Can you hold on for one second? We're on a time limit. If 76 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET you don't know the answer and they're here, can you ask them to come up and respond to that, please?
Hancock Pool, to my understanding, is still to be completed under our Capital Projects Program. And I'm not sure if it will be back up and operating. Right now I know for a fact we have not made plans to open it, but it is not on the list to be permanently closed.
I received a memo about two weeks ago to say that it was not going to be restored. I conveyed that to Councilman Ramos. I should disregard that memo?
You'll just see the crane there again this year.
Put that same tractor out there. I'm just confused because, with all due respect, in the past there was a 77 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET decision --
Point of information. This playground is a hundred feet from my front door. I had people all summer long knocking on my door saying, is the pool going to get fixed. I said, no. I said, it is, but it's going to take a little bit. Some people gave up on it. But never no renovation was done on it. Now, we hear that it's up on the list of pools that will be shut down, and we're very concerned. Councilman Clarke has addressed it. I know that the Commissioner is aware of this. But it was strange that nothing was done during the whole summer on the pool. I had to answer and say that something was going to go on that never went on. Then it was just removed and nothing was done. So we'll probably get an answer about that soon.
There's a question about process, I think, still on the table.
Years ago there was a decision made to basically consolidate 78 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET all capital programs into the CPO Office and to some degree take the Recreation out of the loop, which I thought was a bad idea, but I wasn't elected at the time. So it created an environment where nobody ultimately kind of like took the responsibility. I'm kind of seeing some of that here where the Recreation Commissioner said that it's scheduled to be done. I get a memo from CPO -- and sometimes I have to look at the fine print to see where it actually comes from. Because you get these little faxes and it gives you a status report. It puts us in a position of not being able to adequately monitor our facilities, because you got all these different fingers in the pie. I had a meeting yesterday with folks who have some level of responsibility. I'm being told that the MDO's office and the Budget Director made the decision that they weren't going to do a playground, play area, in my Council district, and I was willing to use the Council dollars that were allocated to the Council district. I'm saying, well, how can they make that decision not to spend money 79 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET that was allocated to the district Councilperson?
Well, I think your question is related to the question that Councilman Rizzo asked sometime ago about process and about what is the best process, given the fact that we do have a bureaucracy to get from point A to point B, and these are questions that we are also asking in-house. The analysis that I mentioned earlier is not just a dollars analysis. It's also a process analysis. And there were inefficiencies --
It means that we're all sitting down talking about this and trying to figure out how to make work.
Who are you sitting down with, particularly as it relates to the Council allocation? Because you tell I got $1.2 million. As a Councilperson I'm in the community and I decide, along with the community, we want to have some play equipment 80 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET there. How does that the decision get made not to do that and I'm not even in the conversation?
Well, it's my understanding that senior staff in the Mayor's Office is holding a series of meetings to try to come to an analysis and recommendation with regard to that. And I am sure that there's consultation with --
So this is the Mayor and the Chief of Staff make the decision now?
Well, you know that this government is very consultative and that we tend to make decisions in consultation, in collaboration, and that's the way things normally proceed. This is not the first time I think you have raised this issue. This issue has been raised by other Councilpeople. It's my understanding before my time there were 81 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET different efficiencies when these funds were placed in agencies. Each agency had its own separate design and construction team sometimes. So we had clusters assigned to each agency. That is what I'm told.
Ms. Griffith, with all due respect, this is a very confusing response. I don't know if it's intentional, but this is a cut and dry question. I'm trying to go find out, at the end of the day, who is responsible? Now it's suggested that maybe I need to talk to the Mayor. Madam President, it seems like my time is kind of different.
Thank you. Are you telling me now that I just need to deal with the Mayor and the Chief of Staff? I don't know who to deal with. I used to deal with this man here quite well. Then there was another layer put on top of that.
If you're talking about process, if you're talking about how the 82 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET process is set up, I think speaking to the Chief of Staff would be useful. If you're simply trying to find information about a given center, it would seem that the first stop would be the Recreation Commissioner.
Yes, but if I talk to the Recreation Commissioner and we have an agreement, then it goes through these various levels of bureaucracy and then it comes here. Now you're saying the Mayor makes the decision.
No. That's about process. They're two separate tracks. I think you're using an example of what you're concerned about to also illuminate this process problem.
It's not the only one. I'm just trying to understand why do we keep confusing an issue. Sometimes you fix something that's not broke. Ultimately, I'm asking the question about why did we decide to move Recreation out of the process where more often than not Council's $1.2 or whatever it was gets spent 83 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET in Recreation projects? Every now and then you have to throw a little on the library, but more often than not we're dealing with recreation. We take them out of the loop and now we've got this process that's convoluted as best.
