COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - - - Wednesday, March 15, 2006 10:30 a.m. - - - Room 400, City Hall Philadelphia, Pennsylvania - - - FY 2007 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - - - PRESENT: ANNA C. VERNA, President BLONDELL REYNOLDS BROWN W. WILSON GOODE, JR. JACK KELLY JAMES F. KENNEY FRANK RIZZO JANNIE L. BLACKWELL DARRELL L. CLARKE JOAN L. KRAJEWSKI DONNA REED MILLER - - - V A R A L L O Incorporated Litigation Support Services 1835 Market Street, Suite 600 Philadelphia, PA 19103 (215) 561-2220 2 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06
Good morning, everyone. This is the continued Public Hearing of the Committee of the Whole. I would ask Mr. McPherson to please call the first department to testify. MR. McPHERSON: The Department of Public Property.
Good morning. Please identify yourself, for the record. And, Commissioner, we do have a copy of your testimony. So if you would abbreviate it, I would make certain that the stenographer has a copy. It will be transcribed in full.
Joan Schlotterbeck, Public Property Commissioner. Good morning, Madam President and members of City Council. With my on my right is Deputy Commissioner Herzins, on my left is Deputy Commissioner Joseph James. Overall, we have a net increase in 3 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 our budget of approximately .4 percent in '06. The increases are in Class 100, Class 200, Class 300, and Class 400. And Class 800, actually. And we also have an increase in our SEPTA subsidy. We have a water fund increase and an aviation fund increase. The noteworthy items in our facilities division would be that we have completed the move of the District Attorney and her staff to a new location on Chestnut Street; that we have continued to work with the Capital Program office on security matters in our triplex, as well as City Hall; that we are working with the Managing Director's Office to undertake the consolidation of maintenance; we've taken the first department into our department, and that would be fire, and we have four others listed to follow. We also intend to have a consolidation of centralized warehousing with respect to maintenance items as a part of this consolidation. Communications. We have been successful in remediating any problems related 4 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 to the 800 megahertz radio. We will be upgrading dispatch consoles and software. And we will have five additional radio frequency channels added. Space utilization. We continue to do our best to make the best use of what we have and to reduce our rent rolls. Real estate. We have the surplus property initiative, which has been very successful, and we are doing a good job of moving that forward and adding it as a long-term commitment in the Five-Year Plan. Special events. As everyone knows, we continue to support many activities in many agencies across the entire city as it relates to special events. One thing I needed to -- neglected to say at the beginning of the testimony that I am requesting in my '07 budget a total appropriation of $223,811,780 in all funds. Thank you, Madam President. We are here and ready to take any questions you may have.
Thank you very 5 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 much. Commissioner, you mention that your department has undertaken the consolidation of several maintenance operations. Can you tell us the time line of these consolidations and, certainly, what are the projected benefits of the consolidation?
Well, the first department that we have consolidated is Fire Department. Approximately eight employees, we may get a few more, depending on their status on payroll at the time of the change in the fiscal year.
We are going to follow that with Health, Library, Streets, and Fleet, and DHS.
The one obvious for me is that we will be making better utilization of our entire staff, so to speak. We will be centralizing in Zoning the 6 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 operations so that we have clear understanding of the needs in a certain area of the city. And, from that area, we will have our teams routinely and systematically go through the work orders to deliver the services in a better and more systematic manner. We also anticipate having savings in our material supplies, better utilization of vehicles. So, we anticipate a lot of added value.
You mention that the city will begin to create a centralized warehouse, serving the entire city, beginning in FY '07, after selecting an implementation strategy. What is the status of this project, and can you tell us who will be responsible for the implementation?
The project is a long-standing initiative from the Managing Director's Office. The intent has always been to consolidate, along with the maintenance, all materials and supplies that would be needed; and be able to delegate and centralize 7 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 those operations right out of this one warehouse. So we are starting with Fire, with Public Property, and, of course, with Police, which we took on five years ago now. So we have -- we are beginning to build, like, a store operation, if you will. And it is -- basically, the initiative is mine to enact and implement, with the jurisdiction and supervision of the Managing Director's Office.
At this point in time, we have not identified an absolute location; but what we have is an operation currently already in Fire. And now that we have absorbed it, we are going to leave those materials there. We have materials that we currently store. And we are hoping and we believe -- and I actually know for a fact -- when we consolidate these other departments, there will be other real estate that we will be able 8 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 to take advantage of at that time. And we will be able to store -- and we haven't decided yet whether it is more economical to zone those operations along with the maintenance or to have a central location where we receive and deliver and disburse materials.
And do I understand that your department will be responsible for the implementation?
You know, Mr. McPherson and I were speaking earlier. And I think that many years ago, in the '80s, we did have a centralized warehouse. And then we thought we were going to be very efficient. And we did away with that and we decentralized it, and now we are centralizing it again.
This centralization is strictly related to building 9 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 materials; it is not at all to suggest that we would be consolidating other material needs for other city agencies. So the benefits to this for long-term planning for the city is that, if we have any kind of a natural or a disaster of any kind, we can go to one place and one department and be able to tap into the resources needed. So, you have to think of it only in those terms.
All right. You mentioned that this initiative is projected to save $3.2 million through FY '10. Are these savings included in the Five-Year Plan?
You also mention in your testimony that you are decreasing your utility funding by $360,000. Can you tell us how you can reduce your utility budget in this time of 10 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 ever-increasing costs?
I will ask that the Municipal Energy Director, Kent Miller, come up and explain that for you.
I think he had told us that we were going to be saving quite a bit this last year, and I really don't know how much we saved. So, maybe he could let us know.
Good morning. My name is Kent Miller. I am the Executive Director of the Municipal Energy Office. To answer your first question, the reason why we expect a small decline in the utility budget in FY '07 is because we expect gas prices to fall. When we do gas price estimates, we look at the forward prices that are available on various exchanges. And we also speak with PGW, who does gas price forecasts, and we use their numbers to forecast our gas prices. So if you look at the detail, you will see that we expect electricity prices to 11 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 increase somewhat and gas prices to fall somewhat. So, that's the answer to your first question. The answer to your second -- do you want to follow up on the first, or shall I go to the second question?
I think I would like to hear your response to the second question.
On the second question, the city has been successful in reducing energy use. In FY '04, we used 231 million kilowatt hours in the General Fund accounts. In FY '05, that fell to 214 million kilowatt hours. It was a very significant reduction in electricity use between FY '04 and FY '05. We expect a further reduction this year and another reduction in FY '07.
The savings? Well, on the electric -- consumption is down. Consumption. 12 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 On the gas side, we also reduced use in gas. Gas usage fell from about 820,000 MCF, which is a million BTUs, to 770,000 MCF; but, those costs were overwhelmed by the tremendous increase in natural gas prices. So we have been reducing usage, as we set out to do; but, at the same time, energy prices have been increasing, particularly on the gas side. So we're going in -- we're doing what we can by reducing energy use, but we're still subject to the energy price increases that are affecting everyone.
I just have one other question. Commissioner, with the surplus property, for FY '06, how much do you anticipate will be generated in FY '06 and FY '07?
I am going to ask the Deputy Commissioner, John Herzins, to answer those.
We anticipate in the rest of this fiscal year, '06, to bring in 13 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 a little over $6 million, and an additional $8 million in the next -- to million 4 dollars in the next fiscal year. 5
Wouldn't it be $10 6 million in the next fiscal year? According to 7 the documents we have, it indicates it would 8 be 10. 9
Currently we have 10 eight properties sold, a little over $3 11 million, with another 5 and a half million 12 dollars under agreement. And the next fiscal year we have offers in on properties totaling so far about 8 million.
Great. Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman Rizzo.
Thank you, Madam President. Commissioner, you wrote a letter dated February 10, and I will quote, "Please be advised that the City of Philadelphia is 14 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 distinct its Urban Garden Program at the Penrose and Port Mifflin garden plots in order to pursue other opportunities with this property." I know it is not your responsibility to be sensitive to people that garden there; you are just doing your job and telling them to leave. But I would hope that we're doing something to work as a government -- maybe not Public Property, but as a government -- to relocate these folks. Could you comment? I understand the commission here, but I think that we need to do more than just chase them.
Well, Councilman, I am very sensitive to the folks down there and those that are gardening. And John and I have been working very closely with the community organization called Fact, ward leaders, Council people.
I have gotten nothing from you officially about this, other than the constituent sending me your letter.
Actually, if you 15 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 had called me, I would have been happy to discuss it with you.
No. I meant, I think it would have been nice that the department, maybe not you directly, would have informed all the Council Members, especially, you know, the District Council -- maybe you did that -- but the At-Large Member that is interested in issues like this. I have gotten no communication. So maybe it is an oversight, but I got none from you about this. And, again, I am not suggesting this is your responsibility. Your responsibility, in my opinion, is to do what you have to do, move the people off, if there is an alternative. What's being planned for the site?
Well, it is part of our surplus asset initiative. And what we have done, to answer the first question, is, we have spoken to -- and John can go into it in more detail than I -- but, there is a standing urban garden agreement program that 16 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 is operated out of RDA. And we have talked, and we intend to talk, to anyone that's interested in pursuing the continuance of gardening through that program. There are plenty of opportunities. And, in many instances, they may be closer to the homes that they actually live in, than going all the way down to this remote area of the city.
So what happens to the folks? Because, obviously, they are going to start preparing their gardens. And you have them out of there by April the 10th, structures included, if there were any illegal structures. So at this point we're less than a month away from your deadline. Where are we?
Well, actually, that letter was -- we amended the time frame. We did not give them a lot more time, but through the end of April. And we posted it a week ago Friday. And we have asked that they take things that are important to them and valuable 17 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 to them away from the site.
I would appreciate -- and I think that the hearings that we had were very effective. I believe that the communications folks did a great job in squaring away the 800 radio megahertz radio system. But I would love to see a close-out of where we are. We talked about a lot of things during the hearings; about extended warranties, maintenance agreements, et cetera. So what I would like provided to the Chair is where we are with that particular issue -- I think that's something we asked for during the hearings, but I don't believe that we have ever received -- on exactly how much money we spent, what we were reimbursed for, where we stand with warranty, extended warranty, if any. So I would appreciate that info to be provided to the Chair so we can kind of close out the 800, hopefully, if we don't have any other significant issues with that. But I have no clue on what this cost 18 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 the taxpayers of the City of Philadelphia to fix the problems associated with 800 megahertz radio.
So you are looking for an overall explanation of the funding, start to finish?
Yes. I would like to see -- we spent a lot of money, a lot of Public Property time, a lot of communications' people time, Motorola spent a lot of time here. And I just want to see at this point what we got out of this whole -- I don't want to use the word "boondoggle." What has Verizon done? I know we have had a lot of trouble. And I am finding out now that a lot of problems we did have were communication line issues, T1 lines, rather than Motorola issues. So I think we really need to have a report. Nothing fancy; something that says this is where we are, that Motorola is going to continue to absorb costs of problems that may develop. 19 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 Because I think that we spent a tremendous amount of money on trying to resolve the problems, some that we probably can't even identify in personal hours, et cetera, testing, and all the police involvement in the problem. And I understand that there is still a lot of concerns at the Fire Department level about the system. And what we are planning to do about -- I understand we are going to add some repeater receivers for the fire department. Again, I don't know much about that. But I would just like a summary of how sound the 800 megahertz radio system is and what the vendors are doing to continue to support that system.
One last thing. And then I will come back for another go-around. You talk about surplus property. And there is an issue that caught my aye in 20 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 the Legal Intelligencer; where there was a court challenge to an appraisal, that the appraisal for the particular property at 36th and Grays Ferry was $160,000, and it -- finally, the courts ruled that the property was worth over a million dollars. I am hoping that the estimates, the assessments or the appraisals, that we get for the properties are realistic; that it doesn't turn out to be an initial appraisal of 160, the owner -- this was an eminent domain issue -- that it turned out to be the property turned out to be worth a million dollars. I don't want to see us giving away surplus property. So what are we doing? Are we doing one appraisal, two to verify the one that we have? If we are starting to sell surplus property, how am I assured that the taxpayers of the city are being compensated appropriately for the disposal of a property, the appraisals that we get?
Well, 21 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 Councilman, I would not do anything but the right thing ever by the taxpayers. We are doing two appraisals, and we are taking the average between the two. And they are professional firms and well known in the community and in the industry.
Could you provide to the Chair the appraisals for all of the properties that you have on the list? How many properties are on the list?
There are currently, Councilman, around 52 properties on the list.
Could you provide to the Chair the list of the properties and copies of the appraisals, please, so we could maybe get those looked at by other professionals to see how accurate are the appraisals we received? Because this is really unfair, in this one particular case. And it just goes to show that an authority gets an appraisal for $160,000, it goes to court, and the court rules that it was worth over a million. I mean, that's not a good situation. 22 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06
No. This is an example of an appraisal that didn't work very well. Madam President, I will wait for the next go-around.
Actually, we will find whether or not we can release the appraisals. I mean, we have been holding that kind of information tight to the vest. We have people responding to RFPs. And we have lately been successful at getting more than the appraised value, so giving that kind of information out is not necessarily in the best interest of our whole program.
You are not sharing it with the average public; you are sharing it with an elected official. So I think that, if we need to go to the Law Department and fight over it, we will do that. But I think we really need to know, at least I need to know, that the firms that 23 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 we are hiring are in fact appraising them appropriately, and they are not being low-balled. This caught my eye, this particular document. And I was very clear that -- hopefully it was clear -- that this was not you; that this was just an example of a transaction that occurred with one of our authorities. And it turned out that it was very unjust to the person that the property was taken away from. It went from 160 to well over a million dollars.
Thank you, Madam President. Good morning, Commissioner.
I have a series of questions regarding SEPTA. 24 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 Is Public Property involved in new lease negotiations with SEPTA?
What's your most recent involvement? Last meeting, last phone call, last --
Actually, I just got an e-mail late yesterday with -- it's sort of a detail issue, but it is all relevant to the overall plan for our new strategy for the negotiations. So as late as last evening, I got an e-mail from the Law Department.
So the increase in SEPTA subsidy is based upon the formula in terms of increase in state subsidy?
How often is that 25 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 money disbursed to SEPTA? Is it quarterly payments, twice a year?
I believe it is twice a year. I'm sorry; it is quarterly.
On at least two occasions that I have been here, I believe two occasions, City Council has chose to transfer that fund, those funds, away from Public Property because we have issues with SEPTA; because we are completely outvoted on the Board because of a disproportionate amount of the fare box revenue comes from Philadelphia, and we simply have no control. Including the fact that we can't even get out of the lease that expired on December 31 with them. What sorts of checks and balances would you suggest that Council put in place to address these concerns regarding the subsidy until we come to a new lease agreement?
Well, actually, that's a difficult question for me to answer personally, because I'm not the point person at this point for the overall strategy for the Administration. It is, actually, being FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 handled through the Law Department. And they are very much -- they are very aggressive and very involved right now in those negotiations.
I say this with all due respect. So if Public Property is just serving as a caretaker for the subsidy, does it really make a difference whether that money is controlled by Public Property or controlled by City Council?
Well, it makes a very big difference to the Administration, yes, that it is controlled by Public Property.
Thank you, Madam President. Good morning, Commissioner and deputies. 27 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 Commissioner, what's Public Property's relationship with the Vacant Property Review Committee?
Well, we are one of the people that are -- John represents me on the Vacant Property Committee, John Herzins. According to the ordinance that established the committee, I am probably responsible on behalf of the Administration for final sign-off on all the properties.
That's recommended by Vacant Property Review Committee?
That's correct. There are -- don't ask me to rattle them off, but there's at least six or eight other agencies that represent the Administration; City Planning, L & I, Revenue. I am drawing a blank. But there is a whole host of -- Planning. There is a whole host of people sit there. And each one of them have reasons to be there to represent the best interests of 28 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 the taxpayers in terms of disposition of the property.
And your representative is a voting member of that committee?
So if that committee votes and recommends that a property gets disposed of to an applicant, it then goes to the Redevelopment Authority?
Councilman, after the committee makes a recommendation, it comes to -- the deed is prepared or the right of entry or urban garden agreement, it comes over to the department for the Commissioner's signature.
I'm not sure where in 29 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 the process the resolution comes in. Redevelopment handles that, Redevelopment Authority.
You don't act on the disposition based solely on Vacant Property Review Committee; is that correct?
You may give them entry authorization, but not act on the disposition; correct?
So once the property gets recommended by VPRC, goes through -- your department or the Redevelopment Authority for disposition? How are the properties disposed of?
The final deed comes over to the Commissioner at the very end for the transfer.
The deed comes over from the Redevelopment Authority for Joan's signature. That's the final, end of the 30 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 process.
I believe the deed probably is not sent over until there is a resolution from Council.
From Council. So once the resolution is authorized by Council to be disposed of, it goes to you for final resolution?
For signature. At what point are you authorized to make a determination that a resolution -- a property that was referred by VPRC, and a resolution was prepared and authorized by Council, at what point can you make a determination that that property will not be disposed of?
Actually, I think because I have the final right -- I sign representing the taxpayers, I can reserve the right to pull the deal at any time, I believe. But what we have done since I have 31 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 become Commissioner is, we do not want to be in those situations. So what John does, oftentimes we get the agenda, we pull items before they are even presented; so that they are not an issue at the table, where folks are believing they are going to get a property, where I have yet to have my say on whether or not I think we should proceed in the manner recommended. So we have tried not to be in a position where they have been reviewed and approved out of VPRC and then I, for whatever reason, may have a question about what we're doing and why we're doing it.
Well, it is my understanding that there are a number of properties that have been recommended by VPRC, resolutions have been prepared and authorized by Council, but yet they are not being disposed of to those applicants. Can you tell me --
In many instances, Councilman, what's happened is, I get, frankly, a letter on my desk telling me, 32 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 please sign. And I don't have the backup information, I don't have the details, I don't necessarily know that the due diligence was done by the other agencies involved in this; such as, RDA, OHCD. So what we have also done is, we have reached out to OHCD. And we now have an open dialogue where, if I have a specific question about something that could be two years in the pipeline -- because oftentimes this process takes as long as two years -- that I am out there asking, is there something that you can give me in written form that shows me the due diligence that was done on your end. Because there are times when I can't understand the benefit of giving a valuable property to someone for a nominal consideration. So I do stop certain transactions, and I do ask questions.
So the process that's established as a result of the policy to do asset sales, are you suggesting that 33 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 that process has sufficient due diligence in terms of disposal? Because I have seen those properties move relatively quickly.
We identify an asset, we determine that it is surplus.
Of course it is approved by my boss. They know that we are putting it on the list. We get two appraisals from PIDC. They advertise, they market the property for us. And then we send out the RFP, we have responses, we have -- as you may know, in certain instances we had to meet with community organizations in your community. And then if everything is said and 34 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 done, and we have the sale price determined, we sell the property.
So you are suggesting that the process is purely internal, no public participation, has more due diligence than the process that is extremely public in nature, i.e., Vacant Property Review Committee, where there is a vote by all the agencies in a public way, then a vote by the City Council of Philadelphia authorizing the acquisition or disposal of a property, you are suggesting that --
Actually, I am not suggesting that at all. No. I guess it is hard for me to explain. But, again, when I became Commissioner, there were items on the agenda approved through the committee that had not gotten to my desk as Commissioner, and they are two years old. So when it comes across and it is a right of entry as John said, or it is a final disposition, it is a deed -- it is all reviewed by Legal before it gets to me. So 35 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 the legal issues I can see have been cleared through the city's Law Department. What I don't see is all the paperwork from the due diligence from two years ago. So if I find something that I personally, my own judgment, does not look right, I feel uncomfortable signing, I have a couple of questions, I pick up the phone and I have called either John Coates -- but now I have a running dialogue with Debbie McColloch, and I get written responses. So I'm not suggesting for one minute that my process is better than the Vacant Property, not at all. I am just trying to explain how and why I would ask questions of a certain property that's been recommended. Because sometimes it takes years before it is finally ready to be signed by the Commissioner of Public Property for final disposition.
