it out with suspension of rules, and I thank you for your consideration.
Thank you, Councilwoman. Before I call -- Mr. Gillison, you can come to the table. Any comment or question yet from the Committee? (No response.)
Seeing none, Mr. Gillison or anybody else from the Administration. (Witness approached witness table.)
Good 9 3/26/09 - LAW & GOV'T - BILL 080748, etc. morning. Could you please identify yourself for the record and proceed. DEPUTY
Thank you. Good morning, Chairman Greenlee, members of the Committee on Law and Government and members of the public. I am Deputy Mayor Everett Gillison. I'm the Deputy Mayor for Public Safety. I appreciate the opportunity to offer testimony today on Bill 080748 and Resolution 080765 that, taken together, propose to change Chapter 4 of the Civil Service Regulations and amend the Home Rule Charter to permit posthumous promotion of any police officer or firefighter or, with the amendment, the paramedic who is killed or dies in the line of duty. The bill further provides for submission of a ballot question to the qualified electors of the City of Philadelphia regarding the proposed amendment to the Home Rule Charter. The intended benefit of the proposed legislation is to provide the 10 3/26/09 - LAW & GOV'T - BILL 080748, etc. surviving families or beneficiaries of the fallen officer or firefighter an increased pension benefit. This is a common practice in some municipalities throughout the United States as a way of helping the surviving families to meet financial obligations following the death of an officer, firefighter or paramedic. As a matter of practicality, there are usually two ways to provide this increased compensation. One way, as described in the proposed legislation, is to promote the fallen individual posthumously. The other way is to provide posthumous pension benefit at the next highest pay grade. The latter method is currently a provision of the existing police and fire contract. And I want to stress that the concept is not new to the City of Philadelphia. It was first articulated in the 1996 through 1998 Act 111 Award where the offset initially was paid by the officers on disability based on 11 3/26/09 - LAW & GOV'T - BILL 080748, etc. " This concept continues to be articulated in the current police contract that states in part, "Any member of the bargaining unit who is killed in the line of duty as an immediate result of the violent conduct of a third party that was directed towards the officer or a member of the public or an immediate result of performing other heroic action in an emergency situation in the line of duty on or after January 1, 2006 shall have his or her pension calculated as if the officer retired at the next rank, excluding corporal, above the rank held by the officer at the time of his or her death; for example, going from Officer to 12 3/26/09 - LAW & GOV'T - BILL 080748, etc. Sergeant. " The language in the firefighter contract that was an award is similar. It should be recognized that the requirements for the increased pension benefit in the current contract is more specific than the proposed legislation. The proposed legislation would amend Chapter 4 of the Civil Service Regulation, which is currently silent on the issue, to provide the increased pension benefit by adding the following language to the existing regulation: Quote, "Philadelphia police officers and firefighters who are killed or who die in the line of duty shall be posthumously promoted to the rank that immediately follows the police officer's or firefighter's rank at his or her time of death," unquote. Basically, I thought to address some of the confusion that has arisen, I 13 3/26/09 - LAW & GOV'T - BILL 080748, etc. would like to explain the reason for the recent posthumous promotion of Officer Patrick McDonald to the rank of sergeant. Unique circumstances surrounded the promotion of Officer McDonald that was recommended by Commissioner Ramsey and approved by Mayor Nutter. Officer McDonald had already passed the sergeant's examination and was 12th on the list for promotion and his promotion took effect when all 12 on the list were promoted to sergeant. In this specific case, the promotion of the officer posthumously was deemed to be an earned advancement, worthy of recognition, and as a result of the promotion, Officer McDonald's pension was computed not as a sergeant but as a lieutenant.
We recognized a unique circumstance and faithfully responded. As previously explained, the proposed legislation would change and be less specific than the current provisions of the police and fire contracts. My 14 3/26/09 - LAW & GOV'T - BILL 080748, etc. view is that our current position is covered in the current labor agreements and should stay in that context. We do not want to start down the line conferring or taking away benefits by legislation. That concludes my testimony, and I would be pleased to answer any questions from the Committee members.
Thank you, Mr. Gillison. I know we have both Councilman Kenney and Councilman Green at least want to ask a question. I just have one. You talked about the current police contract, last sentence, "This section shall not cover death resulting from vehicular accidents." DEPUTY
Officer Nazario, how was that situation handled? DEPUTY
It was actually handled the -- and I have an 15 3/26/09 - LAW & GOV'T - BILL 080748, etc. actual quote here. The City had adopted the most complete interpretation of the benefit, which actually allowed it to cover not only Officer Nazario, but also Sergeant Simpson. The authority to determine if an officer is qualified is vested in the Pension Board, and although both Officer Nazario and Sergeant Simpson were killed by vehicular accident, the Pension Board determined, with the support of the Nutter Administration, that their death satisfied the standard for heroic action and their pension benefit was recalculated. So we've already taken the steps to make sure that's going forward.