Well, the decision to do that predates my tenure. But as I said, it's my understanding that it was because in the past you had these clusters of design and construction and administrative folks attached to each agency. It was duplicative and it was confusing and it cost a lot of money. I mean, a hammer is a hammer. A construction contract is a construction contract. Why don't we gather all of these disparate folks, put them in one agency and maximize efficiencies. That was the thrust. What you're saying is that that is a problem.
Hold it. Is the Recreation Commissioner in that agency? Who are you gathering to put in that agency?
No. CPO. We're talking about the people that used to be 84 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET associated with the individual agencies.
So as an example someone who used to work for Recreation and is now at CPO?
So you have these people who are no longer in the different departments in the CPO?
Right. And the hope was that that would yield an efficient, clear, coordinated approach to design and construct and ease the burden of this moving of money around. Because if the funds were in one agency, then that agency could allocate for emergencies or for special projects as well. It seems that based on your comments and the comments of others, that has yielded another set of concerns, and we need to look at those.
So you're saying that you're not sure that we realized those efficiencies?
I'm not sure that we have and I'm not sure if we haven't. I do 85 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET respect, however, the concerns of Council. And I don't think you raise those concerns lightly.
We gave you more time because Councilman Ramos had a point of information. And I did say that we were going to recess at 12' clock. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Tasco.
I have a question on behalf of Councilwoman Miller, who is home with the flu and watching this on television. But through my trusted cell phone, she was able to reach me to ask me to ask a question. Before I ask her question, I want to ask on this issue. If we could understand the effort to try to have one department put out the bids, to do the planning, why do we find that the department who is responsible for the project is not -- nobody's talking to them? If Commissioner Hancock is going 86 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET forward and the CPO is telling the Councilmember it's not, they're not talking to each another. They're not talking to us and you all are not talking to each other. That's very clear there's a lack of communication of what's going on. And so we get mixed messages. I get calls all the time from people in the field about what's going on in their departments, whether it's the park or the rec center, and then I can't seem to get an answer about who's making the decision. So there's a lack of communication somewhere and it's very frustrating.
We hear you. And it's on us to figure out a better way to do this.
I want to ask for Councilwoman Donna Miller, who is home with the flu, and again who reached me through my trusted cell phone, which I'm not supposed to use -- Northwest Regional Library, she said it was closed in September and she wants to know what is happening because the opening was 87 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET supposed to be in March and she wants a status report.
Rick is a representative and he's coming forward. He's in consultation. You wanted more communication.
Councilwoman, Rick Tustin, again, with the Capital Programs Office. Our office has been working with the library, on three branch libraries, that being one of them. The other one, I believe, was Kensington and Olney. That particular library you're speaking of is scheduled to be opened in April.
It was three projects, libraries we were doing simultaneously having to do with the heating and air conditioning systems. So we had to stagger the shut-down of each one to minimize any one branch from 88 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET being out for too long. As I said, right now our projected date of having that ready to be open again is in April.
I have one final question before we leave. We were talking about neighborhood commercial corridors. As you know, we have done a study of the commercial corridors in the 9th District, being creative and using some of our dollars to do that. But we also find that there's no money to implement any of the recommendations in the study. In an effort to help us do some things on our own and leverage other dollars we might get, we have asked your department to do an urban renewal designation of some areas in my district. I want to know if there are budget constraints in your office to prevent that from happening, because the request has been in for a long time. It also impedes our ability to move forward on economic development where we might not need the City.
Let me get back to you on that, Councilwoman. There shouldn't be 89 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET any staff constraints in general. There may be in terms of time frame. But let me check with Ms. Mason-Ailey and find out where the specific project is.
Thank you very much. I see it is now noon. Council 10 will stand in recess until 2 o'clock. Thank 11 you. 12 (Brief recess.)
Committee of the Whole is now back in session. Ms. Griffith, do you mind taking the witness stand again? Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman Rizzo.
Thank you, Madam President. I'm not sure who should answer this question. I had an off-the-record conversation with Capital Programs. From what I understand from the firehouses, and since you mentioned earlier in your testimony about 90 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET the importance of safety and health issues, I was led to believe that this program of putting -- and I think everyone knows what I'm talking about. When the fire apparatus starts, the emissions of combustion are sometimes contained in the firehouse, and there was a little bit of controversy on this system versus that system. I was led to believe, until I talked to a fire officer recently, that the program for installing these exhaust systems apparently -- either I'm misinformed that this was something that was supposed to be on a faster track, especially if we recognize that it's a safety and health issue. Why is it taking so long and where are we with the program? Because from what I understood, this was supposed to be completed on the fast track. From what I understand, there are still numerous firehouses throughout the City of Philadelphia that don't have these exhaust systems to remove the product of combustion after the equipment starts. 91 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET
Let me see if we can get an answer for you. Either CPO or a representative of the Fire Department.