If there is a property that VPRC requested be sold at fair market value, the assumption is that there is 36 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 an appraisal.
Why would that property not pass through the normal process?
We have -- we do have that happen through vacant property.
My understanding is that there are a number of properties that are recommended for sale, fair market value, that have gotten appraisals, and those properties are still not moving for some reason.
Every month on the agenda, on the Vacant Property Review Committee, there are items that are on the agenda for being sold at fair market value, as well as for transfer for nominal. So that, since I have been attending, has been a monthly feature that the RDA has put on the VPRC process.
I understand 37 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 that. My question is, why are properties that have been recommended to be sold at fair market value, that have gotten appraisals -- and I am assuming that's required -- why are those properties not being disposed of?
I'm not -- believe it or not, I am not familiar with any items right now that have been through the process, selling for fair market value, that I am holding up.
Once it is approved at the VPRC for sale at fair market value, then the appraisals are ordered by the Redevelopment Authority. We don't control the length of that process. So, as far as I know, we don't -- I don't know of any that are being --
You are telling me you are not holding up any properties that were approved by VPRC and Council for fair market sales? You are saying you are not holding up any properties at Public Property? 38 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06
Like I was trying to -- well, I was trying to explain, I think I have had two very lengthy e-mails from Debbie McColloch. And I would say in each instance, there were approximately 100 properties associated with each of those memorandums, which is to say that I did ask detailed questions. She sent me the explanation, that they had been vetted through the proper channels, and all the due diligence was done. My reason for asking, again, was because, in many instances, they were two and I think there were a few that were five years old. So I didn't have the benefit, because I wasn't Commissioner at the time, of knowing any of the details associated with these. So because I was signing, I did hold them up and ask questions. But I have -- I'm 39 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 going to say approximately 200 of them have moved. They don't leave VPRC and land on my desk; they go -- depending on what they are, they have other stops before they come to me.
I agree. And that's, to some degree, my point. I mean, there are a number of checks in the process. And I am not understanding why, given the nature of that process, why the buck ends up stopping at your desk, and the properties are not being moved.
I know, like, sometimes when VPRC has approved a property for sale at fair market value, it still may not reach the Commissioner's table for signature, maybe, for about a year. I mean, we don't control that process, the department.
Which puts me in an awkward position, admittedly. Because it would assume -- then if it gets to my desk and I have a question, it has traveled a year to get there, and then here I am saying, you know 40 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 what, can I just find out the thinking behind this disposition, why are we doing this. And --
So why don't we just send -- VPRC makes it recommendation. Why don't we just send it to Public Property? Why do we send it to RDA, if you are going to have to review it anyway?
Because that's the way the program has been set up by ordinance. I don't have the ordinance with me. Isn't that correct, John?
If the ordinance 19 were changed, and it went directly to Public Property for review, would you suggest that that's a --
Well, I would suggest that that's something I can ask the Law Department, yes. I don't know that that's a bad 41 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 thing, get permission up front from the owner, so to speak.
Because I think that is part of the problem. I mean, it does end up I am the final signer, so it probably would make sense to have us up front. But I don't really know the legal implications of that. Because they are going through, you know, other processes; Housing, RDA, OHCD.
It just seems like there has to be away to streamline that process. I mean, a property that's owned by the city, and we are selling it at fair market value, it shouldn't take a year to sell a property. I mean, that's -- the assumption is if we own it, there is a clear title; right?
Properties that have been sold for fair market value at VPRC, the only interaction that we in Public Property have is at the time of approval, at the vote, and then it is the final end stage when it 42 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 comes to Joan for signature.
So we are not involved in any of the process; just a voting right on the VPRC, then it comes to me for signature. Which is why we started pulling things off before they got on the agenda. Well, they got on the agenda, I'm sorry. Before they were brought up in the committee meeting.
Councilman, one process that the Commissioner and I were working with the Law Department to speed John's signing deeds that come over, we have developed a checklist that RDA now has signed off on. Accompanying every transaction will be the checklist to let the Commissioner know is this an affordable housing project. It is just a check sheet of, you know, is it for nominal, is it fair market. 43 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 Because, prior to that, the Commissioner received these deeds with no 4 backing, nothing; she was just asked to sign. So this will be a speedier way. She will have a clearer understanding of the deal.
You need to know that I am being told something entirely different. And I am being told that there are a number of properties that are in the pipeline, and that pipeline is stopping at your shop, and all the required due diligence as it relates to the committee and the Redevelopment Authority has been done. And I am being told it is a substantial number of properties that are not being authorized.
But you may -- I mean, it has been a bumpy road. It has definitely been a bumpy road. Because it was business as usual, and I had a different approach to the way I 44 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 handled signing documents that came before me. That's, basically, where it all started. And we, I believe, have made major progress, just like John said. We have sat down with the legal people from RDA, our people, John Coates, Debbie McColloch and I are now in an open dialogue. I did -- two stacks of deeds were passed, probably, within the last two months. So there was a log jam. But I don't have any sitting on my desk right now where I haven't reached out, nothing, and said what's the disposition. I haven't been asking any questions of anything. There is nothing on my desk.
But I am open to being a part of the solution. I am not trying to be part of a problem. I am definitely open to --
I have known you for a while, and I am not suggesting that that's the case. It was just, I mean, I have the 45 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 responsibility of dealing with constituents. I know one, actually, young lady who was early in her pregnancy when she went to VPRC. And she had a team of people that were prepared to help her rehab a house. And her thought was that, once she had the child, she would be able to move into this new home. She has had the child, the child is now three months old, and she is still waiting.
Do you know the address of that property? I'm not suggesting that -- I mean, we can look at it.
I have that. But I don't want to do is have you just take care of that one problem and not fix the systemic problems as it relates to the process.
The reason I ask for the address is because I would like to find out where it is. And if it is on my desk, I would be happy to take responsibility. But I can tell you, it is not. 46 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 But maybe that would help me understand some of the time delays, as well. I mean it could be helpful. I could probably pick up the phone, and John could call John Coates, and we could see where it is. If it is sitting in our Law Department -- they have a review process they have to go through.
I am being told that this is being held up at your shop. Because her mother came down to the office and wanted to know, you know, my daughter needs to move into this house, we have people committing to do some work in the house. And then she calls, oh, guess what, my daughter had the baby. Wow. Now this is three months ago, and she still hasn't gotten title to the property. All right. Okay.
I am going to contact the Redevelopment Authority; find out, you know, specifically what properties that, 47 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 in their estimation, are being held up on their end, and I want to see if that can move. And then, hopefully, we can sit down. Because I am Chairman of the Public Property Committee, and it is important that this particular issue be resolved. Because it makes no sense for publicly owned property to take a year to sell. I mean, that's just makes no sense whatsoever.
I think you will be shocked at the process. Because it does, in many instances, not my words, from RDA, takes upwards to two years, start to finish. And I can't answer the whys.
Having worked in government for years, there is nothing that 19 shocks me as it relates to government. 20 Thank you.
Thank you. Commissioner, just to go back on the appraisal, just the properties and the 48 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 appraisal value. And I would like to comment on what you said about some of the properties selling for more than the appraisals value. I don't have much confidence in an appraisal, if it was sold for more than the appraised value.
I think it is called good marketing and strategies, and also competition in the market out there, and the type of property.
Part of that included an appraisal; not just the structure itself, but also the market?
But my point being, if we are appraising something for a 100 thousand and it sells for two, I'm not sure we got the bang for our buck from the appraiser.
Councilman, there is a lot involved in the process, too. If we receive four bids for a property that is, say, $10,000 above the 49 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 appraised value, we go back, then, to the four respondents and say, do you want to make a final and best offer, and give that higher number. Then they bid even higher. And that's oftentimes how the bid goes above the appraised value.
I am aware of bidding up an appraisal. Somebody wants it they are not on it, they will bid up on it. There is not question.
I'm not sure of the appraiser can reflect on a particular sale how far up the respondent is willing to go.
I want to go into another area, because we had some cases recently where reimbursement to the city wasn't being handled very well. I would like to know, Public Property, when it comes to a special event, how do you handle reimbursement? When we do an event, let's say a parade or concert or 4th of July, or we work for a private sector -- I am not talking about, necessarily, a city event, where we do the concerts in the park or 50 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 whatever; I am talking about special events. Tell me about how it is structured, how we bill for special events.
Special events process is actually handled by Gloria Jackson, Managing Director's Office. So the whole process of reimbursement, billings, approvals, it is all done under the jurisdiction of the Managing Director's Office through Gloria Jackson.
But if it is your work force doing the work, communications, setting up communications, if it is stages, and your people that do it so well do the work, how does Public Property get reimbursed? So my question for the information to the committee is, I would like to see how that process works. Even though it is coordinated out of the Managing Director's Office, you are the workers and your people are the ones providing the service. So I would like to see -- and if we need to bring the Managing Director back for a 51 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 recall on this question, but I think we can get enough from Public Property -- I would like to know how you account for the money spent by Public Property for special events. I would like to know how our collection is on that. Are we physically getting paid? And have we ever written off any money as a result of someone not paying for special events? So the question is -- and I understand you say you are just, basically, told by the Managing Director's Office to go do this stuff, but how does your department account for that? And I would like to know have you gotten your money.
We would be happy to give it to you in writing, but it isn't quite that -- we actively participate in the discussions of whether or not this is an event we should do. We establish what it is going to take from our department, whether it is communications or facilities people, stages, microphones, whatever the case may be. We 52 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 tell the Managing Director what that's going to cost. That is told to the person asking for approval for the event. To the best of my knowledge, they get 100 percent of the money back. In the event that they don't, they are not quite so eager to engage that request the next year. And that's pretty much how it works. But, we can get that for you in writing.
Again, I am not talking about the community stuff that we do. I am talking about, we do a major event, and you support that major event. You are working for the private sector. Again, I am not talking the good stuff we do around the city. But I want to make sure that these big vendors that come into the city and get support from the city are paying their tab.
They are, and it is well documented. And it is very coordinated.
We can do that. 53 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06
The big question is, have we written any of that money off?
I can't answer that directly. But I tell you that it is my understanding, because I have been doing my job a very long time, as well, that in the event that someone commits, knowing full well what it is going to cost them -- it could not just be Public Property, there could be other departments involved -- they accept the cost, and then they turn around and not reimburse the city, we don't necessarily look favorably on engaging them the next year.
I'm not so sure we have. But, we will have to find that out.
If they haven't paid, and you don't want to do business with them the next year, the obvious is that they hadn't paid their tab. I want to end on the fact that I think you have done a great job with the 54 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 replacement of the elevators. And I hope they stay as nice and clean as presentable as they are, and I hope they don't get abused. But your commitment last year to make sure that those elevators were replaced -- and I think you have put it on the fast track with capital programs -- I think everyone involved in that should be thanked. Because it has been a big improvement to visitors and also we that work here in this building.
Thank you, Madam President. Commissioner, how many actual structures is your department responsible for? How many buildings, facilities that you have jurisdiction directly over?
Jim, do you know 55 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 the answer? I, actually, don't --
Of those facilities, are those also under the jurisdiction of various departments? So, for example, do you have jurisdiction over a Streets Department facility, that's also under the jurisdiction of the Streets Commissioner? Or are these 170 buildings or so simply your domain?
Can you give me an idea like what, for example, the smallest facility would be and what, perhaps -- obviously, the largest facility is probably this building. But give can you give me some examples as to what it is you are responsible for, the types of buildings.
Well, we have all the Police, Fire, all Public Property. When I say that, you are right, City Hall, the 56 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 triplex, fleet management operations.
But as far as, for example, the Police Department is concerned, the capital needs of the police stations or fire stations, are they within the purview of each department head or solely your responsibility?
What happens with that is, we very actively sit down at the table with the capital people that work for the Police Department, and we prioritize the work because we would know better what items need to be replaced.
So you have a schedule of both maintenance and replacement schedules for all of the 170 or so buildings that you are responsible for?
Do you have a generalized number on the needs annually -- 57 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 not what's budgeted, but on the needs annually -- of the facilities you are responsible for? I asked a similar question yesterday of the Recreation Department. But, again, the Recreation Department, are they your buildings, too?
And I know I am going in different directions. But, which other departments are considered their own domain?
Libraries, Health, Department of Human Services, Streets, and Recreation.
So, okay. When you are assessing your capital needs on an 58 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 annual basis, next year and going forward, what are those numbers like? What do you determine are the needs to maintain the properties in an appropriate fashion?
Are you asking what we submitted as a capital request to capital planning people before it was determined what we were going to get?
What you submitted, what you think you really need, if that's a different number, and what you get back in the way of approval.
I don't know that I have that committed. Do you, Jim? I am going to ask Facilities Director, Jim Lewis, to answer this question.
Jim Lewis, Facilities Management Director. Councilman, typically what we have been trying to do, as the Commissioner stated, we have our slate of buildings that we do work on. We do our best to really try to keep 59 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 on top of the amount of work and time we spend in various buildings. Then as we sit down with the people in charge of the Police and Fire Department as they assemble their Capital Program, we make recommendations to them, per the work we have done, as to where they should probably submit a request for capital work. We focus typically on Public Property, mainly City Hall and the buildings within our jurisdiction, for our own capital requests. There are numbers that we do put in for requests. And we work with the Capital Program office and the Planning Commission on what we would like to have done and what we would recommend should be addressed in a Capital Program. And we do our best to coordinate with the Police and Fire, again, but --
They make their own requests. 60 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06
Just on your own facilities that you make a request for, what was the number requested in capital dollars for 2007?
Off the top of my head, Councilman, I would have to say we have requested upwards of 8 to 10 million dollars.
Maybe 5, with a large chunk of that being the City Hall exterior renovation. It is also prioritized. As we go through our requests, we do prioritize it.
Of the City Hall exterior restoration, how much does the 5 represent? You asked for 8, and you got back 5? 61 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06
The City Hall renovation is almost 80 percent of it. It is $4 million, at least, and it probably should be 5.
So there is a million dollars left for the other 170 buildings that you have jurisdiction over?
City Hall exterior side, what would you need, if you had -- if you were going to submit a rerequest, what would you be asking for?
Off the top of my head, I would say we would probably come back for, you know, just of needs that we immediately see, 8 to 10 million dollars.
How long have you been dealing with the facilities of the Department of Public Property? How long have you been dealing with it?
Me? I came onboard in July. But my history with the city is, I have 62 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 been working on and off with the city for the last years. 4
And not only 5 you, if anyone at the table can answer the 6 question, what is the long-term effect of not 7 meeting the 8 to 10 million dollar number on 8 the life span of the building, or the 9 facility, and on the increased costs of its 10 maintenance deferred or replacement? 11 Is there an analysis that's been 12 done by the department on what deferred maintenance and replacement ultimately costs the taxpayer?
But do you think that the $8 million -- again, excluding City Hall's $4 million need, or whatever -- is the minimum amount that you need to maintain your facilities in an appropriate manner?
I would say for FY '07, yes. 63 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06
So for FY '07, you guys would have appreciated the to 10, 4 as opposed to the 5 minus the 4 for City Hall, 5 which leaves you with a net of a million 6 dollars for an 8 to 10 million dollar request; 7 is that a pretty fair analysis? 8
Again, Madam President, I just, again, think that the record should reflect the similar conversation that we had yesterday with the Department of Recreation. These are city-owned facilities, owned by the taxpayers. The people who are responsible and knowledgeable in their needs, both in maintenance and replacement, and their life span, are making specific recommendations that are being ignored. For what reason, I do not know. Because long-term, both in the Recreation Department and in Public Property, and all the other departments we are talking about, this deferred maintenance has a cost. 64 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 And its cost is in higher replacement and higher repairs. And when somebody tells me that they need to million dollars to maintain their 6 buildings, and ultimately what they are 7 getting is 1 -- because if you subtract what 8 the City Hall exterior is costing from the $5 9 million they actually got, they are working 10 with $1 million for 2007 for 170 properties, with an 8 to 10 million dollar need. And I think that is bad management. Not on your part. I think it is bad management and bad government that we are not maintaining our facilities that we have in place and are talking about doing things that are new. So as far as Recreation and Public Property goes, I will be looking to do what we need to do to be responsible stewards of these facilities and maintain them the way they are appropriately supposed to be maintained. I think it is pretty simple management to do this, and for some reason or another this Administration decides they don't 65 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 want to. Thank you very much.
You are welcome. Are there any other questions from members of the committee for the Commissioner? Seeing none, Commissioner, I want to thank you. I was just saying I think you have done, you and your staff have done, a superb job. I think you have had a great, great challenge. And I don't think you have had one week where something has not happened that required your full attention. I commend all of you. I think you have done a fabulous job.
Thank you. MR. McPHERSON: Fleet Management is the next department.
Good morning. Please identify yourself for the record. I would ask you to please abbreviate your testimony, since we do have a copy of your prepared. Which, we will give a copy to 66 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 the stenographer, it will be transcribed in full. So if you can abbreviate your testimony, we would really appreciate it.
Thank you, Madam Chair. James Muller, Fleet Manager for the City of Philadelphia. Good morning, President Verna and distinguished members of City Council. Here with me to my left is my Administrative Services Director, Bob Fox; on my right is Tim Lynch, the Fleet Operations Director. Thank you very much for the opportunity to present testimony in support of my FY 2007 Operating Budget request for the Office of Fleet Management. OFM's FY 2007 general budget request is $55,173,836, including $12,600,000 for the purchase of new vehicles. The FY 2007 General Fund budget is $2,247,558 less than in FY 2006 estimated obligations. Budgetary variances in FY 2007 are the result of a variety of factors. Class 100 increase by $485,442, mainly due to wage increases. Class 300 67 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 decrease by $1,700,000, due to trends suggesting decreases in fuel. Class 400, decreased by $1,033,000 for vehicle acquisition. The fleet. The City of Philadelphia has a diverse fleet in terms of vehicle size, complexity, and function, with an asset value exceeding $248 million, including vehicles supported by both water and aviation funds. The fleet represents a significant investment of public funds. Currently OFM maintains a fleet size of 6,000 vehicles, including 787 that are specialized vehicles. Availability average is 90 percent, which means 5,400 vehicles are available each day, meeting most daily vehicle department needs. Initiatives. Police cars. Over the last ten years, radio patrol cars were produced only by Ford Motor Company, the Ford Crown Victoria rear-wheel-drive V-8 engine offered at a price of $30,500. Now the Chevy Impala offers -- Chevy now offers the Impala as a patrol car at a 68 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 price of $25,000. OFM, with the cooperation of the Philadelphia Police Department, researched the Impala and found that many other cities had been quite satisfied with their performance. Continued initiatives. Currently OFM is changing specifications on a number of vehicles. There have been a number of advances in technology, and we are responding to these changes; such as, multiplex wiring systems. Trucks are now ordered, when possible, with multiplex wiring for cleaner and more direct connections between the superstructure and the chassises. Another technology is LED lamps, lighting illuminating diodes. The lamp lasts longer because they withstand road vibrations, shock, and much more efficient than bulbs. Thirdly, utilizing synthetic oils in our drive train systems, such as, engine transmissions and differentials, resulting in longer oil life. Additionally, OFM has included 69 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 long0life engine coolant. This increases the overall life of the components of all cooling systems. Internet auctioning. OFM, along with the Procurement Department, is in the process of listing online vehicles that have passed their useful life cycle. E-auctions are now conducted in many cities. Through the E-auction process, competition is increased, as well as potential selling price of auctioned vehicles. Trade journals report approximately percent 14 increase in revenues collected. 15 In conclusion, I want to express my deepest appreciation to all the employees of the Office of Fleet Management for their commitment and dedication to our mission of economy, delivering safe and reliable vehicles to all city departments. That concludes my testimony, and I would be happy to answer any questions at this time.
