I still have some time. What plans are there for, in your planning, to address the issue of driveways?
I know that, but City Planning doesn't have anything to do with that?
Well, basically that there's not enough money to do everything that needs to be done. The Streets Department has tried to upgrade in terms of productivity. They have a number of innovative new processes, and where possible they've gotten the funding, they've purchased equipment that is more productive. 137 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET They also have developed a ranking system so that there's a fair and equitable dispersion of this kind of project based on need. But to be honest with you, you would probably be better served by someone from Streets.
Yes. Thank you. I think I'm done. Mr. Tustin, since we don't have any new construction going on, probably since we don't have any money in the budget, but if we should be fortunate enough to get some dollars to construct a facility or an add-on, what standards do you use in looking at what the expansion should include? Such as, would you say that we're going to expand the rec center, and in that expansion we need to have air conditioning, heating or wiring for technology? Is that part of the make-up?
Well, all of those things you just mentioned, Councilwoman, are actually code issues. They're required by code. In other words, if you're designing 138 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET an expansion to a rec center for a meeting room, there is so many square feet per person that that room has to be designed for. So if you think the meeting room will accommodate 150 people, there is a code that says you need to provide so many square feet per person, and that's how big you make the room. There's also a code that tells us how to heat and air condition that room.
Is air conditioning an option or is it a requirement now?
I don't believe it's a requirement, but I would want to investigate that a little further. I know that one of the issues that have come up in our department working with the recreation project group is air conditioning of gymnasiums. Because of the type of activity in that room, it's a place of assembly and there's a sport going on, what happens is body heat goes up because of all the activity and you're required to have so many of what's called air changes per hour. 139 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET That's how many times the air in that room 3 totally gets evacuated and replaced. It's a code requirement. One of the issues with air conditioning in a gymnasium is that if you're taking all that air in that room and exchanging it so many times per hour, you're losing that cooling right outside because of the number of times you have to exchange it. So when you air condition a gymnasium, the size of the units have to be very, very large and the capacity has to be very, very large in order to accommodate the use of that room. When it's not being used for a sporting event, it's very hard to scale down the running of that equipment to accommodate a different activity. And I'm told through my rec team that what happens is you have high equipment failures because you're asking that same piece of equipment to run in different ways at different times. So there is a lot of issues that are addressed in it. But your original question -- and I'm sorry for making it a long answer -- has 140 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET to do mostly with code requirements that drive our decisions on how big to make a room and how to air condition it and how to ventilate it and how to heat it.
What do the architects say? What is the position of the architects that are designing the building? Some of that stuff you talked about I heard 30 years ago. We haven't had any changes in the way we air condition or the needs that we have for the facilities. I just can't imagine that you can't air condition a gym. You can't compare it to the Spectrum. The same code would be required there, but that's air conditioned.
If I may, I just want to make sure that the same consultation and collaboration that you've asked for between CPO and Recreation happen here today. I think that the Commissioner might have some thought on this, which are additive.
What we find is that the Commissioner may have his thoughts about something, but the capital people in the 141 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET Capital Programs Office who are making the decisions on what should go in a rec center is not listening or communicating with the Commissioner. That's my assessment. The Commissioner hasn't said that. We've met the struggle back and forth on some issues that we believe would be the right thing to do. The thinking in the Capital Programs Office about certain issues, it's hard to kind of break through when it's always been done that way and let's just continue to do that way. We had to struggle with Dorothy Magnum (ph) in making sure that the standards were high, that the equipment we get is the best. I don't know what the philosophy is around what people think about these rec centers. We want rec centers where I don't have to spend $2 million this year and two years later spend $2 million on the same issue or the system if we look at building it with quality assurance to begin with. I want the thinking to be that we want first class, first quality equipment and 142 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET that they are things that we should have. If I have to continue to struggle with that, I mean, there's something missing somewhere.
I want to make sure you get not only the correct information, but the breadth of information, and I think your question would be best served by sort of a collaborative answer. I don't know that there's not communication. We need to solve that issue if that is a problem, but at least for the next couple of hours, I'm orchestrating the responses, and I do want to make sure that you get the response that your question deserves. Then if there's a conflict, it is up to the Administration to clarify that.
Could I get the Commissioner to respond about the air conditioning?