I think Mr. Tustin is here. Again, I'm asking him to repeat this because more so, we work with the record here and what we say over the rail is always nice, but it isn't what we really need. We need the stenographer to hear what the program is.
Richard Tustin, Director of Capital Program Office. Councilman, last year when we sat here we only had four completed. We were just starting the process. We did say that we were going to do as many stations as we could. And the budget had always been staggered over several fiscal years. I'm happy to report right now that by the end of June we will have 34 stations complete, which is 30 more than we had last year, and it's more than half of all the fire stations. There's a total of 64 fire stations. So we have them under construction right now, 20 of them. 92 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET We have just selected a designer to do the next group of fire stations, and we're doing them in groups of or at a time so 5 that we can keep the project moving. 6 As far as the budget goes, we've 7 always looked at this as spread over several 8 fiscal years. We've been matching, if not 9 beating, our design and construction schedule 10 to that funding schedule. 11
I understand it's 12 a good strategy, but you're talking safety and 13 health issues here. It doesn't seem 14 appropriate to me to scatter this over many 15 fiscal years if this is tagged safety and 16 health. In my opinion, someone should say, 17 okay, we really need to get these done 18 promptly. 19 It's difficult for me to take a call 20 from a firefighter and tell him, the safety and health issue is not in this budget cycle. You have to wait until next year. Do what you have to do to deal with this until that budget cycle. You should have a column, safety and 93 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET health, and I don't think that's something that should be something delayed. Are the firehouses that are planned, by the Administration at least, the ladders and the engine companies, even though they could possibly be reduced to just medic units, are they also being equipped?
We had planned to do all 64. I would also like to say that when we were originally told about this project and the need for this project, it was through the labor standards who had negotiated this issue with the fire fighters union. I believe that negotiation led to the staggered completion of these fire stations over several fiscal years, and that's why I believe the budget was set up that way and that's why we're managing the project that way.
Mr. Tustin, even though that was negotiated, when something is deemed a health and safety, I think all of that should go out of window. If you find that we bought 200 guns that are defective, you're going to tell them, 94 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET we'll change out a dozen at a time? You're going to change them all out. I think that this is something that should be on the fast track and get it done if it's just a matter of moving some money around that you're eventually going to spend anyway. Take my suggestion. Get it done. If we have fire fighters that are sickened because their work environment isn't a satisfactory place, I mean, I just can't see playing with this like that.
I think we would recommend that the Managing Director take a hard look at this and see whether this needs to be re-evaluated in terms of the time frame.
Would you ask this current Managing Director? Maybe he'll be more sympathetic than the new one. We really got to get this thing moving.
Well, I think both managing directors will be sympathetic, but certainly we will talk to Mr. Goldsmith.
Again, I would really appreciate somebody getting back to me 95 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET through the Chair. That's another problem we have around here. We spend all this time in this room and sometimes I think it goes up the chimney through that ventilation system.
You're welcome. I would like someone to explain Line 22, which indicates that PIDC land bank acquisitions and improvements will be $12 million in 2006. What land will we be acquiring? What businesses are being targeted for retention and/or attraction to new businesses?
Good afternoon. Paul Deegan from PIDC. This is not new City tax dollars. We are targeting a number of sites around the City, but we don't actually have agreements of sale yet. It's kind of just in case money. 96 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET
Well, it's $12 million of authorization. We don't actually have $12 million in fund.
Do we know what businesses are being targeted for retention? Are we trying to attract new businesses? If so, can you share that with us?
Yes. The money is to buy new sites and create new sites for development. We have a list of sites around the City. We're negotiating with some of the owners, but we haven't closed any deals yet or have any agreements of sale.
While you're up there, Mr. Deegan, would you explain Line 27, PIDC land bank improvements, engineering and administration, $6 million in 2006. Will you explain the type of projects that will be funded from this line number, and what the breakdown is between improvements, engineering and administration? 97 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET
This line is similar to the other line. They're kind of companion lines. They come out of the same fund. What we do, we ask for an authorization to explore properties throughout the City to do the professional engineering and environmental studies that are needed to prepare the land for development. When we spend the money on the studies and we acquire the land, we put in new infrastructure improvements such as water, sewer and streets. When the land is sold, we reimburse the fund. So it's actually a revolving fund. It doesn't require any new City money. We've been doing this since 1957.
How much are the administration costs that are charged in this line item?