Thank you very much. 70 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 The Chair recognizes Councilman Rizzo.
Thank you, Madam President. Good afternoon. Or still good morning, Mr. Muller. I just wanted to complement Fleet Management on the great work that you do. And I can tell you that I have visitors come from all over, especially police and firefighters that visit the city. And one thing they are always impressed with, it is tough for them to even detect the age of some of our vehicles. And I explained to them the little system we have with the year -- the first two numbers are the year of the vehicle. And they are always amazed by the cleanliness in our police fleet. Again, the Impala has caught on to other places since people have seen it here. But being a person that's watched the fleet the best part of my adult life really can tell you, for a fleet that works 71 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 hard, the sanitation vehicles that are, you know, worked into the ground, that I think we have a first-class looking fleet. And I know you have done a lot of good things to make sure that it is managed effectively. So all I can tell you is that, I think I speak with some experience and do understand how tough it is to run a big-city fleet. And I hope some day we can put you in the position -- one of the comments that I must say is that they can't believe that we have some vehicles as old as they are. And I'm sure you just mentioned the auction, the online auction, which is going to be, I think, a bigger bang for our buck. We will get more because four-wheel drives are a vehicle that's wanted all over the world. And I think now that we are going to spread out and get more people interested in buying our used vehicles, that maybe we will be in a position -- and I believe you monitored that very carefully. If you get a vehicle that starts to suck up a lot of money 72 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 on maintenance, it gets put down. So that's one area that I would like to be able to see your budget increased. And the firefighters, I was down at a firefighters' union event, and they were thrilled. I think that you have ordered some brand-new equipment for them, six or maybe even more new fire engines. So, that's great to hear. What exactly is that all about? Because they are thrilled about the fact that you have been able to figure out a way to get them some new equipment.
We had an additional $6 million given to our acquisition budget, so we purchased six new American LaFrance pumpers -- ordered, I am saying -- and two new ladders. And that's what happened with 6 million.
That's the way I like to see our money spent, on making sure that our firefighters have the best equipment. But, again, thank you. You have a tough job, but it is done well.
Thank you, Councilman. A lot of the support we get from the 73 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 other departments makes our job a lot easier, people maintaining their vehicles and caring about what the appearance of the vehicles look like. So a lot of that has to go along with other departments helping us make our job a lot easier.
Am I correct the minute you see -- because when I see some of the vehicles that are 10, years old, some 12 of the passenger vehicles that are still on the street, is there some computer alert that that vehicle, once it starts to cost us some money, even though you don't have the money to buy new vehicles, you try to spend the minimum amount on it?
It is hard for me to believe that we have some vehicles out there that are 10 -- am I exaggerating, 10, 12 years old?
Thank you, Madam 74 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 President.
You are welcome. I just have one question, if I may. On of your testimony, under Revenue Generation, you indicate you expect to receive $400,000 in FY '06 and $300,000 in FY '07 in the General Fund for sale of vehicles; is that correct?
The FY '07 estimate right now is $300,000 for the General Fund.
All right. Now, I was somewhat confused. Because on the budget in brief, the revenue estimates are $600,000 and $700,000 respectfully for the sale of vehicles. Can you explain this discrepancy and which numbers are correct? And what is the impact on the budget and plan?
Yes. When the budget was prepared, we had estimates that we believed were going to be higher. We have had a couple of auctions 75 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 since that, to when the speech was -- testimony was written, and we have adjusted those numbers down. It doesn't reflect on our budget, because we don't keep the money that is generated from the auctions; but, it obviously affects the General Fund.
Is Ms. Reed here? Would you approach the table, please. Identify yourself, for the record. I would suggest that you look at of the budget in brief.
Dianne Reed, Budget Director. I didn't quite understand the question.
We are told that they are not going to generate the type of revenue that appears on that page. So, how are we going to rectify that?
We will have to make an adjustment at some time later in the process.
Yes, I will look into it. 76 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06
Thank you, Madam President. Good morning, gentlemen. A few weeks ago this Council unanimously passed an ordinance requiring fleet division to consider hybrid vehicle purchases, when the price was appropriate, before regular cars. The Mayor has until Thursday, tomorrow, to either veto the bill or sign it or allow it to become law without his signature. In the event that the Mayor vetoes the bill, which is what I am -- some of the information I am getting, and I think the fact that my name is on it almost assures that it will be vetoed, and the Council overrides the veto, what do you plan to do?
Thank you. That's not the answer I expected, but I 77 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 appreciate your honesty. Thank you. That's it. He is going to follow the law. Thank you very much.
I would just appreciate for the record -- and I know you are giving an honest answer, and I respect your honesty. In the event that someone from either the Administration or the Law Department contacts you and tells you not to follow the law, I would appreciate at least the Council President being informed that you have been told otherwise. Okay?
Thank you. Thank you all very much. We have no 22 other questions, so we appreciate your coming in. Thank you.
The next 78 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 department to testify? MR. McPHERSON: Historical Commission.
Madam President, may I speak to Dianne Reed, while she is still here. Just one quick question.
Thank you, Ms. Reed. We have been having some discussion today and yesterday relative to capital spending and capital needs. Are you aware of what the debt policy is for the City of Philadelphia?
I think it is under revision, so I haven't seen the latest draft.
Do you know when the last time was the debt policy was revised?
Well, according to staff, it was revised in 1995, was the last time the debt policy of the City of Philadelphia was revised. And it was revised 79 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 to a 6.5 percent of revenues. Do you know what we are currently at right now?
Why is that? 10 Isn't it important for our ability 11 to manage and for our rating agencies to rate 12 that we follow our policy or update a policy 13 that's now 11 years old and sorely out of 14 balance with the original policy of 6.5, and 15 your testimony is we are at 15? Why wouldn't we have done anything about that policy up -- why are we still revising it?
The debt policy needs to be revised because of changing circumstances. The ten-year moving average of, you know, assessed valuation constrains us. What gets counted in the debt makes a difference. And I am not directly participating in the revision discussions. 80 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06
Do you think that it is problematic that a 1995 policy of 6.5 percent is actually at 15? Someone from the outside reading that in our disclosure documents, would that not raise a red flag that our debt policy is at 6.5, but we are spending at percent 14 levels? 15 Would that bother you, as someone who was an outsider looking at the finances of the city and its way it borrows and spends?
The rating agencies are quite comprehensive in their review of the city's finances. When debt-to-revenue ratio starts to get into upper ranges, you know, they think about very carefully the entire revenue picture and expenditure picture for the jurisdiction. 81 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 And the Finance Director has periodic conference calls with all of the raiding agencies, and all of these elements are reviewed.
Can you think of any reason why the debt policy would not have been updated since 1995? I know you have only been here a short time.
I would request, Madam President -- the Revenue Commissioner is responsible for this?
That the Finance commissioner be asked either in writing or in a call-back to explain the lack of an update in debt policy since 1995, and why we are so far out of balance with our original -- our current debt policy, although it is old, why we are at 15 percent, and what are we doing about it. Thank you.
It will be done. Thank you. 82 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 Are there any other questions from members of the committee of this witness? Seeing none. MR. McPHERSON: The Historical Commission.
Good morning, gentlemen. I would ask you to identify yourself, for the record. We do have a copy of your testimony. I would ask you to please abbreviate it. A copy will be given to the stenographer, and it will be transcribed in full. So please identify yourself, for the record, and proceed.
Good morning, Council President Verna and members of City Council. I am John Farnham, Acting Historic Preservation Director of the Philadelphia Historical Commission; and Michael Sklaroff, Chair of the Commission, joins me. I am pleased to present for your review and consideration the Historical Commission's operating budget request in the 83 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 amount of $321,743 for Fiscal Year 2007, an addition of $8,581 over estimated obligations for Fiscal Year 2006, all of which will fund Class 100 salary increases. The proposed budget will fund six staff positions and support the current level of service; including prompt processing of building permit applications, prompt review of federally assisted projects, and provision of technical and research assistance to a broad range of constituents. Thank you, members of City Council, for your attention. And we are now happy to address any questions you might have.
Thank you. Mr. Sklaroff, is there anything you would like to add to your testimony?
Yes, I would. Michael Sklaroff, Chair, Philadelphia Historic Commission. This level of funding allows us six employees, which allows us to continue the level of service that is now being provided to the citizens of the City of Philadelphia. 84 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 However, this is a staff level that is woefully inadequate for the obligations and opportunities of a city like Philadelphia, which is unparalleled, I would say number one in the country, in terms of historic resources, historic treasures. To do the job that we need to do, we need at least two more employees. The additional funding would be approximately $100,000. We have met this past -- Wednesday a week ago with the Mayor of the City of Philadelphia, the Managing Director, the Budget Director, and the Commissioner of Public Property to discuss this. The Mayor said to us that he was sympathetic to the needs, he understood them, he recognized them, and was going to see whether he could make a place in the budget for the funding of two additional positions. He did say, however, that it was subject to other important priorities of the city and subject, also, to regulatory oversight. 85 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 So we are here to express what Dr. Farnham has expressed, but also to make the case for two additional employees. It is a fact that, given the number of buildings, the number of sites, and the number of districts, we compare at the very bottom of the list when you look at the national situation. The City of New York has fewer than twice -- although it is many, many times our population, fewer than twice as many historic buildings as the City of Philadelphia. And I would say that our buildings are better and more significant. But, they have eight times the staff that the Philadelphia Commission has. We are now, thankfully, in a period of boon in the City of Philadelphia in terms of the repopulation of certain areas, the growth in the residential market. And much of that, much of that, is the product of the fact that we have an unparalleled historic treasure. There are new buildings that are 86 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 being built on historic sites, there is adaptive reuse of historic buildings, there are additions all over the city of -- that people make to their own homes and to larger facilities in historic buildings that requires the oversight and input of the Commission staff, who do a remarkable job. So we are helping, I think, in significant ways the boon by protecting these treasures. And we would like to continue to do so. But over a period of time, I think the last four or five years, we have grown from a little bit more than a thousand applications per year, to almost 1,500. We need more help. And the staff has been wonderful with the resources it has, and we hope that room could be found in the budget. Thank you.
Thank you, Madam President. 87 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 Mr. Farnham, when were you appointed acting director?
I have served as the Acting Historic Preservation Officer from the retirement of Richard Tyler in June of 2005 until January of this year. In January of this year, my title was changed to Director, from Preservation Officer.
Thank you very much. So you have been around since when, again?
I started with the Commission in the spring of 2002. So just about four years exactly.
Thank you. On of the testimony, you mention in the first -- in the second paragraph that, due to the number of applications, those in East Falls, West, and Northeast Philadelphia have not been completed, those applications. So you note that in the paragraph. Now, my question, again, is, as you 88 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 know, we have had many meetings. You reference a task force. I have its report here. The issues that it concerns, which are basically three: How we ensure that the process is inclusive, how we deal with financial burdens, and how we ensure that NTI is not negatively affected. Now, given that, and given the fact that these questions are raised, but not answered, I ask you, where you are with regard to West Philadelphia. As you know, and as is also mentioned in that report on , that Spruce Hill is a -- quote, It appears to be the case of Spruce Hill where the perceptions are that not all the community was aware of its nomination. I ask where you are with regard to your statement that the application is not completed.
Well, the processing of the application is not yet complete. And we certainly wouldn't move forward with that processing of the 89 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 application until we have met with, of course, with your office and held additional community meetings.
Madam President, as you know, we introduced a bill 7 on January 22, '04, that dealt with Council inclusion not to undermine the Commission, but only to make sure that we had some way of knowing that those who were for, as well as those who were against, were included in nominations. I know we have been talking about a conservation district, as well. And Council people, District Council people especially, could have a problem if they are not sure that -- if certain people or individuals apply, and then you process it and act as if all the community is included. And then we could have a problem with communities not included. And I raise these issues because when you say that it is not completed, the application isn't completed, we have to be sure that that means that you are not moving 90 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 full steam ahead without us being assured that all members of the community are included. Now, we in good faith agreed to hold up this bill. But we have to be sure that, in good faith, we are not put in a light that we are not supporting our communities or all communities who are concerned about the issue of inclusion, expense, NTI, and development overall. Mr. Sklaroff.
Council President, if I may respond to Councilwoman Blackwell's comments, which are very well taken. The first rule in an agency like ours, dealing with other government officials, especially elected officials, is that there should be no surprises. That's number one. Number two is, I think the Spruce Hill situation and the task force that was convened by Councilwoman Blackwell has really taught us some lessons. And the primary lesson that comes out of that is that, historic preservation -- and this has been a theme -- is not the 91 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 preserve of an elite group of preservationists. It has to be community-based. So the second rule is that, we go only where we are welcomed. And we are -- nothing further has happened during the pendency of this period where the task force has operated with regard to Spruce Hill. The process on Spruce Hill would be first to meet with the District Councilwoman and her staff, whoever she decides; and then to agree on a process of additional hearings so that the community understands the pluses and minuses. So we are very much committed only to going where we are welcomed, and that's been the history of the other districts. The request for additional staff will allow us to be more inclusive, to have more information, and to fulfill that part of our mission which we are not really able to do now; and that is, the educational mission of the commission, which is also embedded in the ordinance, to teach people about what historic 92 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 preservation means for communities, as well as for individual properties. So in going forward, Councilwoman Blackwell, we are very mindful of our obligation to make sure that this is a transparent process and that the information is spread throughout the community so that people can have an opportunity to comment one way or another.
On of Mr. Gallery's statement, he states in the bottom line that the 1955 Council ordinance 14 didn't allow for the creation of historic districts, but did allow for individual properties. And I think this is one of the issues. If you have one organization, and its officers who say they are for one -- again, I mentioned Spruce Hill. And it is my district, and I support my Spruce Hill organization. We work monthly on zoning issues. I live in Spruce Hill. But certainly I don't want to be put in a position where it is perceived that I am 93 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 not supporting my community organization, when the community organization again approaches the Commission and says they want a district. And many people within the district, you get into a debate, Madam President, we have had with people who have, people who don't. We have had discussions about maybe doing -- Mr. Sklaroff knows this, Mr. Farnham might know this -- about maybe we allow some part of the building or the front of buildings to be preserved historically with certain materials, and maybe the rear of the buildings or the side of buildings not have to invest in that. And, so, there are many complicated issues that come up with this. Obviously we support state and federal funding for it; that's not the issue. The issue is what -- those three points that are mentioned in the report, the task force report, about who is included, what the expense is, and how other areas, how other projects including NTI are affected. Let me ask another question in that 94 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 regard. One of our previous concerns was a recommendation in terms of the materials, what one has to buy, where one has to buy it, who recommends it. And all those things, we have found, were one-stop shop. And we wondered where the Commission is in that regard, as well. We thought -- obviously we had some concerns when the Commission says you have to use X material, you get at X place, you have to buy this much of it, all of that in a closed shop manner, and that everyone got from the one office upstairs, as well. Would you respond to that, as well.
If I may, there are, in historic preservation, certain norms, certain requirements. And we try to do the best in balancing the financial demands on citizens in the City of Philadelphia and the need for preservation. We don't, to my knowledge, the staff doesn't recommend, where to buy materials. And there is a very liberal hardship process so that people of limited means are not held 95 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 to the same standards as people of wealth. And we are very conscious of the need to make this accessible and feasible for people of limited means. I would hope there would be some funding. And I thought in NTI -- and you may know more about this, Councilwoman Blackwell, than I -- there were funds available to finance historic preservation improvements for low- and moderate-income people. I don't know what the status of that program is. Doctor Farnham, do you know?
Yes. I believe the Home Repair Program, just run through OHCD, and with the Preservation Alliance, is just getting underway, and approximately $1 million to help low- and moderate-income homeowners meet the standards not only of the Philadelphia Historical Commission, but the state and federal standards, as well, for historic properties.
Absolutely. We were happy to support the Commission in trying to make this a designation. 96 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 But, as many of my colleagues realize, if you have to use a certain kind of material, if you point your brick, if you have to use a certain kind of windows, the million dollars will not go very far. It is a very, very expensive undertaking. Certainly when we have so many considerations, people in need who have nothing, and then people who have to use just certain materials that are very expensive, certainly it puts us in the position of having to choose. And, again, that's one of the reasons why this issue was so very -- is so very sensitive to we who believe that, in the city there has to be a space for historic preservation, as well as new construction. And I believe that the study, and I guess our last two years dealing with the issue, I think that perhaps we have raised as many questions as we have attempted to answer, and that we don't have this issue resolved. We will hold at least for now and we will continue to hold our bill. But we 97 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 certainly consider that anything that happens within our districts -- and I am sure I speak for all the District Council people -- when I say that we do not want the Commission to move ahead; but, we have to be included in the process. And if we feel we are not, then it puts us in a position of again pushing ahead on a bill that legislates that we be included before any decisions are made. My final question, Mr. Farnham and Mr. Sklaroff, are with regard to the 4200 to 4800 blocks of Chester Avenue. And this is where SEPTA has put in an application to be exempted from historic preservation where there are cobblestones in the middle of the street within those boundaries. My question is, I assume that SEPTA made the application to you. And what do you expect to come out of the engineering report? What do you expect to find, and what does that mean to us? Who makes the decision? I have already been in touch with the community in that regard. But, so, what 98 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 happens then? SEPTA applies to you, and then what happens? What will the engineering report say to you, and then what are the next steps for us?
I think this is an open, transparent process. The community will be involved. When we had a similar presentation on behalf of the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation and the Department of Public Property for Germantown Avenue, it was a very full process of hearing. The community will be heard. The engineering report will discuss the feasibility of preservation, as opposed to the question as to whether the granite block must be removed. So it will be a full, complete discussion. The community is welcome. The Councilwoman and her staff are welcome to be part of that discussion. I don't think we can judge what the report will say. But, it will give us the costs, I'm sure, of full preservation, at least what's left, of the historic fabric and 99 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 the differences. Mr. Farnham, do you have anything to add to that?
No. I think that's exactly what we are hoping for. The application raises some technical issues that we on the staff and the Commission are not used to dealing with. So we are looking for an engineer to provide us with an independent assessment of the financial feasibility of preservation.
Again, let me say, we don't want to be included in discussion; we want to be pivotal in raising the discussions. And that is always my issue with the Historic Commission. Don't include me in the discussion. We have to drive it. You don't know who from the community should be pulling the community together in these discussions. Certainly you can ask for a study. But when that study comes back to you, don't include us in any community discussions; we have to drive those community discussions. 100 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 And that is always where we end up, Madam President. That's my problem with the Commission. Don't include me in things in my area; we have to drive those discussions. I have already, as soon as I got this title that says 4200 to 4800 blocks of Chester Avenue, then I called the ward leader who runs the health center a block away, whose husband is a retired professor at University of the Sciences of Philadelphia, people who are able to participate fully and who know who should be included in the discussion. Don't include us; let us drive the community discussion when it comes to the Historic Commission. You can't ask us to fund you and fund positions, and then you make discussions -- you have discussions and you make decisions for us. That's why we introduced a bill. Historic preservation works in many areas and many neighborhoods, but you don't have the right to ask us to fund your decisions. We are elected to make these 101 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 decisions. Don't include us in discussions; let us drive those discussions so that we assure there is community inclusion. Madam President, that's all I have to say on the issue. I have tried to make my position as clear as I can. We who are District Council people have to drive community discussions. And we are going to ask that you do that. Any questions -- when you get findings from this engineering report, and you are ready for community discussions, call us before you meet with anybody in our communities. And we would like you to commit to that.