I'm sorry. I should have mentioned Sergeant Simpson, too. I forgot. Thank you. Councilman Kenney.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Gillison, in your testimony, you indicated that this is 16 3/26/09 - LAW & GOV'T - BILL 080748, etc. done contractually relative to the computation of their pension benefits, but not the specific rank. Is that what you're saying? So on a regular basis, when an officer or firefighter is killed in the line of duty, either the Pension Board or some mechanism calculates their pension benefits to the next rank up? DEPUTY
And the fact that this legislation would confer the actual rank -- and at Officer McDonald's funeral, it was a major part of the service, the conferring of the rank. In addition to the financial side of it, the conferring of the rank was a very significant, I guess, solace for the family. DEPUTY
And I know that that was determined as the right thing to do by the Commissioner and the Administration. DEPUTY
In the event that we -- and I intend to support the bill -- get this out of Committee and get it on the floor, there's not going to be a significant change in the method in which we do this other than the rank being conferred, because contractually the pension benefits, most recent history, have been calculated at the next rank? DEPUTY
So there's really not a major or any significant pension impact? Even though it's a higher pension calculation, it's understandable we're able to handle it? 18 3/26/09 - LAW & GOV'T - BILL 080748, etc. DEPUTY
And I understand your concern relative to legislation of -- DEPUTY
Especially amending the Home Rule Charter in order to do these kinds of things.
And since I've been here, we've had this problem, because we have no other method of expressing our viewpoint or our intention other than a Charter change. There's no -- I mean, we can't ordain this through ordinance. We can't do it through some referendum that's non-binding. So all we have is the Charter. And I recognize the amount of Charter amendments that have come through in the last number of years, and I share a similar concern. My only message to the Administration, respectfully, today is that we're being asked to do a lot of things over the next year or so, and some 19 3/26/09 - LAW & GOV'T - BILL 080748, etc. of it is not -- all of it is not something that we all want to do, but we know sometimes we have to do things we don't want. I think that in this particular case, Charter concerns aside and contract negotiation concerns aside, I think we're almost bound to show some respect for our people when being asked to do difficult things that will affect their lives going forward, which some of us are willing to do, as you know. But I think in this particular case, we need to maybe balance it out just a bit, and that's why I'll be supporting this. But I do appreciate and respect your position on the law. Thank you.
Thank you, Councilman. I think that was well said, may I add. Councilman Green.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just have a quick question. 20 3/26/09 - LAW & GOV'T - BILL 080748, etc. The Charter is being changed, according to Councilwoman Blackwell, to make this legal under the pension -- I mean, under the Civil Service portion of the Charter and other things. So is what you're doing today even legal without this additional legislation, and, if so, how? DEPUTY
It's legal because it is a pension benefit that is being recalculated, has been done basically since 1996. It is well within the purview of the Pension Board to do, and because it is a contractual obligation that has been duly negotiated between the parties, the City and the union, all of that brings it together, and the Pension Board actually follows and dictates. So, yes, it is legal.
But you can't actually promote the person, back to Councilman Kenney's point, posthumously under the current Charter provisions. And also, you can't supersede the Charter with labor contract 21 3/26/09 - LAW & GOV'T - BILL 080748, etc. language or even Pension Board action. DEPUTY
The entire matter, since it is a Pension Board and -- it is labor negotiated and it is a Pension Board calculation, that is well within the deems of the Charter. The promotion ceremony that you're referring to --
No. I understand. Excuse me. Do you have a legal opinion that -- DEPUTY
I did not have an opportunity to take a look at and I don't know whether or not even Law has had an opportunity to even review this matter. I know that --
Not this matter. I just mean with respect to the current activity. DEPUTY
The only time that it came up is in the context of Officer McDonald -- I'm sorry; Lieutenant McDonald. And I know that Law did review the matter, found that what we 22 3/26/09 - LAW & GOV'T - BILL 080748, etc. did was permitted, which is why we went forward with not only the ceremony but also the pension calculations and everything else. I do not -- I know that they haven't had an opportunity to look at this piece yet, because as of last night, I was asking the Solicitor for any guidance that they might have on this bill.