Well, we need real estate appraisals. We don't pay our salaries out of this, but we use it for professional service studies such as appraisals, environmental studies, design studies, real estate title searches. 98 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET I think a good example is the West Parkside Industrial Park, which we acquired about years ago. It was owned by Conrail. 5 Using the revolving fund we negotiated an 6 acquisition with Conrail. We removed all the 7 rail. We did environmental studies, 8 environmental clean up. We put in new 9 streets, 49th Street, 50th Street, Jefferson 10 Street and now we're marketing the land for sale. As we sell pieces off we reimburse this fund. It's basically a revolving fund. I think there's around $6 to $7 million actually in the fund right now, but we ask for as much authorization as we can in the event that we have a good year of selling land, which we hope to, and then we'll have more money in the fund and we'll have the authorization to spend it.
While you're up there, Line 26, Navy Yard improvements, $4,285,000. How are these funds going to be used?
As part of the development of the Navy Yard, one of the most, 99 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET I guess, critical needs is to upgrade the electrical system and also the sea wall. The electrical system, I think it was installed by the Navy in 1909 and it's in very bad repair. So to attract new companies such as Urban Outfitters down to the Navy Yard we had to upgrade the electrical system. And also to keep the Navy there, because the Navy has 3,000 workers. They're heavily engaged in power research of electrical systems for new ships. So we've asked for City money and we're asking for state money through the Business in Our Sights Program. We're also asking for federal money to upgrade the electrical system and the sea wall. Broad Street is actually on piles, and that's part of the sea wall repair that Broad Street and the Navy Yard has to be shored (ph) up.
Have you had any indication as to how much the federal and state governments will be contributing toward this?
Yes. We were applying 100 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET for $15 million for the electrical system upgrade from the federal government. And we've talked to Congressman Brady, Senator Specter. We're applying for, I think, $10 million in Business in Our Sights funding from the Commonwealth. We expect that application to be considered by the Commonwealth Financing Authority either in March or April. So we're hopeful that with the combination of City, state and federal money we'll be able to take care of the electrical system and also the sea wall.
Wonderful. Thank you very much. I have a couple other questions. Do I have time? I understand I still have a minute. The Free Library's Capital Budget also includes $350,000 to assess the cause of the leaks at the Falls of Schuylkill Branch, repair the steps at McPherson and Logan Branches and assess the windows at the Paschalville Branch. What does assess the cause of leaks mean? Are we addressing the 101 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET problem or are we just finding out what's causing the leaks? Would you also be able to correct the problems with the $350,000? I just don't understand. What does assess the windows of Paschalville mean and will you be replacing the windows? I mean, have somebody study that the windows are in disrepair and have to be replaced?
We just had a quick consultation. I would like to ask the representative from the library to join us. Is there a representative from the library? There was someone here earlier. (No response.)
Madam Council President, your questions are so specific. I would feel more comfortable if there was a rep from the library here. If you will allow us to try to get someone here before the end of our time and respond to the question.
That would be fine. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Tasco. 102 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET
Thank you. On of your testimony, you talk about the improvements at the Philadelphia International Airport. How much of City dollars are spent on the expansion? Or are most of those dollars federal dollars or from someplace else? You cite $112 million will be self-sustaining funds. Would you explain that? And then you say the match is $139 million in federal funds.
Most of the funds are self-sustaining or federal monies. We are lucky that with regard to the airport there's usually very little City money that goes into it. Let me see. Gary, do you have more specifics?
No. That's correct. The airport can issue revenue bonds and through money obtained through, I guess, the rental of gates to airlines and various other sources of revenue to the airport, those bonds are paid off. There really is no new City tax-supported funds, GO funds, recommended for the budget year. It's all 103 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET self-sustaining bond funds, federal funds and state and private funds.
I'd like Mr. Tustin to come forward. I have a couple of questions for him. On of Mr. Tustin's testimony, you stated that the Capital Program Office has initiated approximately 32 professional services contracts and 125 public works contracts. Of these contracts, how many are minority vendors and what is your process for reaching out to the broader community so that they will know what contracts you are initiating?
Hi. I'm Rick Tustin again, the Capital Program Office's Director. The contracts that we have direct control over are professional service contracts. We work with Minority and Business Enterprise Council each year to try to develop a goal for minority and women, disabled 104 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET participation on all of our design contracts. I don't have that information you're asking for specifically on the design professional service contracts, although I can get that for you. Last year we averaged, I think, 27 to 33 percent on our participation on professional service contracts. The second thing you asked me had to do with the construction contracts. Construction contracts are handled through the Procurement process. We put into our specifications and our design documents percentage requirements based on information provided from MBEC to our office. So every project that gets bid through the Procurement process has percentages required for those contractors. When the bids come in from those contractors they get reviewed thoroughly by both Procurement and MBEC to make sure the contractors have met those ranges within their individual contracts. We don't get involved in their review process of that in the public works side. As I said, we focus more on the 105 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET professional service side.
On the professional services contracts, what is your outreach to other communities so that they know that you are putting out a bid for professional services contracts? Do you have a limited number of people that you contract or do you have a broader pool of people and what is the role of MBEC in that process?