Thank you, 102 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 Madam President. Good morning, good afternoon. I have a couple of questions primarily around the issue of preservation, and how you remove a historic designation from a property that remains vacant year after year after year. The designation is probably what's caused it, or is probably the barrier to its development, because it increases the price. And the building just sits there, becomes an eyesore, is very blighted year after year. I think this one particular building has been vacant for about years. And at 15 this point I have put in to have it 16 demolished. The church wants it demolished, 17 that's next door. The neighbors across the 18 street, which is Germantown Friends School, 19 they want it demolished. It just sits there. 20 So, how do we remove that?
Actually, I think I know the property on Germantown Avenue.
And I have done legal work for Germantown Friends School. And I 103 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 think, in that particular case, a discussion with the Commission would be very helpful and, I think, might resolve the question.
Because I have put in, again, to have that demolished. Everybody, you know, everybody wants that building demolished.
I think, if I know the circumstances, that a building in that condition basically has expired, its useful life is over. And I think there is maybe more of a reluctance to address that than there could be, and I think that can be resolved.
I think, Councilwoman Miller, if somebody from your staff or from Germantown Friends School would contact the staff of the Commission -- I would not be involved, because I have invested 30 years in tuitions in that school, and I have done some pro bono legal work. But if you would speak to Dr. 104 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 Farnham, I'm sure we could at least tee it up and see whether it is a candidate for removal. I don't think we have had a request before.
We have, actually, been putting in a request for some time. Now, maybe through L & I more than through the Historical. But I know I have brought this up with Mr. Tyler in the past, because the building just continues to sit there, and now it is imminently dangerous.
This is on the other side -- it is on Germantown Avenue, and it is sort of coming apart.
We were involved in the parking lot application. So I know the building, I can almost picture it, and it is coming apart at the schemes, really.
If somebody at your office can contact Dr. Farnham, I think that 105 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 can be resolved.
Thank you. Any other questions or comments from members of the committee? Seeing none, gentlemen, thank you very much.
This committee will stand in recess until 1:15. Thank you very much. (Short recess.)
The Committee of the Whole has now reconvened. MR. McPHERSON: Department of Licenses and Inspections.
Sorry for the delay. Please identify yourself, for the record. May I suggest that you abbreviate your testimony, since we have copies of it. We will give a copy to the stenographer, and it will be transcribed in full. 106 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 MR. ROBERT D. SOLVIBILE, SR.: Good afternoon, Council President Verna and members of Council. I am Robert D. Solvibile, Senior, Commissioner of the Department of Licensing and Inspections. Accompanying me today are key members of the department's management team. Eileen Evans, to my left; and Dominic Verdi next to her; and, to my left, Fran Burns and Bridget Greenwald. We appreciate the opportunity to present our Fiscal Year 2007 Operating Budget request. The Department of Licenses and Inspections is requesting a total Fiscal Year '07 budget of $65,725,132, of which $28,787,801 is in the city's General Fund; $36,088,027 is in the general grant revenue fund; and $849,304 is the in the community development fund. The General Fund budget represents an increase of $222,005 from our Fiscal Year '06 estimated obligations. This increase reflects a 3 percent wage increase. We offset 107 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 that by a delay in hiring of filling our positions. The '07 request will fund 362 General Fund positions, a decrease of 6 positions when compared to Fiscal Year '06 7 General Fund position level. The decrease in positions will not impact service delivery. We will continue to prioritize emergency and public safety concerns and will maximize productivity with current resources. We have achieved a multiple of accomplishments in Fiscal Year '06; most notably, the execution of a majority of our automation projects, our commitment to improving the permit approval process, and ability to electronically image building plans. In addition to plans undertaken in Fiscal Year '06, we will continue in Fiscal Year '07. The department has identified key '07 initiatives, including moving forward with the next phase of our automation efforts, which will include placing a majority of our 108 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 applications on the web and expanding the types of permits and licenses the public can access and purchase online; professionalizing our inspectional staff by consolidation of our business enforcement efforts to create a fully cross-functional and specialist staff, thus gaining productivity efficiencies; conducting a time and work flow study to determine the most appropriate use of space in our dedicated area of the concourse; and making our electronic building plans available to other city agencies, such as the Fire Department and the Board of Revision of Taxes. Overall the department is making great strides, and will continue to do so in the upcoming fiscal year. I am grateful to work with the dedicated staff that has been able to make these achievements possible. This concludes my testimony. I welcome questions.
Thank you very much. What is the amount budgeted for demolition in 2007? 109 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06
The average cost of demolition this year is $21,500, and we project it to be relatively stable in the coming fiscal year. That does not include the cost of the stucco.
It does not include the cost of the stucco; that's just to demolish the property.
Per wall. Now, Council President, every building that gets demolished, the wall does not necessarily get stuccoed. It is only attached occupied properties that we treat the party wall. 110 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06
Wouldn't you say there are more of them than there are of single?
In the curbside demolitions, there is more of the party walls that need to be stuccoed than in the NTI program inspections. But, in some cases, it will be a stand-alone house or there will only be a party wall on one side or sometimes free-standing. It is not always a stucco involved. Rule of thumb is about 60 percent of the demolitions will create a stucco.
How many buildings do you anticipate that we will demolish in 2007?
Approximately 275 buildings will be demolished next fiscal year, imminently dangerous buildings. 111 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06
And can you tell me what the amount is in the out years of the Five-Year Plan for demolition?
I believe that the work of the last several years, working with the NTI-targeted demolitions and the curbside work we have done, the decrease is a lot less on buildings that are imminently dangerous. The private market in areas that were -- in a lot of areas, the private market is stepping in and rehabilitating the problems -- rehabilitating the properties and not making demolition necessary. 112 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 We are finding more and more people, when we send them the violation notice, will comply with the violation, and not let us tear it down.
One of the items we discussed last year, if you recall, was the number of illegal billboards. Can you update us on the status of their removal?
There is a federal and state lawsuit against the city at the present time. And I cannot really comment at the time because it is an ongoing lawsuit that they are in the middle of working in the Law Department, working out.
Really? I didn't know that. Councilman Kelly. COMMISSIONER KELLY: I would like to ask the Commissioner, who is the lawsuit.
The best of my knowledge, the billboard owners are suing the 113 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 city in State and Federal Court.
Yes. Well, I'm pretty sure it is the Philadelphia area. I'm not really sure of the extent of -- if it goes beyond Philadelphia, the lawsuit.
Is it possible to send the Chair a list of the people who are involved in that suit?
Is somebody here from the Law Department? Do you mind coming up and addressing this issue, please. I think you heard Councilman Kelly's question. Would you be able to respond? If so, please give your name, for the record.
Thank you, Council President. I am Andrew Ross, Divisional 114 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 Deputy City Solicitor. The plaintiff in the lawsuits -- there are two separate suits, one in State Court, one in Federal Court. The plaintiff is an entity called Free Speech, which was -- is a coalition, as I understand it, of several of the larger billboard companies. And they have, of course, used that name in part because they are raising constitutional challenges to the ordinances. It is my understanding that Free Speech consists, at least in part, of Clear Channel and CBS, which used to be Viacom. There may be some others, as well.
Mr. Ross, how many companies are involved, do you know?
I think those two are the only companies directly involved in the litigation.
That's my understanding. COMMISSIONER KELLY: I just have a followup question, Madam Chair, if I could. 115 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 Okay. I will wait.
Go ahead. COMMISSIONER KELLY: I would just like to know -- and I remember this from last year -- that, in testifying, I don't know if it was the Commissioner or someone from the Law Department, and it has to do with licensing fees. Do you know if it is still, I guess, an area that companies, billboard companies, pay licensing fees on a voluntary basis?
They were paying on a voluntary basis. The ordinance that was adopted, among other things, included a new fee. Some of them may be paying the new fee at this point, I'm not sure. But, that is part of the litigation that's being contested.
I am sorry. I was just wondering. The word "suits" was pluralized. There is more than one suit? How about the tax that we imposed last year; has the city been able to collect the tax? Or has that, because of the lawsuit, 116 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 been uncollectible?
It is actually both, Madam President. Some of the companies have been paying tax on a monthly basis; however that is part of what's being contested in the lawsuit, as well. Or in one of the lawsuits, at least.
Mr. Ross, are all companies paying it or just some companies paying the tax on this?
I'm not sure. I don't think every company is necessarily paying it at this point, but I don't know for sure.
Do we know which ones are paying and which ones aren't?
I am told that $770,000 in taxes has been paid to Revenue.
Councilman, are you finished? I have a couple other questions. Are you finished with that one 117 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 line of questioning?
Did I just hear something that you brought up, I think, almost a year ago, about the voluntary payment? Did I just hear we are still collecting these voluntarily?
Well, because the license fee issue is being contested legally, I don't believe that the companies are all paying the fee that was just most recently imposed in the 118 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 current ordinance, you know, until that gets resolved.
Because I remember President Verna was really the one who brought this to all of our attention. And I am amazed. So I would assume just the fact that there is a lawsuit stops our process?
In the past it was a voluntary payment because the law expired and it wasn't getting renewed. And last year, when Council passed it, it no longer was a voluntary payment. But then they filed a lawsuit. And, as Mr. Ross just said, until that's resolved, not all are paying the fee. But, it is not a voluntary fee any longer.
Refresh my memory. What was the amount of the fee that had to be paid? I know it depended on whether it was a single or --
The current ordinance calls for -- the old law required 119 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 $175 per sign face. And, as you know, a pole may have more than one face. And the current law calls for $650 a sign face that was passed last year in Council.
Yes, there was a tax. And that's the number I gave you, the $770,000.
Included what was collected in Revenue for signs. And that's all I know. I was just told that. It is not in our budget; it is in Revenue's budget. We have collected this year in licenses 35,000, last year it was 85,000.
Wait a minute. We are collecting less this year than we did last year? 120 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06
Are we going to be able to go back and collect those fines after this suit is settled one way or the other?
Yes. In accordance with the resolution of the suit, depending on the outcome, yes.
When were these suits filed and what is the status at this time?
I do not know exactly when they were filed. I know it was a number of months ago. I don't remember the exact date. It was toward the -- it was toward the latter half of 2005. And the current status is that they are still pending in court, pending either decision by the court or resolution among the parties.
I know that we 121 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 took a great deal of time last year on this topic. And I believe, if my memory serves me, L & I had done an aerial photo shot of all of the billboards. And they were supposed to ascertain whether in fact there were permits that had been issued for those billboards that -- wherever the location was; and, B, if they were illegal, the owner would be notified. And then they also had talked about the possibility of, if in fact -- and correct me, because I remember this clearly -- we had suggested that maybe wherever the billboard was erected, should the owner of that ground be paying property taxes on it. Were any of those questions ever resolved?
We worked -- what we were talking about last year was that PennDOT commissioned a study of all the signs along the state highways within, I believe, 150 feet of both sides of the state highways. And they had an engineering firm out 122 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 there that we worked with, feeding information. They would go out, assess the address, and we were giving them copies of the zoning files so they could determine what was in fact legal. As part of the new ordinance, it calls for the sign companies to give us an inventory of the signs; the location, and the signs they own. And they have not given us that inventory as of yet. When we receive that inventory --
Yes. And, also, there was regulations that we recently had to issue to enforce -- to interpret parts of the ordinance. And they were just -- I believe it became effective March 8. Either voluntarily, if they either comply or per the agreement that's reached by the settlement in the law case, they will give us the inventory. We are going to share that inventory 123 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 with PennDOT. PennDOT has told me that we will get back the database that they have created. They will filter in the information from the sign companies, and then we will be able to run a comparison so we can do the necessary steps to enforce the location of the signs and the legality of the signs. As far as enforcement efforts with eight-sheets, which were, I believe, talked about last year -- I believe there's 900 of them, approximately, in the city. We have, instead of just -- we have been dealing with the Law Department with the company that owns the eight-sheets, who has told us that they wanted to try to reach an agreement with us so they could voluntarily take them down over a period of time. We have decided to also notify the owners of the build the eight-sheets are on, on the sides of the walls. And we -- because of that effort, the owners have completed the removal of about 40 signs from eight-sheet signs. 124 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06
Can I make one more correction on something I said earlier?
The Revenue Department, through February, has collected $1,062,000 in revenues through February regarding signs.
The Chair recognizes Councilman Rizzo for a point of information.
I have a point of information, it is relevant to Commissioner Solvibile's testimony. But could I indulge you to allow me to introduce a visiting class?
That's why I am recognizing you. Because I am not finished with my questioning. 125 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06
We would like to welcome a group of students from Temple University who all want to follow in Mike Dunn's footsteps as a radio journalist. And, class, could you all stand up.
They are from Temple University. Don't forget me, now, if you cover City Hall. Madam President, could I ask Commissioner Solvibile a question? Why that money wasn't put into an escrow account? Rather, the Law Department --
Excuse me. I would just like to welcome the students and to let you know what we are doing. We are in the midst of our budget hearings. And presently we are hearing from the Department of Licenses and Inspections. 126 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 So that you are not in the dark, you will know what we're discussing. All right, Councilman Rizzo.
Thank you. And Dick Sheeran is a person that, obviously, had a lot of years here.
So are you correcting the record; that we, in fact, did receive the revenues?
I am told that the revenue department has collected $1,062,000 in taxes. That's the tax money, not the sign licensing.
Why can't we put it in an escrow account? Did the court specifically say or did the lawsuit specifically say that we weren't allowed to collect the revenue?
No, there is nothing preventing us from collecting it. 127 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06
Does anybody know what the revenue should be? Well, wait a minute. No, that's not the number. That's tax. I am talking about the licenses. We're not collecting that, according to the Commissioner. That was what the point was a year ago that President Verna brought to our attention, that we weren't collecting it. And the lawsuit, couldn't we have structured our response, or the court's, couldn't they structure it that maybe they don't have to pay, but it should go into an escrow account, at least?
I believe when the lawsuit is settled, one way or the other, we will get the money due us. Whatever the settlement calls for, we will then receive. I'm confident of that at that point. That's the only explanation I can give you, Councilman. 128 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06
You are welcome. I don't want to belabor this issue. But if L & I discovers that a billboard is illegal, this pending lawsuit does not prevent them from removing that billboard, does it?
And if it does not, my question is, how many illegal billboards have we removed? And if we haven't removed any, my question then is, why not. Why would we have them up there? They are illegal, and we are just ignoring it.
We are still working with PennDOT and waiting for the list.
You told us that last year. 129 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06
Billboards. We are talking about all kinds of billboards.
The eight-sheets are clearly illegal, there is no question about that. I think the eight-sheets are clearly illegal. The billboards, there may be some discussion as to whether or not they are legal, they are grandfathered, or not. But the eight-sheets on the wall with the malt liquor and the alcohol and all the other stuff, they are clearly illegal. There is no dispute. And I was listening downstairs. How long was the process of negotiating with these illegal people? And we have removed 40 of them?
The owners have voluntarily, that owned the buildings, removed 40 of them.
How many are there? You said there were 800? 130 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06
800. And the owners removed 40. And how many years have we been debating or negotiating with the illegal owners?
Eight-sheets came onto my radar last year for the first time.
So at least a year you have been dealing with it, and probably the department has been dealing with it more.
I have asked this before. I understand the large billboard issue. There is some dispute of ownership, grandfather, big companies. I understand this. We are talking clearly illegal eight-sheets that advertise alcohol in minority neighborhoods. Okay? Mostly 131 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 minority neighborhoods. And we can't just go up with ladders and take them down? I would get a contractor, hire people from the neighborhood, and let them make a day's wages by cleaning up their own neighborhood. To me it is bizarre that we sit with the Law Department and we figure out how we can negotiate with people that are clearly breaking the law. Go get ladders and screw guns and take them off the walls and throw them in the incinerator or wherever we put them, in the landfill. They are illegal. Why are we negotiating? This may not be for you, but for the Law Department. Why are we negotiating it? They are all illegal.
And if you decide not to do it, then you will just get away with it. 132 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06
In the meantime, the advertising, which is offensive to everybody, and dangerous to the kids, stays up there while we negotiate with these guys who put them up illegally in the first place. I don't get it. I think the eight-sheets are more insidious and dangerous for the neighborhood than the billboard for the casino on the Walt Whitman Bridge, frankly. I mean, that doesn't even bother me. But those eight-sheets advertising malt liquor and vodka and whatever else they advertise, in neighborhoods where kids are talking to school, we are going to sit down for a year or more and negotiate by people that are illegal anyway? Buy some ladders at Home Depot, get some screw guns, and start taking them down. I don't imagine a judge is going to tell you to stop. And I know you can't do it. Commissioner, I apologize. Because this is 15 years of frustration with the Law Department and the departments who service people saying, 133 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 do you know what, we really need to take it easy here, and we can't offend anybody. What's more offensive than a Vodka ad across the street from a school? Unscrew them, throw them in the trash truck, and take them away. And don't worry what the Law Department says, for once. I am sorry. I apologize. Because this is, you know, this question -- how long have we talked about this? We talk about this every time they come here, and we are still negotiating it. Sorry. I apologize.
I don't think you should be the one apologizing. I think this is crazy.
It is year after year that we have the same discussion. Councilman Kelly.
Yes. Thank you, Madam President. I just want to follow up on 134 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 Councilman Kenney. He just Chaired a meeting with Law and Government Committee, I think, the other day. And it is very, very frustrating. I know where he is coming from. I know Commissioner Verdi was there. And we showed slides of West Philadelphia with the stop-and-goes, and it was absolute disgrace. They had signs all over the place. And I know Deputy Commissioner was there. And we were just imploring that something has to be done. I am sure that 99.9 percent of all of those boards were illegal. And I think the Councilman is right when he is saying that, you know, we should stop talking and just do it. Just go out there and remove them. I think they are a blight on the community. And we had community leaders in there, they are almost crying for us to do something. And I think it is very, very frustrating. And I think I know where the Councilman is coming from. And I think all of 135 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 us want to see something done, especially in those communities. Because it is just rips them apart, and it is just a blight on those neighborhoods. Thank you. I just had to get that off my chest.
Can we have some commitment here as to what's going to be done? And I beg you, do not make a vain commitment.
I would venture an estimate that, by this time next year, if not sooner, within the next several months, that the eight-sheets will no longer be an issue, as they will be removed.
There's approximately a little bit more than 700 left now. I said 40 were removed; it is, like, 66 have been removed. And the rest, that would leave about 720 left to be removed. And, as the Councilman said, the majority of them in African-American neighborhoods. 136 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 And within the next several months, I would envision the signs will all be removed.
Can we have from the Law Department a summary of what the lawsuits are, please? Can we get a copy from your office? We want a summary as to what the lawsuits are.
Okay. On of your detail, you are requesting $152,225 for concourse reconfiguration. Can you tell us, what are your plans, who will do the work, and how will they be selected?
At the present time we are working with the BIA, Building Industry Association. And they have volunteered an architect to come and look at our work-flow process in the concourse and help us to 137 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 envision how it should be laid out so it would better serve the public. And then we haven't envisioned who would do it. We would have to, under the new ordinance or law, RFP and select that way under the new regulations, is the way it would be done, if not a bid. We haven't thought how it will actually be bid. We are right now working to see what the plan should be. I can't hear because of the...