Did you find it difficult to get a direct answer to that question? DEPUTY
Thank you. Just for the record, please reflect that Councilman Kelly is also here, a member of the Committee. Councilman DiCicco. 23 3/26/09 - LAW & GOV'T - BILL 080748, etc. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and good morning. It sounds to me as though the bigger issue here, even as far as Council is concerned -- and I want to support this because I think it's the right thing do. The end result is the right thing to do. DEPUTY
As we do -- COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: It's a question of how do we get there, and the concern is about the change to the Charter. DEPUTY
Absolutely. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Without getting involved in any bargaining labor negotiations, could this, what we're attempting to do here, become part of the labor contract going forward? And why I say that is, it seems to me that this bill will come out of this Committee. If it's voted on by the full body, then this 24 3/26/09 - LAW & GOV'T - BILL 080748, etc. would be on the May primary ballot. If we had -- I'm speaking for myself. If I had some guarantee that the Administration was going to make it part of the next labor agreement contract so that we would not have to do the Charter change, we could potentially vote this out of Committee and not vote it out of the full body, and see if the Administration lives up to that agreement, assuming they would agree to it, and then we can always put it on the ballot in November, if for some reason it doesn't get us to where we want to get to. And that, I think, would get us to where we want to get to. Hopefully we never have to use this, but the likelihood is, it may happen. Just a thought I'm having, because I didn't get this until this morning, this language or anything, and I heard about it on my way out the door about 6 o'clock last night, and I want to support the folks out there on the front 25 3/26/09 - LAW & GOV'T - BILL 080748, etc. line and I will vote for it either way. I'm just looking to see if there's a way in which we can avoid the Charter change. Just an opinion. DEPUTY
And I agree. Thank you very much, Councilman. What I will tell you is is that all of these things -- since we are conferring the benefit at this point, one of the things we want to do is take a look at it, because we do feel it's the method that is wrong. The whole underlying issue, we are already doing, we already support and we are well within -- as I think everyone would say, that this Administration has been very responsive to the problems that have been going on. So we want to make sure that we continue doing that. We just want to keep it within the context of -- COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: And I agree, but there may be another Administration, and I'm looking at some way in which we can memorialize it in a 3/26/09 - LAW & GOV'T - BILL 080748, etc. way that doesn't require us to change the Charter. And I think the sponsor of the bill has great intentions, and we all support that. DEPUTY
Okay. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: And maybe we can hear from the union folks as well, if that's something that they feel would be acceptable. DEPUTY
Not a problem. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: So we still get a second shot at it, is my point. If we don't do it in May, we can always do it in November. DEPUTY
Thank you. Any other questions or comments from members of the Committee? (No response.)
Thank 27 3/26/09 - LAW & GOV'T - BILL 080748, etc. you, Mr. Gillison. DEPUTY
I should know -- I think, union representatives, would you like to testify? Please come to the table. Somehow I thought you might. (Witnesses approached witness table.)
Good morning, everybody. I just note for the record we are running late. We're supposed to have Council starting at 10:00. So, folks, I think you kind of heard our comments up here, so you know where we're coming from. Whoever would like to go first, identify yourself for the record and proceed. MR. McBRIDE: I'm Brian McBride. I'm the President IAFF, Local 22, representing the firefighters and paramedics of this great city, and I 28 3/26/09 - LAW & GOV'T - BILL 080748, etc. thank Councilwoman Blackwell for introducing this bill and members of the Committee. To me, it's a no-brainer. Quite clearly, the Administration could already have given us an agreement to promote these people. It's a no-cost factor, because they're already doing it for pension purposes. I can tell you that since the contract language came into effect, there were -- Captain John Taylor and Firefighter Rey Rubio were two members who were affected and they're being paid at the higher rank that they deserve, but the Fire Department has refused to promote them. So if it's a good intention is to promote, why haven't they? I think that they need something memorialized. We need something stronger than the labor contract, and the Charter is just that tool that directs everyone for eternity. 29 3/26/09 - LAW & GOV'T - BILL 080748, etc. What we do here today goes out for eternity, and I think that it's a good thing to do. I think it's the right thing to do, and I hope the Committee does the right thing. I believe you will. Thank you.
My name is Eugene Blagmond. I'm a lobbyist for Fraternal Order of Police, Lodge No. 5. And even though the Deputy Mayor is right, the contract language is in the contract, I don't believe that this should ever be an issue of bargaining. I think this should be something that the City does as a tribute to any worker, any firefighter, any paramedic, any police officer who is killed or dies in the line of duty. I don't think that having it in a contract -- anything to be put into a contract can be taken out. I'm not sure 30 3/26/09 - LAW & GOV'T - BILL 080748, etc. that would ever happen, but I think this is something that should be immortalized in our law.
Thank you, Mr. Blagmond. Anyone else like to -- sir.