That is a very good question. We work directly with MBEC on that process. MBEC has a directory of firms that are certified; minority, women and disabled. We draw from their certified directory of firms to participate in these projects. Again, every time we get ready to go out with an RFP for professional services we contact MBEC. We tell them what the project is. We tell them what firms we think we would like to invite to that because they have some level of expertise in the type of work we want to do. MBEC usually responds to us, and after they review the firms that we want to 106 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET submit it to or solicit, on many, many occasions they ask us to add additional firms from their directory, which we do, and then we send it out through our normal RFP process. We work hand and hand with MBEC during that professional service contract to develop professional service contracts.
If I can add something, which some of us heard today, which is that next week the Mayor will be issuing an executive order which will require every agency to have a senior member of their staff dedicated to outreach and to ensuring that minority and women-owned firms have a fair share of City contracts, and there are percentages attached. I would assume that CPO would be one of those agencies. In addition to the good work they're doing in league with MBEC, they would have on staff someone dedicated to this kind of outreach. I apologize. We were privy to a luncheon speech, which I don't think Rick had an opportunity to hear, but that is something 107 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET that will be coming down the pike.
In other words, at this point they are quite appropriately relying on the entity in City government that is supposed to be doing this outreach and certification. In addition to that, the Mayor is asking that each agency have someone on staff that could be trained. I think the thrust is that, for instance, in our agency, we have contracts that are very specific. We have to, in a way, educate MBEC to the range of those contracts, to the kinds of professionals that are needed, et cetera. We will have someone on staff who will know that intrinsically and be able to outreach on behalf of the kinds of contracts that we have. I'm assuming, since the Mayor said every agency, that CPO will also have that person dedicated for that purpose.
That's correct. In fact, the person from our office that oversees 108 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET that and works directly with MBEC is the Deputy Director. She works directly under me. She's the second highest level person in the office.
Councilwoman Blackwell, your light is on. Did you want to be recognized?
I'd really like to know our level of involvement. In other words, there's a company, PKF, who is working on the project, who was fired from Cobbs Creek because, according to SEPTA itself, they're the worst company they ever saw and they -- just all kind of irresponsible acts. When we had our hearing months ago, they were 717 days behind and were fired. So I wondered if, since we do partake in SEPTA's budget, what are the plans? There's nobody working there for months, and this same company that's horrendous that worked in Cobbs 109 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET Creek and was fired is working on the rest of it from 46th to, like, 62nd. I would like to know where the City is, since we fund them as well, and how involved they are in this contract and where we go from here?
May I ask the representative from SEPTA to take the microphone, please?
Good afternoon. I'm Francis Jones, government affairs at SEPTA. Unfortunately this response will be very brief. Because we are in litigation with PKF at this point, we're unable to provide any additional information.
But PKF still works for you. This City, what they tell me, Madam President, is that we do go by the lowest responsible bidder, so they have the same company. They gave them two contracts, one from 46th, to what, 62nd? 46th to 60th?
One contract is to 62nd Street, that's correct. 110 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET
46th to 62nd Street. So it's really Councilman Nutter. And then 62nd and Milbourne. Now, they said they're the worst company they've ever seen. They said it in a public meeting in front of state and local officials. They fired them. They were already 717 days behind. So how can they still work for you but you not have anything to say about -- how can they be so great on one end and so bad on the other end? Not you, Francis, obviously. It's not directed toward Francis Jones. But how can SEPTA say that? How can they be so great on one end and so bad on the other when it's the same strip?
Unfortunately, there are two different contracts, Councilwoman. But the contract for the Cobbs Creek package, as I said earlier, is in litigation and we are working with the bonding company. So at this point, that's about the gist of the information we're able to provide at this time. As we move forward and as soon 111 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET information is available, of course, you know we'll be in contact with you.
Let me say, Madam President, we continue to still work on every aspect thereof. We're working with the Public Property Commissioner. We're working with lots. We're working with parking. We're working with traffic. All those things that contracts provide for, we're still working on. Let me say that I would hope -- and I say this to the Planning Director, the Budget Director, Finance Director and Administration, that just as we did last year and put the City's part into Council's budget, we are certainly requesting that that be replicated this year so at least we can have some say about what happens in our communities. Because it's just horrendous and continues to be unconscionable the way the store owners and the communities are victimized by these contracts.
Thank you. 112 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET Again, it's not directed at you, Ms. Jones. We realize you have a job. But it's so unbelievable. There's some issue that you scream so much on, you almost get tired of screaming about it. I've been involved in a lot of rough projects over my years, but by far this is absolutely the worst project I've ever been involved in. I have a community where we have the MOVE houses. We have the Tom Lasore (ph) One Project. I've had sinking homes on Cedar Street and Florence Avenue. This is absolutely the worst project I've ever had the displeasure of working on. I guess I will let that part go for SEPTA. Certainly we ask that the Administration respond in terms of them putting the budget as they did last year with the City Council's budget. Thank you.