So, basically, we will bid it out and/or RFP it, like appropriate, after we have a plan in place as to how we lay it out. We feel that the work flow could be a lot better than what it is now. And we want it done professionally, so we could have people next to each other that need to interrelate with each other. And that's, 138 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 basically, how we had planned to do it. Whatever the regulations call for, it will be bid that way.
Very well. I have one last question. On of your detail, you are requesting $35 million in NTI funds for FY '07. What is the status of that request? What is that used for? I thought that the balance of the NTI proceeds were practically gone.
Basically, it is going to be the carry-over funds for money not spent this year. And that's why the appropriation is there, so it could be spend next year.
Demolition. The carryon, the unfinished demolitions that aren't in the process yet.
So what would be the total of the demolition for '07? It would be the 35 plus the 8 million? 139 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06
I'm not at all positive if all 35 million in the NTI budget would be for demolition. As you know, the money comes into L & I's budget, and then is disbursed to people that draw down from it. So I know that the majority of the money would be spent on demolition, but I don't know that all the 35 million would. It depends on the bid packages, working with the District Council people, that are put out.
All right. I recognize Councilman Clarke. I am going to ask the Law Department to please make sure that we get what we asked for. And, Commissioner, I am hoping that next year this time we do not, do not have to have another debate regarding the billboards.
Whose responsibility is it to take those billboards down? If they don't, can you simply go in and 140 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 do it and charge them for removing it?
I envision that as soon as the court -- and I'm not involved in the negotiations. But, as soon as that's over, the decision will be made, and either they will or we will remove the signs. And that I expect in the next few months. The eight-sheet signs, the neighborhood eight-sheet signs.
Thank you, Madam President. Sorry. It is a little inside joke going on over here.
Commissioner, can you tell me what type of licenses are required for home-improvement contractors? There are a series of licenses that are required?
To do business in 141 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 Philadelphia at all, you need a Business Privilege License. And to be a contractor, to do work that requires a building permit, to, you know, build a house, to rehab a house, you need a contractor's license, in addition to that. The Business Privilege License is a lifetime license, and the contractor's license renews yearly. I believe at $150 a year is the cost of that license. Plus, as a part of that license, they give us a copy of their insurance so -- to ensure that they are insured.
If the contractor's license or their insurance expires, how will we know?
On the sheet that we get, there is a statement that says the insurance company will attempt to notify us of the cancellation. They don't obligate themselves to. If they notify us that the insurance is cancelled, we put a hold or cancel the license, the license holder. 142 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 And as one of the improvements we made this year is, all approved licensed contractors are on our website, you look up to see if the contractor is licensed. We would remove his name.
Yes. We would urge any homeowner, though, any homeowner who is hiring a contractor, to check to see if they are licensed, and also to get a copy of the insurance to protect their own interest.
Let me ask you this: Since we have the technology to list on the website the approved contractors that are licensed, do we also have the ability to require or place the insurance carrier of that company?
We were -- I was having a discussion with my staff yesterday about that. And we're going to look into seeing if we can do it and if we have the ability to 143 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 do that. But that might prove a little bit more difficult to do than just the license holder. The licenses are all in a database. The insurance, we just really check off a block that they are insured, and that allows the license to process.
So we don't really know that they are insured; they are just telling us that they are insured?
We know they are insured. Because, if we don't get their insurance back, we void the license.
Why wouldn't we just require that they list the insurance carrier?
Well, we never -- well, they do list the insurance carrier to us. We get a copy -- I am going to call it a dec sheet. That's the wrong terminology. The declaration page, like you get with your auto insurance, it says what you are insured for and the amounts. We get a copy of that that co-names 144 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 the city as -- not additional insured. But we get it for information purposes, that that contractor is licensed to do contracting work. And then we file that. We have it in our file. We keep a file of it, but we don't add the information to the license database.
But I am saying, if we are requiring -- now you are saying -- first you said that you just checked off a box. But if you are saying they are giving you the specific insurance carrier -- in a separate form?
Why can't we simply require it is attached to the same form or part of the same form so, when you list these licensed contractors, you also list the insurance carrier for that licensed contractor, and then have that as a part of the website information?
I'm not sure the effort that would take on our part, if we 145 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 would have the personnel to be able to get that up all at once.
Over a period of years, there's -- I believe there's -- my gosh, there's -- how many contractors' licenses? Over a hundred thousand contractors licensed.
Well, we started years and years ago. And it just gets added on when contractors come in through the years. But to be able to also put the insurance company's name would be an effort that -- I am not sure how long that would take us to accomplish. It would take a long time.
If you start somewhere, eventually you will get there. If we don't start, we will never get there. 146 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 I understand, in spite of the fact that we have advanced technology, there is a human factor associated with that.
Well, I agree, Councilman. We will look into it going forward, and we will give an answer back to Council. It was also, when it was being discussed yesterday, was in that light. We were wondering if it's -- you know, just to scan the sheet on our website, let people look it up. We are going to look into the technology and how we can get it in, and we will get back to you. It is a good idea. Because the more information we can give the public online, that means the less they have to come into the office.
That's what I am saying. Actually, I am asking these questions because of a report I saw last night on the news that your guys were involved with. And we had a contractor who was doing work, 147 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 actually didn't do the work, got a substantial amount of money from some individuals. And he was licensed; but, he apparently had no 5 insurance, so the individuals had no ability to go after the bond of the contractor. So if we have the technology -- and I am glad to hear that; I didn't know we had the ability to list those licensed contractors -- it would be helpful if you also had the insurance carrier so that individual, if they are savvy enough to go to the website to look for licensed contractors, I'm sure they are savvy enough to also look for the insurance carrier when they make a determination.
I agree. I think it is a worthy effort. Like you say, we have to start somewhere. And maybe if we can start it, we can put it actually where it is all there.
Maybe when we are all retired, we might have it done. But if we never start, we will never get there.
I can't disagree 148 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 with you.
On the issue raised by Councilman Clarke. With regard to the website, what kind of treatment is given to the update and currency of the information on the website as described by Councilman Clarke?
Within a week. If it's -- contractors are added and removed on a weekly basis.
We have been doing that since right after Council testimony last year, it's been up on our website.
We can also give out certain permits on our website now, without coming in the MSB Building.
Sorry? 149 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06
We can also give us certain permits on our website also through the internet paying, by credit card, building permits; roofing, decking, things like that.
Thank you, Madam President. One last question. Commissioner, in terms of stucco on a side wall after demolition, are there certain standards associated with a private contractor that they must adhere to? I know we have certain standards internally. We contract with someone to do the work. But if a private citizen demolishes a building and they have to place stucco -- the assumption is they have to put stucco on the adjacent wall, particularly if the property is occupied -- I don't know if it is vacant, if they have to do that -- is there a standard that they have to meet in terms of the stucco, or can they just throw anything on 150 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 there?
Yes. In the last several years, Councilman, we have improved the spec. Not just at the treatment of the party wall, and it is not just stucco that you see. Below grade we have them fill all voids and dash it with cement, and then tar it, two coats of voluminous tar that's water-proof, and then backfill, and then protect the wall, trying not to let bricks hit it so it puts a ding in the protection. Then at the roof level, we used to have the tin that was bent as a barge board. We now have a roofer, the spec states it must be a roofer, place a barge board, professionally looking barge board, at the top. This stops water from getting in at the parapet at the top and the bottom. The stucco requires to be wired and then nailed using aluminum nails and diamond mesh wire. And that's an inspection. That's one inspection during the process. Then a scratch coat -- 151 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06
That's good. Are you saying that the inspector inspects the work that's being done by the private entity during the course of the stucco, or do you do it after the fact?
Private and city, it would be the same. The demolition spec is the same. We made the spec the same for private demo and city ordered. And the inspector would need to see the waterproofing in the cellar, the barge board at the top you can see at any point in time, the wire. The wire is an inspection and the scratch coat. The first coat -- you can wire and scratch coat the same day. Then you have to let that sit for hours and come back. It 23 doesn't matter if you come back the next day, 24 but come back after 24 hours and do the finish coat, which is the smooth coat. 152 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06
You are saying we have inspectors onsite for all of those?
We are there. We see the wire, we inspect the wire. We inspect the scratch coat. And then we go back for -- yes.
Yes. Most of the stucco being done is being done by the City of Philadelphia through the demolition program.
I understand that. Again, I am asking this question because a person a block away from me stops me one morning and tells me that this guy demolished a property, and he left a hole in the ground. That's the second part of my question, are you required to fill the hole in a particular time period. But he also did patch work, stucco job, and now that person is getting damage to the interior of their property. And now the 153 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 chimney is starting to fall because, apparently, they didn't adequately deal with the party wall associated with the chimney. We sent it in to your office, but I am trying to get a sense of the process on the private side.
The private side, you are required to -- we put the same requirement on the private side as we do on the city.
The difference with the private side is that the city will not stucco a vacant building. We will treat the base and we will treat the top, but we won't stucco the wall until someone takes the permit out to start rehabilitating the property. But on the private side, if it is even vacant, we make them stucco.
Hole in the ground has to be filled. Should be filled in a timely manner.
I would say it should be continuous until you have a level lot. And if not -- I'm not sure, Councilman, I have to get back to you if a regulation is called for private demolition to be fenced. On city-ordered demolitions, as you know, it is now ordered that every job be fenced. But I'm not at all sure about the private sector, if we require that in the code. We will get back to Council President on that.
So you are going to check to see if it has to be fenced.
For private jobs. 155 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06
I need to know how long they are allowed to have a hole in the ground.
I would say a period of time -- every circumstance is different, of course. But I would say anything longer than 30 days is not acceptable.
I rather you give me the specifics, instead of speculating. If you can get them to the Chair.
You are welcome. You know, I just want to remind my colleagues, your name can appear on this board. And, once you ask for a point of information, it is removed. So I just want to remind you to put your light on again, if you want to be recognized, because it is deleted once you ask for a point of information. Councilwoman Blackwell.
Thank you, 156 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 Madam President. Question. How long can a person keep a dumpster in front of a property?
A construction dumpster in the street would be regulated by the Streets Department. And there is rules that they get a license or a permit from the Streets Department and that the dumpster have reflective tape. But it is not something that L & I regulates.
I will check with them, then. Thank you. Madam President, that's all for me.
Thank, you Madam President. I just want to get back. I am a little confused on this, about the billboards. You are saying that you collected $1,062,000 for billboards. Was that for tax or is that licensing fees included? 157 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06
Now, because of this lawsuit, you cannot collect licensing fees; is that correct?
Because of the lawsuit, they are not paying it. And what was said when Andy Ross was here was that, we will get the money. When the lawsuit is settled, and the terms of settlement are reached, then they will have to pay renewal starting April 1 of every year the license fee.
Is it just the two firms that are in the suit, or is it all billboard companies that are not paying licensing fees?
I am not sure who is paying. I know that there is $35,000 worth of fees have been paid for the licensing of billboards, but we would have to get back to you on the who is doing the paying. 158 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 I don't know if that's in the detail that we receive. I'm not sure if we would know who paid for the licenses. We will get back to you on that
But, as far as you know, the two companies that are involved in the suit are not paying any licensing fees, but they are paying taxes?
I can't answer that. There's roughly -- I know this, there are ten sign companies. And I know that a $1,062,000 has been paid through February in Revenue, to the Revenue Department, but I don't know who has been paying. I don't know where that revenue is being generated from.
We will provide the information. We will ask Revenue to provide the information to Council President Verna.
I would just like 159 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 to piggyback on what the Councilman just asked. I do notice that, in your Operating Budget, $250,000 was earmarked for 2006 for demolition of illegal billboard signs. How much of the $250,000 has been spent to date?
Nothing has been spent. But, pending the lawsuit, we may -- if the lawsuit -- I'm assuming that we will get some relief through the lawsuit, or we'll win somewhat, we will be able to remove -- someone will be removing signs.
Do you know what I can't understand? If they are illegal, they are illegal no matter what the outcome of the suit is. So, why can't we just remove them?
I'm told that we have to hold it -- you know, it's pending legislation. And I really -- I'm not qualified to comment on what we can and can't 160 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 do.
It is a pending lawsuit; it is not pending legislation. And I still --
It is pending litigation, Council President. I really don't know how -- what the answer would be.
That was fast. All right. I am going to throw the responsibility on you. I think we would all like to know, since you are working with the Law Department, if you have $250,000 appropriated for this year for the demolition of the illegal billboards. If they are illegal, our question is, why can't they simply be removed? And we would like that response in writing, please.
Yes. I will have 161 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 that request made to them, Council President.
Thank, you Madam President. Good afternoon. Let me just start first with the testimony. On of your testimony, top portion, More Efficient Work Effort, it says, "Inspectors will be equipped with information in the field that then allows them to do the follow-through required with the paperwork back in the office." Information like what? Could you provide some examples?
We are in the middle -- we call it our LICA project. And we have equipped our housing inspectors and our contractual services inspectors with tablet computers, computers in the field, that are wireless. And they are receiving -- the complaints that we receive from the public, 162 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 they receive that by census tract. An inspector was assigned to a census tract. He or she will receive their workload for the day and/or their reinspections via the internet onto their tablet. And they will make their inspection and enter the information on the tablet, and the violation notice will be processed. Whereas, in the past, they would get their complaint on paper, write it down on paper, and bring it back to the office, and have a -- the clerical staff enter the data into the system. That would take several days. When this gets up and running, and they get used to it, there's -- you know, it is a lot of agony, nice agony. It is a good feeling, because we are seeing it being done. Yesterday we entered 190 cases electronically into the system, versus the old way of having them inputted by a clerical force. And we're getting there. And we see light at the end of the tunnel. And it works. 163 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 There's problems. But, then, if it was perfect, they wouldn't need commissioners.
Real new. Okay. I know, and I am very much aware, of the good work the department has done with regards to having what I call one-stop shopping for child-care providers. What happens when an individual who is a new owner of a multiple dwelling with regards to the same -- the entire process? Is there one place the owner of a new multiple dwelling can go and get everything they need to know about to follow the rules and regulations of the department?
Let's say they are constructing it. They would start with Zoning, and they would have to start there. If they became a new owner, there's -- on the internet, it would tell them the licenses you would need. And also Deputy 164 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 Commissioner Verdi's staff, who handles also the child care, would be very capable of working through landlords with issues, because his staff mostly deals with that --
-- through the licensing and through the inspection. But information, there's information available on the internet, what they would need, the licenses required.
So there is one place you can go on the internet, it is like a cliff note manual, that tells you or instructs you all of what you need to do to be in full compliance?
There is a pamphlet that I believe is on the internet that's a pamphlet, it is called "For Good Housekeeping," which would tell them what you need. We have various zoning pamphlets and various things that are on our website that bring people through it. And, I might add, in several languages. 165 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06
What is done in instances where -- in this body there are changes all the time in the code, for legitimate reasons. What happens with the update of documents like that, so that an individual who comes in after the new code?
Our codes are updated on the website. Other than the state code, which is a copyrighted code. But our regulations in the city, which would be enough for what you are talking about, for people to get through, are updated. Whenever Council changes them, we update them in a short period of time. So what you need to deal, you can either get from us by coming in, but better on the website, in your living room. And you can download it and print it out, and it is all there, walk you through it.
I have learned 166 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 that HOPO, the Homeowners Professional Organization, actually has a binder that walks people through everything they need to do, I mean everything. Does L & I have anything like that for citizens who are starting new businesses and need to be fully up to speed with what they need to know?
I think it's on our website, would give them everything they need to know to start. And the only thing that would scare me about, like, HOPCO's binder, I don't know how current it is. And I don't -- they have never asked us to review it and make sure it is current. Of course, the codes change almost, you know, weekly.
Wouldn't that be in good order, though, to have a sit-down with the leadership of that professional organization, that's in the business of what they do, to ensure that those who they are representing and those whom they are serving 167 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 are well up to speed with city code?
Deputy Commissioner Verdi meets with them on a regular basis. And I am going to ask him to look at their book and share it with Deputy Commissioner Evans to make sure what they are saying is accurate, so we can update it for them. Maybe even steal their ideas.
That would be a good measure On of your testimony, you discussed the department is committed to allowing customers to view plans and decisions made by or through the particular departments. How far along are you in developing what you are calling an inclusive electronic map via the internet?
The electronic mapping for zoning, we are receiving -- in working with the BIA, the Building Industry Association, they have donated Phase I of a zoning mapping project, which will allow anyone on the internet to click onto a property and see the zoning, including the 168 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 overlays. Phase I will get you 80 percent of the way there. Phase II, which will be done within the next year, before the end of the next year, will be funded by the city for about $150,000 -- we're not quite sure of the cost yet -- to make it a hundred percent active; where any professional, anybody sitting there, any homeowner on the internet, could click onto the property and know the zoning classification and all the overlays.
Now, that's wonderful, and that's important. But we know with citizens, it is education, education, education. What steps are taken to help citizens understand that that service, which is good and valuable and important, is even available for them?
When it goes live, I will promise that we will put out a very -- Council will be informed and demonstrated and trained on how to use it. And the citizens, we will put press releases out, and there will be a how-to on 169 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 the site as to how it use it. It will be well publicized. And the industry that will use it, they are waiting for it. They can't wait. And they know it will be there. And it will relieve a lot of the pressure on L & I staff, where people have to come to us to ask what they can find out on the map, which will free up a lot of our plans review people to do the actual review and approvals or disapprovals, so we can move the process along. Right now our staff has to get up and go to the back and read a map -- it is colored in by our staff -- versus just sitting at their desk and seeing what the overlay is and all the other parts of the zoning requirement for that parcel. It will be a huge boost in our productivity.
I know for sure successful developers will know that. Heads of CDCs can benefit from that kind of information, as well. 170 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06
Absolutely. Everybody will. The Managing Director has made it a commitment that we will get this done.
On your testimony, you talk about a guide Doing Business With the City.
Yes. Could you just provide a copy of that to the Chair?
And then on you discuss -- in fact, it has been raised already -- the reconfiguration of the public area in the concourse. What has prompted this new development? What was the spark?
The bright idea I had when I asked Deputy Commissioner Evans to be a Deputy Commissioner. And she worked down there her whole adult life and asked if that could be one of 171 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 the priorities we undertake. And then I went to -- both of us went to the Managing Director. And he agrees completely that we have to show our face to the best we can to the public and organize the concourse in a way where people -- it is a more pleasant experience than it is now.
Sure. So to that end, and for what it is worth, it might be valuable to have a conversation with Myrtle Levitz, as well, whose organization is in the business of increasing tourism. Separate from the Philadelphia Visitors' and Convention Bureau, she is in the business of just boosting tourism for the city, and that type of information is helpful to her. Once you come up with the master plan, if you will, it is helpful to her, the actual publications that they put out on a regular basis.
I will ask Ms. Evans to undertake that. That's a great idea. Thank you. 172 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06
In your measurements, there are two line items that stand out to me, the clean seal and lots treated. And the numbers in 2003 were 800, but the target for FY '07 is 180. Help me understand that huge difference. What has happened?
In '03, the department was actually doing lot cleaning as one of the only forces doing it. Under the NTI program, the NTI lot cleaning program, under the Managing Director's guidance, treats the lots. The lots that L & I treats -- if we are on a block cleaning and sealing a property, which is still our responsibility, and there is a lot next-door or on the block, we will clean that, also. On the theory that, you know, people don't realize there is two programs. And instead of having the NTI portion come and clean that lot, we will treat it because we are there. So that's the lots that -- that's 173 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 why the difference between '03 and now, is because there is different people doing it.