My name is Raymond Clothier. I'm the Second Vice-President of Local 22. Back in 2005, President McBride directed me to secure as many large city labor contracts as I could for our collective bargaining that was going to be going on that fall, and when I secured the City of Miami's, it contained this exact provision that Councilwoman Blackwell is attempting to introduce for us. This is also in Spokane, Washington; Scottsdale, Arizona; New York City and somewhere in Vermont. I'm not -- I don't exactly remember. But this is the right thing to do. As my friend, Mr. Blagmond, said, this shouldn't be subject to collective 31 3/26/09 - LAW & GOV'T - BILL 080748, etc. bargaining or labor agreements. This is just something that should be done. Thank you.
I want to introduce Ron Stagliano. He's our pension representative on the Pension Board.
Thank you. Councilman DiCicco. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: I actually have a question for Mr. Gillison.
Mr. Gillison, can you come back to the table, please. (Witness approached witness table.) COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: I understand labor's point of view about this should not have to be part of a bargaining agreement. There may be 32 3/26/09 - LAW & GOV'T - BILL 080748, etc. differences of opinion in that, but I support their notion that it shouldn't. Could something be done -- and if you don't have the answer, I'd like to get it back to the Chair -- prior to labor negotiations, maybe an executive order -- I don't know if that is sufficient -- that makes it binding? Again, I'm only trying to find some middle ground between what we all want to do and believe is the right thing to do. DEPUTY
Absolutely. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: But how do we get there again, without changing the Charter. But I want it so I would like for myself to make sure that whatever it is is legally binding and it can't be taken out at some point. I don't know if there's a way of doing that. I'm not an attorney, nor do I pretend to be one. DEPUTY
And I will look and I will ask both -- and get an opinion. 33 3/26/09 - LAW & GOV'T - BILL 080748, etc. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: I'll be here voting this out today, but I think some of that might be helpful, whether we get it on the ballot in May or in November. DEPUTY
Not to elongate the record, but just as a response to Councilman DiCicco -- not to get into a debate -- I think an executive order just holds for that particular Administration; am I right?
So I think it's a little bit of the same problem Mr. Blagmond talked about with a contract. Any other questions, comments? (No response.)
Thank you all very much. Anyone else here to testify on this bill? 34 3/26/09 - LAW & GOV'T - BILL 080748, etc. (No response.)
Seeing none, that will conclude the hearing of the Committee on Law and Government, and the meeting on Law and Government will commence in seconds. 8 Less than 20 seconds. This is 9 the meeting of the Committee on Law and 10 Government, and the Chair recognizes 11 Councilman Kenney regarding Bill No. 12 080765 (sic), amendment to same. 13
We're going 14 to do the resolution or the amendment? 15
Mr. Chairman, I move Bill No. 080748 be amended accordingly with the amendments 35 3/26/09 - LAW & GOV'T - BILL 080748, etc. that have been circulated by the sponsor. (Duly seconded.)
It's been moved and seconded for adoption of the amendment. All in favor please say aye. (Aye.)
The amendment is adopted. The Chair recognizes Councilman Kenney regarding the bill, as amended.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I move that Bill No. 17 080748, as amended, be reported out of this Committee with a favorable recommendation and a request made for rules suspension to allow for first reading at our next Council session. (Duly seconded.)
It's been moved and seconded. All in favor please say aye. 36 3/26/09 - LAW & GOV'T - BILL 080748, etc. (Aye.)
The motion carries. Bill No. 080748, as amended, has been reported out of the Committee with a favorable recommendation and the rules of Council suspended to allow for first reading at our next session of Council. The Chair again recognizes Councilman Kenney regarding Resolution 14 080765.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I move that Resolution 17 080765 be amended accordingly with the amendments circulated by the sponsor. (Duly seconded.)
It's been moved and seconded for the approval of the amendments to the resolution. All in favor please say aye. (Aye.)
Opposed? 37 3/26/09 - LAW & GOV'T - BILL 080748, etc. (No response.)
The resolution is amended. Again, the Chair recognizes Councilman Kenney.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I move that Resolution 9 080765, as amended, be reported out of this Committee favorably. (Duly seconded.)
Hearing none, Resolution 080765, as amended, has been reported out of this Committee with a favorable recommendation. That concludes the business of this Committee. Thank you all very much for attending. (March 25, 2009 letter from Committee of Seventy attached to 38 3/26/09 - LAW & GOV'T - BILL 080748, etc. transcript.) (Committee on Law and Government adjourned at 9:45 a.m.) - - - 39 CERTIFICATE I HEREBY CERTIFY that the proceedings, evidence and objections are contained fully and accurately in the stenographic notes taken by me upon the foregoing matter on March 26, 2009, and that this is a true and correct transcript of same. ______________________________ MICHELE L. MURPHY RPR-Notary Public (The foregoing certification of this transcript does not apply to any reproduction of the same by any means, unless under the direct control and/or supervision of the certifying reporter.)