You're welcome. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman 113 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET Brown.
Thank you, Madam President. I would like to follow-up with Councilwoman Tasco's questions regarding designated persons within departments who are responsible for MBE/WBE activity. Where is the ultimate accountability? There's a link between the departments for that particular responsibility, but ultimately who's responsible for holding those individuals accountable?
This will come as a result of the Mayor's executive order. I would assume that the Mayor is holding the agencies responsible.
But if I may, if I'm misguided in that, I will get back to you. But that's my assumption.
This is due to be effective when? 114 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET
I believe the Mayor said he was going to be signing that executive order next week.
Okay. PIDC representative, could they please come back to the table, please? Good afternoon.
It just so happens during your testimony I was actually reading information here from a community organization affiliated with the Fox Chase Cancer Center in Representative O'Neill's district. What is the status or role or responsibility of PIDC in that potential project in the Councilman's district?
Councilwoman, we're really not involved in the project at all. I think it's an issue between Fox Chase and the Fairmount Park Commission over land.
Between the Fox Chase 115 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET Cancer Center and the Fairmount Park Commission.
Okay. Thank you for the clarification. All right. Thank you. No further questions, Madam President.
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman O'Neill.
Thank you, Madam President. At this time I would like to submit for the record proposed amendments to Bill 16 Nos. 050001 and 05002. Copies of these amendments I have for the Sergeant At Arms to distribute to all Members. These amendments would increase the appropriation for improvements to existing recreation facilities by $7 million. Under the Home Rule Charter, Council must first seek the recommendations of the City Planning Commission before amending the Capital Program. I am submitting these proposed 116 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET amendments at this time so that we may request the Planning Commission's recommendations in a timely matter. I'm not requesting any action at this time. Thank you.
Thank you, Councilman. The proposed amendments certainly will be placed into the record. I believe this will trigger the 30-day clock that we need. I will also write a letter to the Mayor asking for recommendations of the City Planning Commission.
I think we're on the second go around. On Line 49-2, assess Fairmount Park facilities for code compliance and other safety deficiencies and make remedial repairs as warranted at the tune of $225,000 in 2006. Why is this in the Managing Director's budget and not the Capital Program Office?
It was requested by 117 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET the MDO to be placed there.
Well, who in the MDO's office will be responsible for this project?
Is there a representative from the MDO's office to answer that question, who specifically will be responsible?
Jim Donaghy, Deputy Managing Director. I work in the Managing Director's Office as the Capital Program Office liaison and will be taking responsibility for management of the project, working through the Capital Program Office and the Fairmount Park Commission.
And how did we arrive at the amount of $225,000?
The original request had come from the Fairmount Park Commission, and the Managing Director had asked that that money be placed in the Managing Director's 118 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET budget. So that's where the amount of $250,000 came from.
Thank you. How many fire stations does the City have?
I think it would be very interesting if we got a list of the 64 fire stations, if you could tell us the age of each station. The 2006 capital for the Fire Department totals $1,450,000 for interior and exterior renovations. Does the Planning Commission really feel that this is an adequate amount?
Well, we base our decisions on an analysis by the Fire Department.
I would like if we could get a copy of the analysis. Also, when was the last time a facility assessment study was done of the fire facilities?
I believe that was by 119 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET CPO. Sorry. Mr. Tustin is telling me the assessment is done on an as-needed basis based on ongoing meetings with the fire departments as opposed to a snapshot report that would give you an assessment of the state of all fire departments.
When was the last time an assessment was made and where?
He is telling me that there has not been an assessment of the kind that you're speaking of. At least through your tenure?
Perhaps we could ask Mr. Tustin to look at his records and see whether there's been an assessment prior to his taking this on.
Thank you. Rick Tustin, Capital Program Office. I'll be more than happy to do that. I believe there may have been an assessment done in the early '90s. At the time I worked for the Department of Public Property in the 120 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET Facility Planning Division. This is just from recollection. I will confirm anything that I tell you, if I'm correct or not. But I believe it may have been done from an engineering firm, Braker, Hoff (ph). Let me confirm that. What we do, Council President, is on a yearly basis we sit down with the liaison from the Fire Department, Chuck McGrady (ph) and his staff, who are not only responsible for overseeing all the stations, but working with Public Property, they do maintenance. So they're very, very familiar with the conditions of each fire station and what their needs are. We then take those needs and we develop our Capital Budget request that we submit to City Planning. We stagger the work over multiple years so that we're not overtaxing the budget in any one year, and we try to do it in a logical sequence so that all the fire stations receive adequate treatment. And the Fire Department, I believe, has been very happy with our procedure.