I see. What are your priorities for the next months, given what you have mentioned 7 already with regards to the automation website 8 efforts? And you now mentioned the 9 reconfiguration of the public access area of 10 the concourse. 11 What are the 1, 2, and 3 priorities 12 of L & I in the next 12 months?
To improve the -- to continue to improve our LICA project.
To improve and increase the availability of online services that we offer for our computerization project; to be able to come back next year and testify that all eight-sheet signs have been removed; and public safety, to work with the Fire Department and staff to have a safer Philadelphia.
Talk about 174 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 that. You said to work with the Fire Department. What triggers the need to do that in a strategic kind of way?
We have been working with the Fire Department for the last two or three years, where we were experiencing several fires in homeless shelters. We put together a task force to check the zoning folders. Under the direction of the MDO, Fire, L & I have been going out making an inspection of all the shelters to make sure that the people living there are safe and to get corrections made that need to be done. In the prior year, we did all the senior citizen homes in Philadelphia, with the Fire Department, L & I task force.
As a result of that focus, has there been an impact that you can see?
Yes. Yes. The last fire -- which, you never want to have a fire. But, when you do, you want the alarm systems 175 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 to be working. The alarm system worked, and everybody got out safely. That's how, you know, we measure successes. Our job is to make sure the alarms work so people get out in a safe manner, and I think that we have been successful in that. And we will strive to make that, probably, our number one priority. Public safety is always foremost. You go to bed at night thinking, have you done everything you can to make sure people are safe, and that's a good feeling.
With the priority around the automation piece, somewhere in your testimony I read that L & I can break the trend of -- do you believe it can break the trend of 50 percent satisfaction rate amongst customers, given the fact that you have now set the new automation effort as a priority for the coming year?
I happen to believe that if L & I, because we are an enforcement agency, is more than 50/50, then something might be wrong. 176 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 If 85 percent of people like what we are doing, because we are regulating -- don't forget, we write violations. When it is 50/50, we are in a good place. I really believe it needs to be there. We are like a referee. You can only please one team at a time, not both. And if we're 50/50, we're in a very good place. That's where we should be.
I would agree with that with this one footnote, having served some time on the Tax Review Board, and heard how citizens come there anguished because, in their eyes, they haven't been treated fairly, purely from a notification standpoint. So I would agree with that, only to the extent that notifying citizens in a way that's whatever you define it to be is handled with the level of integrity.
That's what the LICA project hopefully will do for us, it will make us more efficient. We have seen the beginning of it, 177 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 now we just have to complete it through to the end. And it will make us more efficient and enable the inspectors to concentrate on the public safety aspects of their duties.
Thank you for your testimony. Thank you, Madam President.
Thank you, Madam President. Commissioner, this thing with the billboards just isn't going to go away easily. And I don't mean to stay on this thing. But I understand from conversations -- I checked my notes from the last time we discussed this, and now you are telling us about the lawsuit. Isn't there normally, when there is a lawsuit or a court order, there is -- what you mentioned before on the testimony was that you used the word "stay of enforcement." I don't believe that any stay of enforcement is 178 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 associated with this court or this legal challenge to the licensing of billboards.
I believe the -- I don't know that I used that term. If I did, I wasn't speaking from a standpoint where I have been told it has been a stay. And that's a question that, really, the Law Department needs to answer for me. I can't answer it.
It is kind of comical that we would allow these organizations to stop paying their licensing fees, if we don't know whether or not there has been a stay. I mean, I would like to have a business where I could just stop paying fees, licensing fees.
We had to promulgate regulations. And we just had them through Public Property announced for the 30-day period. And renewal period for the license fee is April of every year now. That was not defined in the ordinance that was passed. And we, at the suggestion of the Law 179 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 Department, had that done. So now, with April 1 being the date that they are due, then the enforcement process could begin. And at that point we would seek the advice of the Law Department. And when you bring in the lawsuits and the federal and the State Courts, I'm not of the ability to answer as to what we can do. I really don't know how to answer that.
All right. Well, fair enough. Let's switch gears, since the Streets Department is going to follow. And, in all fairness, I did tell you that I wasn't going to dig in too hard on this dumpster thing today. But, now, I really just want to -- I don't want to talk about the successes or the failures. But I just would like you or one of your associates, the legislation that was passed here in Council to license dumpsters and dumpster companies in the City of Philadelphia. As you know, Councilwoman Blackwell 180 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 asked a question about how long a dumpster can sit in the right-of-way. What urged me to address this issue was the fact that you would be on an innercity street, or on a Center City street, and you would wonder why there was a backup of traffic. In the operating lane was a dumpster. No reflective devices, nothing. We got the legislation through. Now I'm a bit confused. There are some issues with the lack of response of owners, the dumpster companies. But could you take a minute and explain, so my colleagues will understand and I will understand, what exactly the requirement is of dumpster companies. You indicated to Councilwoman Blackwell that it wasn't an L & I issue, that it was a Streets Department issue. What does L & I do? What does the Streets Department do? And why aren't we a little further ahead here than we should be?
We license dumpsters on private property, the dumpsters from trash. 181 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 The construction dumpsters that are on the street during a project are approved by the Streets Department, and L & I does not in any way license them.
So the dumpster legislation, L & I -- don't the companies have to come to you to get the license?
Dominic Verdi, Deputy Commissioner, Licenses and Inspections. What we do is license the company to have the dumpsters. The approval on the location, and as far as the enforcement, is either through Streets Department or Police Department, I'm not sure which.
I don't have the ordinance in front of me. What our discussion was earlier, that we do have approximately 116 companies, 8 of which are now licensed. And the letters have gone out. We gave them a substantial amount of time to comply. And violations are going to follow 182 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 within the next two weeks.
Who is doing that, L & I or -- in other words, are you going to cite them for their lack of response to the ordinance? But whose job is it, who should be out there now? Should it be the Streets Department out there now, when there is a dumpster that is not appropriately licensed? What should be happening today of this date by the Streets Department or L & I?
Again, our job is to license the company. The issue with whether or not the dumpster is on the street in the right location or approved for that location would be the Streets Department.
Okay. Well, the Streets Department is next. So they are, obviously, going to, hopefully, be prepared to answer the question. That we only have 8 or 10 of the 116 businesses that do business in the city that have complied with the legislation. They are 183 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 still dropping their cans on the city streets. And I want to hear from the Streets Department. You apparently have done your part. But you are going to make sure that the rest of these companies realize that they need to conform with the L & I piece of this.
And the enforcement side is the Streets Department. And I want to hear from the Commissioner what the Streets Department is doing about the ordinance that requires the dumpster companies to be licensed; and, if they are not, what they are doing about it. Thank you. Thank you, Madam President.
You are welcome. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Blackwell.
Thank you, Madam President. Certainly I wanted to say thank you to this department. We called -- there are a 184 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 myriad of things and issues that we call on every day, and they are always responsive. And I wanted to say thank you.
Are there any other questions or comments? None. Thank you all very much.
If you would remain, please, because our next -- MR. McPHERSON: Board of L & I Review.
Are you going to testify? Who is testifying? Please identify yourself for the record and proceed with your testimony.
Good afternoon. My name is Fran Burns. I am Deputy Commissioner of Administration. The Board of Licenses and Inspections Review is requesting a total Fiscal Year 2007 budget of $219,278 in the 185 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 city's General Fund. The General Fund budget represents an increase of $15,257 from Fiscal Year '06 estimated obligations. The Fiscal Year '07 request will fund three full0time General Fund positions, comparable to the Fiscal Year '06 authorized General Fund position level. I will be happy to answer any questions you have at this time.
Thank you. I don't have any questions. Members of the committee have any questions? Next. MR. McPHERSON: Board of Building Standards.
Good afternoon. Again, my name is Fran Burns, Deputy Commissioner for Administration. The Board of Building Standards is requesting a total Fiscal Year 2007 budget of $109,552 in the city's General Fund. The General Fund budget represents a decrease of $6,552 from Fiscal Year 2006 estimated 186 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 obligations. The Fiscal Year 2007 request will fund two full0time General Fund positions, comparable to the Fiscal Year 2006 authorized General Fund position level. Again, I will be happy to answer any questions that you may have.
Thank you. Are there any questions from members of the committee? MR. McPHERSON: Zoning Board of adjustments.
Lastly, again, my name is Fran Burns, Deputy Commissioner for Administration. The Zoning Board of Adjustment is requesting a total Fiscal Year 2007 budget of $449,252 in the city's General Fund. The General Fund budget represents an increase of $11,555 from Fiscal Year 2006 estimated obligations. The Fiscal Year 2007 request will fund five full-time General Fund positions, comparable to the Fiscal Year 2006 authorized 187 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 General Fund position level. I will be happy to answer any questions you may have.
Thank you. Any questions from members of the committee? That's unusual. Job well done.
Thank you. MR. McPHERSON: The next department is the Streets Department.
Good afternoon. Thank you for your patience. Please identify yourself, for the record, proceed with your testimony. Commissioner, we do have copies of your written testimony. If you would be kind enough, I would ask you to abbreviate them. The stenographer will be given a copy, and she will transcribe them in full. Thank you.
Thank you. Good afternoon, Council President Verna and members of City Council. I am Clarena Tolson, Commissioner of the Streets Department, and I am here today to present testimony on behalf of the Department's proposed 2007 Operating 188 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 Budget. We request a General Fund appropriation of $128 million and an All Funds appropriation of $161 million. Our proposed budget reflects a net General Fund increase of $4.7 million from 2006 estimated obligations. This consists primarily of a $3.1 million increase in personal services, a $2.1 increase in purchase services, and a decrease of $660,000 in equipment. For sanitation, the FY 2007 budget request is $106 million for all funds. This includes $95 million in General Fund. This also reflects an increase in the purchase of services for disposal contracts. Sanitation will continue to provide a variety of programs designed to collect and dispose of trash, as well as recyclables, from the waste stream. For our transportation services, the Highway Engineering Bureau of Survey and Designs, Traffic, and Streetlighting Units provide the department's transportation 189 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 services. The FY 2007 budget request for the transportation group is $49 million for all funds, with $27 million in General Fund allocations. The employees of the Streets Department, I would like to say in conclusion, continue to work diligently in the delivery of our services to our citizens and neighborhoods and to improve the quality of life in our city by providing clean and safe streets. Thank you very much.
Thank you, Commissioner. On of your detail, you are reflecting a $900,000 increase in Class 100 for Hot in Place. Can you tell us what this is for?
Yes. The Hot in Place program is one for resurfacing of our city streets. This is a system that we tested previously, and it worked quite successfully where we applied it appropriately. And in this coming year we want to do 500,000 square yards of street resurfacing 190 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 through the Hot in Place system. It is a system that provides a great deal of convenience for our citizens. It allows for the milling process and the resurfacing process to happen all at one time, versus being spanned over two, four, five weeks of time. It provides a road surface that is quite spectacular and is equivalent to our traditional resurfacing. And, additionally, it allows us to save approximately percent 13 of the cost. 14
If my memory 15 serves me correctly, I believe, when this was 16 last tried, they were not able to get around 17 the manhole covers and the corners. 18 How has that changed? 19
The system that we are 20 talking about using does allow us to go around 21 manhole covers, utility covers. It doesn't 22 require the disruption, which we need right 23 now, for the utilities to come in and raise 24 the utility covers. 25 Instead, there is a system within 191 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 the -- it is called a hip train that allows for alignment of the boxes. It is a very fast, swift process. There are systems that can only be used on major thorofares, roadways where there are not utility covers. The one that we are talking about here, though, to use would not have that as an impediment.
Are we going to have to purchase that type of equipment?
No, we will not be purchasing the equipment. It will be a lease arrangement with the -- a partnership, of sorts, with the firm to do this. So we will have our employees, as well, our employees using someone else's equipment.
And the $900,000, that's an increase in Class 100, is that for --
The personnel that will support this. The personnel, the staffing within the Streets Department to support this.
So would they be 192 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 additional personnel?
And how many additional personnel would we be getting for the $900,000 increase?
It is a fairly large piece of equipment. It can only be used on certain type streets, very broad and wide streets. It was used on Pattison Avenue several years ago. You need a street where it can accommodate a long piece of equipment, and you want to take a long run. So when we did Pattison Avenue, I 193 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 will say, from 21st Street through 13th Street, something like that, a long stretch of road, also very wide, to accommodate the large train. It would not be suitable for some of our smaller residential streets. It would not fit.
So we have one train. And how many employees would operate it?
We are going to require that -- the whole team to do that. Because --
It is a fairly large train. If you could imagine, on the front end it is tearing up the street; milling, as we would call it. And on the back end, it is relaying the material. So by the time that the train goes by -- it is a very long train. By the time that the train goes by, the entire street is done. But there are processes that are 194 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 happening in the interim, whether it be the removal of materials, the melting or heating of the asphalt, application, and then making sure that the final product is appropriate.
So they would not be able to use this on smaller streets, the secondary streets; is that what you are saying?
No, the smaller streets it would not fit. It would be a wonderful thing if it could, but it is too large for that.
On of your testimony, you mention refuse collection services at condominiums. Can you tell us the procedure as to how these properties apply for the services?
Yes. The condominium process is, we started with a field audit to confirm addresses that we receive from the Board of Revision of Taxes. After firming up those lists -- and I would say that there was some points that need to be clarified, addresses that were 195 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 inaccurate or locations that needed to be input into the system -- we prepared information packets and application forms for the property owners or the management firms. We also completed site visits to each of the facilities to determine what type of services we thought they might need; as well, developed collection agreements and provided mailings to all of the 178 firms or condominiums that did not have a management firm. And we have been collecting those collection agreements for the last several months.
On of your testimony, you show that you will eliminate your ditch restoration backlog. Can you state for the record how you will accomplish this?
Yes. We are quite excited about an initiative that is called Operation Smooth Streets. Through this initiative, we will be addressing our pothole and ditch problem that we have in the city. 196 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 And I say, "problem," in that, because of the weather that we experience here, our severe winters, and then the spring, we have road deterioration from unplanned work through potholes and also planned work through the ditches. The ditches, for the most part, cannot be addressed during the wintertime because of the extreme cold, and our materials for reconstruction would not be applied properly if used during that time. So we will be beginning this April launching Operation Smooth Streets, with our focus on reducing the ditch restoration time from over 90 days to 30 days. We are working with not only city employees, but also our utilities, our right-of-way users, who create ditches, as well. And we have developed protocols that will allow for the ditches to be restored in a timely manner; whether it be through our tracking, our communication or coordinating with our other users and the city agencies. 197 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 Within our budget, we have an investment of personnel and equipment to support that effort. It will take us several months to catch up on our backlog. And, after that, probably beginning in July, we will be in the position that we can maintain our 30-day standard.
On of the city's Quarterly City Manager's Report, it states that the sanitation division, the average for employees' sick leave usage is 30 days. Would you say this is an accurate figure? And, if so, what measures are being taken to reduce it?
Okay. I think that 198 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 that, if I am reading this properly, it says, "annualized leave days." So that would be all leave?
Okay. Yes, I see. It is sick leave usage, 30 days in sanitation. Within that, it includes some of our long-term sick. Meaning, we have over 50 employees who have been out sick over a collective 1,200 days. Within sanitation, let's say you and I may come to work with a sprained ankle. Within sanitation, a sprained ankle means you cannot work. A cold or the flu, you do not come into work. But, more importantly, 50 people accounting for over a thousand days, I think over 1,200 days, for a long-term sick, could be a broken arm, a broken leg, things like that, which are included in this calculation. We have done calculations that exclude some of our long-term sick, and this number comes down dramatically. The 30 comes 199 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 down dramatically.
I have my own question on that. But, Councilman Rizzo, did you want to be recognized?
Thank you, Madam President. Commissioner, good afternoon, and your staff. First of all, thank you for your department's help in the legislation that passed here in Council in reference to dumpsters that are placed upon the right-of-way. So I kind of set you up earlier with L & I to be prepared for this question. I am really disappointed that, of the 116 vendors that do business in the City of Philadelphia, that only 8 have come aboard and got the required licenses from L & I. Well, first of all, could you explain to me, are you up to speed to start 200 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 doing what I believe is Streets Department's responsibility for the enforcement of lack of compliance?
Please explain -- I am sorry. Please explain what you believe the Streets Department responsibility is to assure that the legislation that passed unanimously here in this body is being implemented and enforced.
Yes. It is the Streets Department's responsibility to enforce the requirements with regard to dumpsters and dumpster placement, dumpster maintenance. To that end, we have issued several thousand violations last year. Those violations included dumpster maintenance problems; as well as, we began just this year with the permit, having the proper permit. So we have been ramping up, after our discussions some months ago on the permit, we have been ramping up that effort and had numerous dialogues, meetings with the vendor 201 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 association, to make it clear that this is coming, and now it is here. We had some debates and some concern with them about some of the requirements, but that has not stopped us from moving ahead. And they are continuing to wish to work with us to reconcile some of the differences. They initially expressed some concern about, say, the tarping. We have said that's required. It is a safety issue, it is required. They have expressed some concern about the cleanliness issue, the graffiti and things like that. For us, again, that is a required. We don't believe that it is appropriate to have large boxes on the street, which, basically, would be graffiti billboards. And we have said to the vendors that it is required. I know that the Law Department is working with one vendor right now with regard to the number of tickets that they have 202 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 gotten, because we have started taking a very heavy hand with this over the last year.
Commissioner, can I just stop you for one second. I am not talking about private dumpsters now. I am talking about the legislation that was passed regulating dumpsters in the right-of-way.
My data, unfortunately, doesn't segregate; it talks about dumpsters in terms of the tickets.
But my legislation is the most recent, the one that passed late last year.
And I waited until the beginning of the new licensing cycle patiently for it to be implemented and also to be enforced. So I just want to make sure. Now you are telling me you have some 203 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 issues where you can't separate them. And I think you need to do that, be able to identify the construction dumpsters that are on the right-of-way. I am talking about in Center City, where a vendor drops a dumpster in the operating lane on Spruce, Pine Street, no 9 reflective devices on it, just a very unsafe condition. That's what got my attention early on. And I recollect that there was a serious issue where someone crashed into one of these dumpsters and was seriously injured. So what I need to hear from you is, now that we have an ordinance to give you the ability -- I don't think there really should be a whole lot of debate. The ordinance is the ordinance. Okay? It is very clear. Your department, along with L & I, worked on a bill that was going to give you the ability to do something about these dumpsters that are just being dropped all over the place and creating an unsightly and a dangerous condition for many, many months. 204 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 Earlier Councilwoman Blackwell asked a question. She may be here, but I want to follow up. Oh, there she is. Do you mind if I ask?
If a contractor -- I go occasionally for dinner over at the Vesper Club on Sydenham Street. And I notice there have been dumpsters sitting there in that street for six, eight months. I don't know even know if they are still there. How long can a person put a dumpster outside of their property? I mean, isn't there a period of time where -- do they get a permit? Part of the legislation, I think, requires that. How long can they just put a dumpster there? This one here has been like a permanent fixture for a year.
A construction dumpster can be placed for a maximum of one year for their permit.
One year. That's 205 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 assuming that work is going on for one year. If it is a location where the work is not going on, they should not have a dumpster that's allowed to sit past that. That is a problem.
So if a person wants to take an operating lane like on Pine or Spruce Street, I mean, they just can't come in and say, I want to dump a dumpster in front of a building and tie up an operating lane, without some scrutiny; isn't that correct? Isn't the Police Department part of it? How can you just take a lane?
With the construction, it does become challenging. As part of the process, we do have reviews within the right-of-way group. And there is some consultation and advice to the Police Department. We try to make sure that they are in legitimate locations, that they are at locations that only abut -- where possible, only abut the property that is being developed or worked on. Sometimes that's not possible. 206 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 It is a big concern for us. And, to some extent, we can work closer with the Council people to advise them of things that are happening in their districts. I think some of that advice has gone out, but maybe we should do a little bit more.
So we have an ordinance. L & I needs to do what they need to do to get the rest of them licensed, and you need to start an active enforcement program on the right-of-way, the construction dumpsters that are in the right-of-way. Fair enough?
The last question. Last budget hearing, I forget which Council member brought up the fact that there are trash receptacles missing in action. And I have seen your people out placing them. And I like the fact that they have the cable, and they have them around a light post so somebody doesn't take it home to a souvenir, or whatever, or move it to another location. But, there are still many missing. 207 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 Now, I sent you an e-mail back on the 15th of February telling you about the one that was missing in front of the MSB Building in the mid block. And you indicated that one of your staff, Mr. Mercer, would have it there that week. It is still not there. I'm not really concerned about that one. But, from what I am hearing from people, that around areas like convenience stores -- and I know they are supposed to have their own receptacle, but a person doesn't stand outside a convenience store and drink all of their coffee. Have you reduced the number of trash receptacles? And are the ones that are missing being replaced, or have you decided not to put them out there? Because, Commissioner, I think most people will put trash in a receptacle, if there is one available. And if we are cutting back on them for budgetary reasons or some other reason, I would like to know.
Yes. We have actually 208 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 increased our number of baskets. I remember ancient history, when I started, we did some survey work, and we had probably under 200 baskets in Center City. And probably as many more outside of Center City, the entire rest of the city. We now have over 1,800 baskets around the city. We have removed this year 50 of them. That's always done at the request of the adjacent property owner. That's the only time that we will take one out. Because we usually place them because we think that we need it. However, if the adjacent property owner makes a request to have the can moved, then we will remove those. But, we don't like to remove them.
What Commissioner in the MSB asked for the can to be removed in the mid block?
I don't know that. 209 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06
That one is gone. And, according to your e-mail, it was supposed to be put back, and it never was.
I will check. That went up to the staff person not having done their work, as opposed to a desire not having the can. That's an important location for us, and we would need to have that location filled with a can. But I am just suggesting that, out of the 1,800, the 50 that we have removed were at the request of the adjacent property owner.
You are the Streets Department. If a person complains, I mean, that easily you will just take a container away, because somebody complains?
Unfortunately, because of the large number of cans that we have around the city, we have another problem that goes along with trash cans, and that is that trash cans become magnets for trash. And particularly where we have residential areas that are nearby, whether 210 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 they be apartments or houses, people know that the can is going to get serviced at a frequency that is greater than trash collection. And when that happens, they bring their trash out regularly to the can. And sometimes the adjacent property owner is then left with illegal dumping on their property quite regularly, and becomes annoyed with it. And I think that any of us in the same position would probably understand. You know, you want to be community-minded, but at some point when you have vermin and grease and other things on your property because your neighbors are putting their trash out, and sometimes it is not when the trash is being collected, when they have issues and concerns with that, we usually relent after some time and remove the can.
Thank you, Commissioner. Madam President, I think my time is up, and I will come around again. But my next round I want to talk about the relationship 211 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 between PennDOT and the Streets Department. Thanks.
Thank you, Madam President. Good afternoon, everyone. Top part of of your testimony, you mention that there are currently six properties that have signed up for the curbside collection services. The remaining five locations require dumpster service. Could you simply provide to the Chair who they are, who those properties are?
Yes, provide it to the Chair. Considerable amount of your testimony is given to recycling. And that 212 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 continues to be one of my favorite topics, as well, so I have a number of questions around recycling. First tell me, tell us, how many officers are in the SWEEP program, how often they patrol, and -- period. Let's start there.
There are five officers who are dedicated to recycling in the SWEEP program.
Is that a relatively new development, or has it always been the case?
Most of us are familiar with the city comptroller's report of May 27, 2005, where a number of findings, I guess, would be a fair way to characterize this, findings regarding where our city is and where our city could be with regards to recycling. So I would like to walk through a few of those findings. One of the key findings in that report is the availability of what they call 213 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 single-stream material processing technology, and the opportunity it presents to our city to expand recycling in a significant way. It appears that, based on the city comptroller's findings, that would be at no 7 added cost to the city. And your testimony indicates that there has been RFP processing of recyclables contract, which is set to begin on July 1. Could you please provide to the Chair who those lists of respondents are?
As soon as the responses come in, we will gladly provide that. We recently released the information requesting the information. We have not gotten the information back as yet. But our expectation is that we will be in a good position to move ahead, or hopeful that we are be in a good position, with the pricing to move ahead beginning July.
And when you say, "recently," that means what the last week, the last month? 214 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06
No; no. That was -- we had our prebid meeting on March 7, and five vendors showed up.
Okay. Very recent. Okay. You said five vendors showed up?
Are you at liberty to say if any of them were from Philadelphia?
There is a mild bias in this body to provide opportunity first to those who live in the County of Philadelphia. The good news is that the department has a newly -- appointed a recycling coordinator. What considerations have been discussed or are anticipated that will move the department to be in better compliance with the city ordinance around recycling?
We have some -- we are 215 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 excited about some opportunities that we believe are going to present themselves quite soon. First you mentioned the single stream. We pilot the single-stream program beginning in the fall of 2004 to about 5,600 households. From that piloting, we saw that there was increase in the average set-out from the households in that area. So, we were quite pleased with those results. Which is why we have taken the time to do further analysis to determine what the opportunities may be with the single-stream program. Additionally, we believe that we have positioned ourselves such that, when the pricing comes in -- we expect it to come in, I guess, beginning of May for single stream? When the pricing comes in the beginning of May, that we have positioned ourselves such that we can purchase the equipment that will be required to go along with single stream. 216 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 That was one of the issues we had with the comptroller's report, that it did not acknowledge that you have -- a different type of requirement was required, equipment that we did not have. And we will be purchasing the compactors. We have already begun the purchase of compactors that can support that system. And we believe, with the expertise that our new recycling coordinator, who is in the audience today -- she can stand up, if she would like -- her name is Joan Higgins, from Glendale. She is here. Certainly she is not going to be here to testify, she has only been here a couple of days. But she brings with her a wealth of knowledge about the start-up of the recycling business and also the maintenance of it from her community. So, we are excited about our participation in our program. Additionally, we have a pretty neat education campaign that's kicking off in about two weeks, maintaining our Know What and Know 217 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 How System of information with regard to recycling. We are continuing to encourage residents to understand what the requirements are. That we certainly believe that many do understand, but we want to reinforce what is required of them in order to have a successful recycling program.
Given that all citizens are bombarded with information and every department wants their issue to get through and resinate, what does that campaign entail? What partners are in place to really make sure that the goals of the campaign resinate?
Yes. I would like to mention that Carlton Williams, who was our recycling coordinator in the interim, while we were without one within our department, developed in a great way the educational campaign working with our contractor. And one of the components of that is a door-to-door notion, where he has street 218 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 teams that will be knocking on doors encouraging people to get out and recycle. And these street teams will be people who come from the community. So that it is not a stranger from another end of town telling you what you need to do in your community, but somebody who is from the community that's been incorporated into the education program. And we think that's going to be a very successful element in the end.
So they will report to the recycling coordinator or to the six professionals that you talked about or to Mr. Carlton? Who will they report to?
Carlton Williams only managed that position in the interim. We now have Joan Higgins here. So, she will be managing the recycling program in total.
Okay. On of your testimony, some numbers are discussed that seem to focus on, based on -- are those numbers based only on talking with residents in Chestnut Hill and East Oak Lane? 219 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 Let me turn to it real quick. The key performance measurements, it speaks to the percent of recycling collected on time and the citizen survey, which numbers are quite impressive. So my question, are these targeted neighborhoods, or just Chestnut Hill and East Oak Lane? I need to get a handle on what the universe was.
Let me try to catch up with you, Councilwoman. I don't think my is the same as yours.
And they are great grades in the area of percent of recycling collected on time. And further down, second from the bottom, the citizen survey, which speaks to the percent satisfied with recycling collection. So my question is, what 220 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 neighborhoods does that information come from?
I am sorry it took so long to catch up with you. I was looking on the wrong page. Both of those categories are related to citywide information. They are not targeted to any community or any pilot area. So citizen satisfaction for in '05 at 85 percent is the citywide average, using whatever...
So the good news is, where recycling exists, the citizen satisfaction is great. But the bad news, as best I can determine -- and, really, using the comptroller's report as one, just one measuring stick -- is that we are not at a place where we could be with regards to recycling. Would you agree with that assessment?
The 85 percent is 221 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 citywide, and recycling is available citywide. The comptroller's report, I think, tries to address opportunities to improve the system. There were some assumptions that were erroneous in that report with regard to recovery and the revenue rates and the absence of the costs to raise the additional revenue. But what the intent is, to try to look at ways to improve it and try to get even higher diversion than what we have right now. And our diversion is very low, so we need to get it higher.
So you would disagree with the conclusion that 13 out of the provisions -- the recycling program is 18 out of compliance on 13 out of the 18 provisions? You would disagree with that conclusion?
Councilwoman, may I 222 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 look into that? I don't have that to respond properly.
A couple of more questions on recycling. The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection has a lot of money, millions of dollars, available for these types of programs. Does our city currently take advantage of or access, for example, the Waste Management Planning Grant or the County Recycling Coordinator Grant or Recycling Performance Grants currently administered by the Commonwealth?
Yes, indeed. In fact, in Fiscal '06, I believe that we have a grant budget of about $5 million.
My final, I guess it would be, statement on recycling is that, a number of us share that interest here. I will be calling for hearings on 223 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 where we are with recycling, where we want to go, what we can do better. And I will be introducing a resolution asking -- making that request to the President tomorrow, with hopes that we will have hearings some time in the fall, and then some time thereafter look to see how we can maximize the findings in the report that you believe are fairly attributed. And then, ultimately, a plan that moves us to a different and better place when it comes to recycling. So I wanted to put you on notice that that is forthcoming, where I will be introducing that tomorrow.
We are taking turns, so I will come back around and talk about school traffic lights. Thank you, Madam President.
Thank you. Good afternoon, Commissioner, Deputy 224 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 Commissioner, and all. Albeit Councilman Rizzo was asking some questions, I was distracted in another area. And I wanted to ask about dumpsters. My staff gave me a complaint about a dumpster that's been in front of a property that's facing our Malcolm X Park, the park that I love so much in my area, that's been there for a year and a half. They say that the owner has a proper permit, it is covered with graffiti. And they want to know, if it has a permit, how many renewals can they get? And if there is something we can do or should do or if I should introduce legislation, or just what can be done.
If they are not doing construction/renovation work at that site, and it is just a dumpster that's laying, we can certainly work to address the business owner to make sure that they remove the dumpster. If they are just slow in doing their work, we will have to start to look at limiting their time lines, such that they will 225 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 lose their permit. Because we can revoke a permit, as well.
Can an individual get one indefinitely, if they are working, or does it last a year? Or, what are the rules for a dumpster?
It can last up to a year, so a person can reapply and get another one. However, if you say that it is a year and a half, and it is an eyesore, it sounds as if -- and if it is not moving, it is always the same dumpster there, it sounds like it may just be abandoned and left behind.
Thank you. I will submit the address to Carlton, your Deputy Commissioner, Carlton Williams. Thank you very much, Madam President.
You are welcome. The Chair recognizes Councilman Clarke.
Thank you, Madam President. I just wanted to check with your 226 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 staff. It eliminated one of my questions.
Commissioner, the SWEEP division is in your shop; am I correct?
Are they the primary or the only responsible group that deals with refuse on sidewalks?
Is it only during trash days? Tell me what their responsibility is.
They are responsible for enforcing the Sanitation Code. So it may be the dumpsters that we were talking about earlier, the trash dumpsters; it could be household trash and debris; litter that may be on the sidewalks. All those come under the purview of SWEEP.
Residential and commercial. 227 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 Now, they are not the only entity that can enforce those things; but they are the primary group within sanitation for the Sanitation Code. We also have inspectors that can enforce other things with regard to the right-of-way.
From within our highways group that deal with some of the other right-of-way issues; such as, a restaurant with outdoor furniture.
How many officers do you have to deal with that citywide?
And are they based on what, sanitation highway districts?
They move around the entire city. They work on routes, and they 228 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 are moving every day.
Are they complaint-driven, or do they have a systematic approach to monitoring the city?
It is both. They have routes that are set so we know where they are going to be tomorrow, what section of the city, where they are going to be working; and they also are complaint-driven. So that if someone has a problem or concern, they call that in, and officer can go and address that problem.
In the newer part of my district, because I now represent Fishtown and parts of Kensington, that is an area where there used to be, or still are, in some instances, a substantial amount of commercial properties, factories, old industrial facilities. And in most cases where there is vacancies associated with the operation of the building, it is no longer in operation, and a lot of cases where they are actually still operable, there doesn't seem to be any 229 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 willingness on the behalf of the property owner to sweep their sidewalks or to maintain their sidewalks in any reasonable way. That part of the area is a pretty well-knit residential community, an older community, and people are trying to take care of their sidewalks. But because of the issue with respect to the commercial properties and the debris, particularly this season, we had a lot of wind, it has just blown all over the place. But, in some instances, there are actually commercial properties that have had debris on their sidewalks so long that it has actually stabilized, so it can't even be blown by the wind. Who handles that part of the area? Because it is, like, quite ridiculous.
That would be SWEEP. SWEEP would be the perfect group to be contacted. And the way that would work, citizens would call in to our customer service line, they don't need to know all the numbers 230 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 within the department, call in to our customer service line at 686-5560, complain that they have a neighbor or a problem location, where are people are not sweeping their sidewalks. And, from that, we would have SWEEP go out to make contact with the property owners and see what they could do to address -- educate and address that location.
Okay. Well, I am kind of bringing it to your attention today.
-- have people look over there and find out why people don't feel the need?
We have done that on behalf of other Council people. We will gladly do that.
And I know Councilwoman Reynolds Brown and Councilman 231 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 Rizzo were talking about the recycling program. Early on in the initial pilot program, there were certain incentives provided for participation. And that was, actually, offered in exchange for me allowing my trash date to be eliminated. I didn't participate in that, but my trash date was taken anyway. So, in retrospect, I might as well have taken the gifts; right? Is that program still in place in any way, shape, or form, or is it just a pilot program to get people to engage, or is that an ongoing program where people in the geographical area agree to participate in an aggressive way in a program for recycling? Because I get asked this, that's why I am bringing this up. People want to know can they get the IKEA gift certificates. And I guess that happened as a result of the new IKEA being built on Delaware Avenue. Everybody wants to go to IKEA now. Are we still doing that? 232 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06
Yes. The one that you initially mentioned was one where the department was developing its own system. But, we did not implement one. And, in fact, we instead partnered with an organization called Recycle Bank. And we have been working with them in about 2,500 households in the Northwest section of the city. We applied their incentive program on top of our single-stream pilot program in Chestnut Hill and West Oak Lane. That pilot continues.
So where would we call? If an area is interested in participating, where would they call?
They can certainly contact our offices. It is duly noted that, given we had discussions about it previously, that you are interested in it. We are presently in discussions with them, talking about the possibility of expanding the pilot and testing it. There are some concerns because 233 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 presently it is an inefficient system and it has some increased costs to it. But we are working with the vendor, because they have some interest in ensuring that the city is risk-free, in a sense. And we are trying to negotiate that with them now. So that, if we were to engage in an extended pilot, that it would be without expense or risk to the city.
Commissioner, I want to thank you for agreeing to participate and work with us on a large-scale cleanup program. It is really, really needed out there. The debris is just getting out of control. So I want to thank you for agreeing to participate in that major cleanup.
You are welcome. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Miller.
Thank you. 234 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 Thank you, Madam President. Good afternoon, Streets Department. I just want to start off by thanking you for all your help in helping me assist my constituents. I need to just follow up on a question. And I wasn't listening, and I know you answered it just a few minutes ago. But, what is the status of expanding the recycling incentive program? Because you know that I know that in Chestnut Hill it has been very successful. And, in fact, some of the residents where it is not included in Chestnut Hill are calling for it. But, other people really want this. So what is the -- it has been a pilot for how long?
And we are talking about expanding it further as a pilot. When does the pilot end?
We have had very good results with the pilot program, to the extent that we have seen recycling tonnage as a net, 235 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 as a macro system, increase in the pilot area. Though Chestnut Hill was our highest participation area previously, it has just gotten a little bit higher. And the West Oak Lane area has seen a significant increase in its tonnage in the pilot area where we are applying the single-stream pilot, as well as the recycle bank incentive on top of that. We are looking -- let me back up a second to say so, it has been very successful in terms of the product, getting the materials from those communities. What we have to address further is the efficiency of the collection system. It is done by using a container, along with a scale. And that process is a little slower than a bag or a can process. So we want to work with the vendors to try to improve that, to make the system as good as it can be. We are continuing with discussions with the vendor, we are negotiating expanding that pilot program. It is presently at 2,500 households, and we would like to see that 236 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 maybe quadruple to a much larger size in going to other sections of the city, to include communities that maybe are not the top recyclers already. And I think that we -- I am hopeful that we will be very successful in that negotiation. But, we do continue in those dialogues.
So once you sort of, in a sense, improve the speed and efficiency of actually picking it up, then you will determine how it can be expanded?
Well, the pilot will be an expansion in and of itself. So, we are look at doing a broader pilot area. Where we are right now in Chestnut Hill, there are -- the houses are fairly far apart, and there is a great deal of participation. The average weight, I think, is around 21, 22 pounds per set-out. That's not the norm; that's the highest that we have in the city. And we want to be able to apply it 237 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 in other sections of the city where we may have a more normalized participation rate and also tonnage rate. Additionally, the area that's in the West Oak Lane, that, we get into more twins and some rows, and it had probably a more average recycling rate. So we want to just expand that to other locations, other places. As recycling is offered citywide, we are interested in seeing it can be applied in environments where, you know, people may be challenged with placement of a can, challenged with participating fully already. So we want to incent new people to recycle and to also recycle more.
Speaking of pilots. Several years ago, when we started the street-cleaning activities in the various districts, what's the probability of that expanding further than the test areas? I know we have had a couple of changes, because I requested them. But we still get calls from other parts of our 238 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 district that want to get that street cleaning.
The resources are limited. We had some Council districts that did not want to have the street cleaning occur in them because the citizens did not wish to move their cars, and we were able to kind of reshuffle. However, the resources are limited, so our ability to expand on a great scale does not exist. I would be happy, though, to look at any boundary that you might have. So that, if we could consider it, we will gladly do that.
That's good. Thank you. Commissioner, I received this letter from a constituent. And I know that my office has called and talked about this particular problem as it relates to the SWEEP program. And I really don't know what goes on with that program. But one of the biggest complaints is that people are getting tickets 239 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 for putting out trash, I guess, in an incorrect manner, even though most of them say that, you know, they are just putting out trash the same way they have been putting it out for years. But they get this -- they get cited. And you know that they don't get the copy of the citation for five or six months. And by then they are outraged. They can't even remember what happened five months ago and why they are getting cited. But these are the types of letters. I got this in the mail yesterday. This goes on and on and on. So at some point what is happening here? Maybe there needs to be a different system. I don't really know. People are saying they are putting their trash out correctly, they are getting cited. And this one particular woman has gotten cited over and over again. She pays the tickets. She doesn't request a hearing because she is disabled and really can't get in town so easy. 240 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 But there seems to be something wrong with the system where people are given a ticket today and won't get the actual citation for months and months, maybe six months from now. And I know that's a Carlton question, isn't it?