Mr. 121 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET Tustin, that was a very long response, but I just have one more question, as long as you're up there. Can you tell us how long it takes to complete a recreation project, from the time the district Councilperson approves the project?
I would have to check with my recreation team director. What I can tell you is I don't think there's any single time that represents all projects. Quite frankly, the reason is in the short period of time that the recreation team has come under CPO, I've been able to see how they work with the Council people and their community representatives, and a lot of times projects grow and change through the design process, and that can take quite a long time. Then once the project is finalized and the design is ready to go, after bids are awarded, the actual construction can take anywhere from a year to two years, depending on how complicated it is. I would be happy to get back to you with examples.
I don't 122 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET know about the other district Councilmembers, but I can only speak for myself. I have seen where we have had money in the budget for maybe new windows in a recreation facility, and that appears in the budget for maybe three years. And I think that a member of my staff, when I questioned why this was, I am told that she was informed that we almost stock pile the requests so that perhaps when you go out for the bid it would be cheaper. But doesn't the cost of that increase yearly, so if we wait four years, it's going to be much more expensive than it was four years prior?
I'm familiar with the discussion on that issue. My recollection is a recreation team has been doing this for years and they feel it's a really smart way of doing things. Most recreation centers are extremely small in size. So if we needed to put a new roof on one, by the time the project was designed and put out for bid and constructed, it would be extremely expensive on a per square foot basis. 123 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET On the other hand, if we can take two or three rec centers and put them together under one bid package, the net result is a much cheaper price per square foot to do the job. Now, naturally if a roof is in that bad of a condition where it needs to be replaced immediately, we would act on that right away. But what we try to do is, working through recreation maintenance, sort of nurse those roofs along that aren't in that bad a condition but need to be replaced, so that we can package, as you say, several projects together. It's a much more efficient way of doing it and ends up costing the taxpayer less per square foot to do it that way. It does extend the length of the project though. It does.
It certainly does. I mean, waiting four or five years is causing more damage to the facility than it would have to. You talked about a new roof being needed. Do we have our own roofers, and how 124 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET many do we have? Do we have our own electricians, and how many do we have? Would it be more cost efficient for the City to have the plumbers, the electricians? Didn't we have them at one time and wouldn't it be much more cost efficient to do it that way?
I apologize. What Mr. Tustin is telling me is that Public Property and perhaps the Recreation Department could respond better to that inquiry. I don't know whether there's someone from Public Property.
Good afternoon. Joan Schlotterbeck, Public Property Commissioner. Yes, we do have roofers. I'm going to say we have three and one supervisor.
Yes, ma'am. What we do is we're usually the front people before Capital. In other words, 125 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET we're out doing as much as we can with every roof in the whole City with our staff --
Pretty much, yes. We do not have the abilities nor the funding to put new roofs on.
To your memory, didn't we have roofers, electricians, plumbers on the City payroll at one time? Does anybody recall that?
Well, they've always been in my department. Do you mean for capital projects?
How many did we have, say, eight years ago? I'm sure we didn't always have three roofers.
I'm 126 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET talking about all of the City facilities.
I think that your memory is correct, but that it was the Recreation Department and perhaps some other departments that themselves had and still have, I think, a skeleton crew, but used to have a more substantive crew of folks to do this kind of thing before the consolidation that I talked about earlier. It probably predates Commissioner Richards.
Has anybody looked into whether or not it would be more cost efficient to have our own employees do it than putting it out on bid? Has anybody looked into that?
Well, the question you ask is very much related to the questions from Councilman Rizzo and Councilman Clarke. Looking at the relationship between individual agencies contracting for work as opposed to going to a centralized CPO, which was done, as I understand it, in the last Administration to become more efficient. And because these concerns have been expressed to 127 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET the Administration, certainly over the last year, I am told that we are going to take a look at that to see whether, at least in terms of communication, we can make things better. I can't speak unilaterally to it, however, because it's an operational issue and something I would suspect that the Managing Director would take on.
There are also trades persons in the library staff -- Diane Reed, Budget Director -- and there is, as one of the initiatives for management improvement, a plan to go forward with consolidation of the trades people so that we could have a single work order system and deploy people centrally. That's kind of underway in its very preliminary stages.
Thank you very much. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Tasco.
I don't want my time charged to this. Point of information.
Point of 128 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET information.
I know you have to put these contracts out for bid. But would it be possible to do a bid for, say, two or three years so that the contractors would be on call to come in and do the repair work when you need it, as opposed to holding it? Because while you're holding the bid, the roof is leaking on the gym floor and the gym floor is buckling, and then we've got to put money in the gym floor and the roof.