No. I was looking for a Halls, actually. We recognize that there is some concern -- and we share the concern, too -- with regard to the notice that citizens have, having a timely notice. Our first desire is to maybe make contact with the citizen to see if they can take care of their property. However, if we cannot, and ultimately a warning or a violation notice is written, we have heard that people have not gotten their notice from the department that issues it in a manner that's timely enough for the citizens to be able to correct their actions. What we have done is modify how we give the ticket. We are still writing the 241 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 same ticket; however, now we created a kind of a simple paper process. We now leave a flier of sorts behind in the door. So it is not the official ticket, per se, but it is a notice that says, we were past your property, and there is a violation, a violation has been issued, and it is for the following reason. Kind of gives a quick check-off. And with that, that check-off, it allows people to have immediate notice of a problem that they may have.
Who is the department that actually mails out the ticket?
That's part of the Bureau of Administrative Adjudication in the Finance Department.
Right. So I think that we have improved the process. We have met with them and talked about what we could do to improve our system and process to make the process a little more 242 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 smooth. They have also considered some things that they can do to improve the process. So I think the issue that you are describing may be beginning to come to a close. Because over the last, I would say, six months, we have dramatically changed the system, in the sense of starting to leave a flier in the door that says, here was your problem, or actually being able to issue the ticket and leave it in the door.
That's good. Because one of the suggestions that this constituent makes is, couldn't they put something in your door, even though most people are denying that they are putting their trash out incorrectly. I am a big supporter of trying to keep Philadelphia streets clean. And I think if people are disposing of their trash -- not just residents, but businesses -- in an incorrect manner, that we need to address that. 243 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 But I am glad to hear that you are working on the system. And if it is 9th and Filbert, Department of Finance, that's the culprit who is sending these tickets out so late, then we will probably need to talk to them. I know we had a meeting scheduled to talk to the Streets Department, and I guess 9th and Filbert. Not with me, but one of my staff members, who was actually out sick. Or, she was either out due to the death of her daughter. But I wanted to bring this up to date because we constantly continue to get these letters and phone calls from unhappy constituents regarding these notifications. But anything that we can do to get our streets of Philadelphia cleaner, you know, get our citizens to shovel and sweep and take care of weeds --
-- and those other things, I am more than happy to support. But it just makes it -- makes me 244 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 feel bad when people say, you know, okay, if I didn't do this right, how come it took them six months to tell me. So...
As I said, we have worked with the Finance Department in recent months. So I think that some of what you may hear about is maybe a little bit older. Because in recent months, that system has been changed and modified. We made changes to our system and process, and so has the Finance Department through the Bureau of Administrative Adjudication.
Councilwoman, I do appreciate your being an advocate. Because I think that only when we are serious about issues, and we are willing to step out there and do what needs to be done and stand strong and firm on these issues, will we really see the difference. If we make excuses, we will not ever see a difference in terms of the cleanliness 245 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 of the city or any other initiative. So, I thank you.
Thank you, Madam President. Commissioner, again, first of all, I think it would be real helpful for the record, you have got a great group of people, you referred to them earlier year, your customer service group, 215-686-5560. Could you just for a minute briefly, I think there is some confusion on all that they do. I know that there was a period of time where they weren't taking streetlight assignments, but now I think you fixed all of that. Could you take a minute and just tell us all, when a citizen or visitor to our city sees a discrepancy, and even if it is a state highway, that I think we would 246 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 appreciate it if you would take a minute and go over that.
Thank you. I think that we have some of the hardest-working people in our customer service group. They are few in number; however, they receive inquiries on many varied and different requests, many which are street department services and some which are not. But their group is intended to be a one-stop shopping place where people can call to put in a request for our services. And the services range from trash not collected, or needing a household visited because of debris and litter that may be out, a pothole, a ditch that needs to be addressed, a traffic signal that may be out, or a Stop sign that is missing, an accident, some other problem that people see on the street, all those are addressed within our group. Additionally, requests that come in for our streetlighting, although we have some of our maintenance handled by a contractor, if those calls come into our customer service 247 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 system, we get them relayed to the vendor directly, such that they can go out and inspect a location the night that it is called in. So we are quite pleased with how we try to respond to the citizens. At times, you know, the load may be very heavy in terms of the calls that come in, and citizens have to be patient with us in terms of having messages come in on our answering machine. But the fact is, even at night we are retrieving our messages and entering them into the system so that everything can be addressed in a timely manner. So any request that citizens have with regard to Streets Department services, from potholes, ditches, streetlights, any problem that they may see in the roadway or sidewalk that they think needs to be investigated by a professional, they can call into our 686-5560. And if someone is on a cell phone, say driving down the street, and they see a 248 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 pothole or a ditch that they want to report, they can call in to the number star, the symbol star, FIX, F-I-X. And that, too, gets relayed to our customer service group, and they receive those calls. And should anything not be a part of the work that the Streets Department handles, they receive that information, advise the citizen that, you know, it may not be the Street Department work, it may be somebody else's. But they will, in turn, also forward that information to the appropriate entity. So if it may be something for the Police Department or Fire Department, Licenses and Inspections, or PennDOT, or some other entity, Gas Works or SEPTA, they in turn not only dispatch it to our own workers and employees, but they also get the information out to the appropriate parties outside of the Streets Department.
Commissioner, you mentioned star FIX. And I am pleased to hear, I got some information that Cingular, Verizon, Sprint now, and also Nextel have all jumped 249 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 onto the star FIX. And I think that's very helpful. It is a free call, and it goes right to the same group of people.
Yes, indeed. And thank you for your help in getting that developed. You were quite instrumental in facilitating that process, and I think maybe your brain child. So we appreciate the help that you offered there.
Thank you. And that's good. So if a person at night sees a streetlight out, even though your office is closed, they can leave a message?
That's good. Now I want to go to our relationship -- which we are going to be having hearings. I have notified the Secretary of PennDOT that we have a resolution 22 that will be heard here in this Council, in our Streets and Services Committee. And we have tied Subpoena power to that. And I know I am going to be working 250 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 closely with you to develop the hearing and the hearing date. Because I am not satisfied, and I think most citizens are not satisfied. You do a lot of work in trying to make old city streets usable. But the relationship that I personally see and have documented and have taken photographs -- so, I am doing my homework. And example. Kelly Drive, the northbound lanes at the St. Joe's boat house, have been in deteriorated condition now for almost two months. They came, PennDOT, after a delay of almost two weeks, they came out and through some cold patch into the roadway. Somebody is going to be seriously injured or killed. And I appreciate the fact that your people now know where the 380 or 390 miles of PennDOT-maintained roadways are. But I think PennDOT should be ashamed of itself in what it does in maintaining the streets that they have responsibility for. They are in terrible 251 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 condition, and their response is deplorable. And I am going to make sure that they are brought into this Council and asked what they plan to do to make their response better. I know it is very frustrating when I have to talk to a person that works in the Streets Department, no names, and they also express the same frustration and suggest to me that, here's the phone number for PennDOT, District -- 6, is it?
Here is the phone number. We can't get any response. Maybe if you call them, we can. So we are going to bring them in here. And we are going to ask the Secretary of Transportation to come here. And hopefully the Mayor Operation Safe Streets will include the state-maintained highways. Because I am not satisfied. I don't think we get our bang for our buck out of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania when it comes to their participation in cooperating with you. 252 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 I know they do a good job in cooperating with snow removal and things like that. But when you drive down a street in Philadelphia that has a worse roadway than Iraq, that's really a bad situation. So our hearings are going to be scheduled appropriately, where the people that work with you will have an opportunity to start pulling some information together on some of the problems that we have on -- is it 380 or 390 miles of road?
380 miles of roadways. And I know this is not a new issue. We have been fighting with PennDOT for years. Because I drive through and I see a sign that's very dear and close to my heart that says, this is a state highway, call a certain number. Because the city -- it is unfortunate that you, the Streets Commissioner, the people that work with you, 253 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 work so hard in trying to keep the roads maintained; and, if it is not our responsibility, the citizens of this city and the visitors should know that it is not our problem. But, we need to solve the problem together.
So you will work with me in preparation for these hearings.
You are welcome. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Brown.
Thank you, Madam President. My last remaining questions are around the discussion of the priority that the department has made with regards to its safety of school children. And the progress you have made is phenomenal. We are all encouraged by that. 254 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 Particularly when I recall months ago in the hearings, there was a lot of conversation and concerns raised about what was not happening around schools with regards to traffic safety. So given the progress and given the $1 million grant from the fed's Safe Route to School, could you provide to Madam President the list of the 40 schools that would be involved in construction under the Safe Route to School Program, number one; and, number two, you say currently in design construction is expected to start in FY '07 for these approximately 40 schools. So help me understand what that means. Because I am sure there is already a standing operating procedure or a formula in place that you execute when you want to put up traffic lights; right?
We have schools that have already applied for their flashers, and 255 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 we are continuing to process them. We are working on some now this year. And, with our additional funding that comes in in '07, we will do even more. So that means through '07 we have more we are doing through this year, and then through '07 another 40 we will be doing.
With the flashers, are they installed at middle schools?
With the configuration that some schools have in terms of whether they start at kindergarten or start at 6th grade, some of it has changed around. We do have them at middle schools, yes. I don't know necessarily that was our initial focus of our work. But -- because we started with the elementary schools.
Thank you. 256 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 Thank you, Councilwoman.
Surely. Let me walk this through. We have a $1 million loan from the school district to take care of 50 schools through -- that have been completed, completed as of now, February '06?
And then an additional schools that will be completed 12 by the end of the school year, which is June 13 '06; correct? 14
The anticipated 16 $1 million from the feds will get us through 17 another 40. 18 The struggle I am having with this 19 is, if we know that the money is coming, 20 and -- I mean, the good news is that the number of children being hit around schools by cars has diminished significantly. But, if we know that the money is promised -- I know in government you cannot act on a promise -- why can't we act on 257 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 knowing that those dollars are committed, a press conference was held, the school district stood up, you know, ready to back up this whole initiative, why can we not get -- move along with these other 40 schools, knowing full well that those dollars are in place, they are just not here?
Well, I think, Councilwoman, we are moving along with them. We are doing the design work, there is a great deal of design, community work that goes along with it. So we have never stopped or slowed down on the flashers. It is a continuous process.
That's why we are saying we expect another between now and 20 the end of June. July begins a new fiscal year. So we are not waiting until July to start; it is just that we don't think we are going to get more than 20 done in the next four months.
So I did make a request to provide the list of those schools to Madam President, did I not?
I just want to make sure I covered everything around school safety. Do schools have the option between the traffic light, the flashing light, versus the speed bumps? Can they make the request for a choice between the two?
Okay. Finally, traffic-control devices, such as rubber strips and speed tables, are placed at various locations, again based on what the studies have identified. 259 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 Can you tell us where some of those are? Or is there a laundry list that you could just provide to Madam President?
Sure. You are touching on another topic that we are quite excited about, and that's our program that we call Slow Down Philadelphia.
Thank you very much. Slow Down Philadelphia. And that one comes out of our concern that we are seeing more and more accidents, whether they be vehicular or pedestrian accidents, occurring as a result of --
-- speeding or negligent behavior that involves some type of speeding in the city streets. And we are examining options. We are thinking out of the box with regard to the possible solutions to solving the speeding 260 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 problem. Included in that will be something called the speed table. It is not a hump. If you imagine the ones near the airport, where you have a longer strip.
They are safer for plowing, they are safer with emergency vehicles, fire engines and rescue wagons, things like that, that may have to come through with the heavy equipment. So we are looking forward to that. So we will be issuing a report on that very, very soon, talking about the various options that we are going to be putting on the table and applying around the city, including soft rumble strips and the speed tables.
And I would imagine the report would provide some information on where the hot spots are for speeding, particularly around schools? I mean, have you noticed that there has been a decrease in the number of -- speeding in schools where you have major large 261 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 intersections?
We are working with the Police Department that's applying enforcement. And that's a very important component of the education, engineering, and enforcement that changes behavior and changes conditions on our roads. So where we are seeing police participation, the speeding problem and the negligent behavior has greatly improved. So we want to do everything that we can to make sure that the children understand what they need to do; the drivers understand what they need to do; that the location is engineered as well as it can be engineered. You know, you can't make, you know, a Broad Street like a little small street. It is what it is. But, given those parameters, we can make these streets as safe as they can be in terms of the engineering appliances that are put into place. So we are encouraged, as we continue to work with the Police Department and the 262 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 school district, through the school safety committee, that the situation will greatly improve for not only pedestrians, but also the vehicles in the city.
I would ask, as you sit down with the Police Department, and in the spirit of having departments talk across each other all the time, remember the school crossing guards and the role they can play. In fact, it would make sense for them to be offered a copy of this study or a summary of the study, because it affects their world, as well, what crossing guards have to deal with speedy drivers.
Thank you for your testimony. Thank you, Madam President.
You are welcome. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Miller.
Thank you, Madam President. I, actually, just had a 263 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 followup question to one of Councilwoman Brown's questions. Have we been given a recent list of the schools in our districts that have received flashers?
And the other thing I just want to note of -- and I think it is really a good thing -- is that, you know, as I am driving around, I end up running into new four-way Stop signs that was not there before, and I didn't even request them. And it is amazing to me that they are coming up. What's happening? I mean, what is making the district actually put up -- the Streets Department put up four-way Stop signs?
I think that -- let me say that the department has always been putting them up. They have always examined 264 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 locations to determine whether or not they meet the warrant. And after study and evaluation, if they meet those warrants, then we are definitely applying them. We understand that sometimes the logistics or the traffic changes in the community. A request is made of us, and we will do the study and the evaluation and put them in. Sometimes it is not warranted, so we do tell people that we can't do it, on occasion. But where is it warranted, we think that -- I know that we apply them.
Thank you, Madam President. Commissioner, I want to talk about WiFi for a minute and your department's 265 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 involvement in the process. As you know, there is some controversy about the electric usage of this wireless network that's going to be attached to your light fixtures. I would like to know about a company that already has these devices that went into bankruptcy called Ricochet, I think it was, that has hundreds, if not thousands, of these units not just in Philadelphia, but many of them are in the City of Philadelphia. They are still attached to our streetlight network. Did we ever have an electric usage agreement with that company? And what is your streetlighting department's involvement with the WiFi program involving the way they are going to be installed? And I know we talked about possibly having your own work force do this work for the vendor. That's none of my business, but one thing I want you to consider. But I would like to know what your involvement, what Joe Doyle's involvement would be in the WiFi process. 266 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06
Yes. That effort, and the department's involvement, is actually led by Deputy Commissioner Mike Sakagney. And he has worked with the committee to address the Streets Department interface, meaning how the appliances would be attached to -- how and what type of appliance would be attached to our streetlights. So through rigorous review with Joseph Doyle, our Chief Streetlighting Engineer, made determination about what would be suitable or not suitable in application. So we came to agreement with regard to the type of appliance. And we further are going to be involved in a way that we think is most helpful for us, and that is the construction and inspection. We really are not interested in putting the appliances in ourselves
The time. A new business is not one that we are interested in. But we feel comfortable with being the ones 267 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 who are monitoring the construction. So we are approving the location where they can be applied. It must be a request for siting the appliances. There has to be an inspection of that location to determine that it is suitable. And then we are having -- we are doing the inspections of the installations after they are done, which we find to be -- we believe is going to be an efficient use of our time.
Well, I would hope that that's not a closed door on your people. This is not a big task. And if you are going to inspect, do all these other things, again, I said that's not -- I am part of the legislative body, you run the Streets Department. But I think we should at least give your people an opportunity to do that work. Only a suggestion. Let's talk about the network that's already there installed, already still continuing to consume energy. 268 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 When are we going to make a decision to remove those devices, and who is paying for the electricity?
They are. I have talked to the vendor, and they tell me that they are energized and they are -- Joe, can he come up here? Because I have a couple of questions for him.
I am Joseph Doyle, Chief Streetlighting Engineer for the Streets Department.
The Ricochet network, it is out there, it is attached to our structures. I'm not sure there was even an energy usage arrangement with PECO Energy. I talked to the Ricochet people. They tell me they are energized, they are using energy, they are emitting a signal, but there is no signal to be received. Do you know how many of these devices are still attached to your streetlight network? And when do you plan to remove them, 269 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 since this company is in bankruptcy or out of bankruptcy? I don't even know the circumstances at this point. But, what are you doing with that old network that's out there?
Well, what was installed on the streetlights several years ago were handled under a previous agreement with the city related to the approval for their installation. As far as the connection to PECO power, that was really handled directly through PECO. It was, actually, PECO's contractor who installed the units from the beginning in the five-county area around Philadelphia. So we were not party to whatever electrical usage, power consumption payment, whatsoever between Metrecom, which was Ricochet, and PECO itself. So, I can't answer that question.
Well, they are still out there. They are not paying you any revenue for that attachment. 270 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 I mean, are they just going to rust in place, or what's going to happen?
Councilman, apparently there are some other issues related to this on the attachment of that that I think goes back to the original bankruptcy, and I really am not privy to the details of the final resolution of the attachment.
Well, I would appreciate, since you are responsible, Commissioner, for the streetlight network, if you would ask the Law Department. Because, if they are no longer needed, let's get rid of them. And the current WiFi program, Commissioner Joe Doyle, whoever, are you involved in the deal with who pays for the electric? My question is, is the city going to pay, as far as you know, for any of the energy consumption for the WiFi project?
The Streets Department has been involved with the equipment installation and confirmation of construction. 271 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 The other aspects of the agreement, we would be kind of telling it to you secondhand. I would not want to be the one to speak to that.
Now, when we involved ourselves with WiFi, we said it wasn't going to be -- it was a private, nonprofit. Are you going to have an accounting method to be reimbursed for all the work, this inspection work and all this other work that you are going to need to do for the installation of the WiFi network? How is the Streets Department going to be reimbursed?
Michael Sakagney, Deputy Commissioner, Streets Department. We will be having meetings with finance to set that system up. That system isn't in place yet, but we will be looking at what protocols we have to put in place to have an invoicing procedure in place for us to be reimbursed.
So there is a 272 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 plan to be reimbursed for your work?
Because when somebody tells me that it is not going to cost us anything, that's when I really start paying attention.
Okay. Hold on just a second. I am sure the Commissioner will followup, because it is a question I would like answered to the Chair, on the status of the Ricochet network that's out there, and whether or not the streetlighting people can start to remove that and maybe bill them. Because I believe they are out of bankruptcy now. So to have that equipment there competing with ours, and probably they have done a lot of work -- from what I understand, in a lot of the locations that the WiFi system would like to occupy is the spots where this other network is. 273 FY '07 OPERATING BUDGET HEARINGS - 3/15/06 So I think we need to make a decision and ask the Law Department to give you some direction on what we should do with that network.
Thank you. And I guess, for me, that's it. Thank you Madam President.
You are welcome. Are there any other questions from members of the committee? Thank you very much. This committee will stand in recess until Tuesday, March 21, at 10:00 a.m. Thank you all very much. 274 C E R T I F I C A T I O N I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing proceedings of the Council of the City of Philadelphia of Wednesday, March 15, 2006, were reported fully and accurately by me, and that this is a correct transcript of same. RE: COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE _________________________ DEBRA A. WHITEHEAD