You can't patch. You've got to fix it. You should have a life history of the facilities, an inventory or record of when the last roof was put on, when you think it may be put. You have to have some analysis of all of that and maybe when you let the contract -- the contract is not just for these five roofs. It's a three-year contract. And in three years we'll have so many roofs or we'll have so much work to be done in that period and you can lock in 129 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET the rate.
I think NTI does some of their demolition work that way. I don't know whether the Capital Program Office has ever considered doing this or whether it has a history of doing it in that fashion.
Again, Rick Tustin, Capital Program Office. We have, at least for the last five years, those kind of contracts you're referring to. We call them as on call or requirements contracts that we refer to them. We have one for general construction, one for mechanical, one for electrical and I believe we have one for landscape. We also have those type of contracts for environmental abatement, asbestos and that kind of stuff as well. We bid them on a periodic basis. Procurement has been working with us, and they would like us to bid on a yearly basis so that we can get again that ongoing competition. They're usually bid because we don't have a definitive project that we're hiring 130 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET them to do. What we do is we bid it on what's called a time and material basis. So it's the lowest percentage mark-up for their labor costs and their material costs and it's on actual cost and the number of hours they work on a job. So we've been doing that. Normally what happens, Councilwoman, is the operating departments will go out first to fix a problem, a roof patch, a leak or something else. If they feel the project is too large for their staff to handle and they only have two or three roofers and can't do it, then we would ask our requirements contractor or our on-call contractor to go out and to make those kinds of repairs. We don't want to do it to do a brand-new roof because it's usually too large. But that's what we use them for and we find it's very pretty useful. Then we build back towards either that department's operating budget or a Capital Budget line.
But you can't do the roof projects, the larger roofing projects, you can't do it that way instead of 131 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET holding them for five or six years?
Well, we probably could. But because we are doing the project on a time and material basis it's going to cost more to do it. If a contractor bids on a known item like a roof and they can take off how many square feet it is and the type of roofing you're going to need and everything else, you can usually get a better price. If you bid it as a single project, as opposed to what we're doing, which is, again, on-call, go in and go out and try to take care of these problems, but not necessarily do a big job because then it's more economical to actually bid it as a single project with a known scope.
Mr. Tustin, you're helping me make a point that I made earlier. You're expanding my point.
I know you are. You have 65 firehouses -- is that 132 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET what the number is?
We have 63. I know you're trying to have fewer, but we're fighting that.
Wouldn't it have been a savings to the City of Philadelphia if you would have put the contract out for the exhaust systems? One deal had to be more to our advantage to put it out to do them all at once, even if it took six months and you paid as you went. Isn't their fire power in doing the deal in one --
There's a trade off, and I'll explain what that is. You're right. Economy of scale, you're probably going to get a better price as a lump sum. The problem is each fire station requires a 133 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET separate design. We don't have one fire station, a cookie cutter, for everything. We need to hire a design firm to look at each one and design the system that best suits the configuration of that fire station. By doing it in packages of or 15, what we can do is 8 get an architect or an engineer out there, do 9 a quick design within a matter of a couple 10 months, get that out for bid and get that work started. If we waited until we had design work done for 64 fire stations, we probably would have gotten a better price, but we probably would not have 34 fire stations anywhere close to done by now because of the amount of time it would have taken to design all 64 fire stations. So in a way by breaking it up in smaller pieces we can actually expedite fire stations being done sooner.
But there would have been a way to have one architectural firm. There are ways to do things work in progress. That concept that I suggested could have been utilized and still accomplished the 134 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET goal.
It's similar to what they call fast tracking a project, where what you do is you bid packages of it and bid those packages separately. If you're doing a large project like a prison, you may do the foundation package and the site package and bid them separately. But if you really stop to think of it, isn't that what we're really doing? We're taking 64 and we're bidding smaller packages and designing smaller packages as we go.
I'm pleased to hear that that is something that you do. That's why these hearings are so educational and we come and listen because we learn. It's good to know that you're doing those things.
On the Capital Program, on of the Capital Program, "$53 million is allocated over the life of the plan to reconstruct or resurface 135 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET neighborhood streets and Fairmount Park roads and drives. To pay for these funds, the City intends to issue new taxpayer supported general obligation bonds." Of the $53 million, how much will be spent to reconstruct or resurface neighborhoods streets?
Councilwoman, I'm not the right person to answer that question. That's a Streets Department project and they do their own Capital Budget.
I know the Streets Department was eager to testify at the hearings. We also have a representative from the library whenever the Council President returns.
I'm told that two representatives from Streets have been called to an emergency meeting with regard to snow. I've asked that one of them rejoin the hearing. In general, if I may, I want to make 136 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET sure that there's at least one representative of every agency that remains here for the rest of the afternoon. Thank you.