For the record, again, Vic Richard, Recreation Commissioner. Thank you for having me up. Relative to the air condition or 143 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET heating system or any type of high volume usage, it should be done on the front. It should be done in the design phase. I know in the past a lot of things were dictated by the dollars, which it shouldn't be done that way. It's more fiscal savvy and smart to do the entire thing while you have the shell open, instead of having to come back and retro fit. To go further in detail with your question relative to a gymnasium, when you design the air condition or the heating unit you design based on -- just like Rick was saying -- the volume capacity of that room, but you do it and you build and design it in zones. So you may create that air conditioned separate zone system and tonnage for that one particular gymnasium area and have maybe the dance studio and the arts and crafts room done on a different system, and then maybe you may have an auditorium or a different part. So you build it, design it in the front while the shell is open, and then you 144 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET build it in zones so when the gymnasium is down, the entire system is down, but you still have operational capacities to either chill or heat the rest of the facility.
Now, that process, that requires additional money than if you, I guess, do it the traditional way?
It may take a little bit more money. But in the long run you're saving money in maintenance and also in usage of the system as well. Say you're not using the gymnasium and you got one system, that means you're running the system for the entire building, where the gym may be the biggest part of the facility. So the most cost effective and business savvy way to do it is what I presented to you today. Not only that, if the system goes out, you don't lose capacity of the entire facility. You only lose capacity of that one particular part of the building and you can still deliver services while you're getting that part of the building back up and operating. 145 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET
Did we do zone heating and air conditioning at Dorothy Magnum?
Do we have zoning there? I'm sorry. I don't have that detail in front of me, but I can find that out.
Let me just add that greater initial, up front costs, which are saved through life cycle savings, is a discussion we have with just about every project. Is it better to spend more up front and reap those benefits over the years, or given scarce resources, do we have to unfortunately, just to get a project up and running, start the project, perhaps not with the maximum efficiency and then perhaps try to retro fit? In my personal opinion -- and I did study architecture -- it's not necessarily a right or wrong. You do have to factor in cost. But hopefully each time we do a project in consultation with the Councilmember, we make the right decision for that project and for the amount of money we have at the time. 146 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET
We have Simons (ph) where no air conditioning was included in the expansion and now we're putting in air conditioning. It didn't make sense. This was sometime ago. That thinking and having struggled with the Dorothy Manuel project, we have tried to make sure that we learn from other projects that were built so that we would not have to go back and spend money because there are other rec centers that need resources, and we didn't want to continue to have to retro fit anything. I just want the thinking generally to be one that we should try to do it right the first time, so we won't have to go back. In the end you're going to pay it now or you're going to pay it later. Later is going to cost more money.
Well, we had the money to do my project and we got money from the state. So money was not an issue. 147 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET
Councilwoman, if I could add just for one second, the team that works in our office on recreation projects are the same group of to people that work 6 when they worked under Vic's office. We have 7 not moved the people off that team. So it's 8 Eric Iffrig and his team continue for that 9 continuity between our office and recreation, 10 and we do discuss all of our projects with 11 Recreation on a regular basis. 12
Thank you, Madam Chair. Good afternoon. Real briefly to follow-up on an earlier question with respect to process and as it relates to CPO, MDO, all the alphabets associated with the process, should I assume that there will be some evaluation as to whether or not the process in place is working as efficiently as it was 148 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET intended to be when we reorganized that?
I would make that recommendation to the Managing Director because both Recreation and CPO report to the Managing Director. The idea was that sort of coordinating authority would ensure that there was communication and consistency.
And I know you can't speak for the Managing Director, but you do you think there could be some time line as it relates to a response?
I think the best way to proceed would be to try to get that time line from the Managing Director if he's comfortable and respond to the Council President when we respond to the other queries from today.
I asked this question, I guess, for the last three or four Capital Budgets and I'm going to ask it again. 149 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET In a speech a few years ago, the Mayor talked about consolidation of Capital Projects with the School District, given that the School District had this massive multi-billion dollar proposal to rebuild schools. We had our traditional Five-Year Capital Budget plan. There was some thought that it made sense, because the rec facilities and the schools are in the same neighborhoods and is a better way of doing business, where we would consolidate the process, and therefore consolidate the capital improvements or a new construction of facilities so possibly a school could accommodate the needs of the neighborhood as it relates to recreation and educational opportunities. Every year I ask that question and every year I get told that we're working on the process. But I've never seen an example of it working in any structural way. So I'll ask the question again. Where are we with that process and has it in fact been implemented? Give me examples of where it's been implemented. 150 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET
I was involved in some early meetings under the new regime when Paul Vallas came into the City where that was discussed. I know the education secretary has been interested in that kind of coordination. We have a Charter mandated responsibility to review both the School District's Capital Plan and siting decisions. To be honest with you, especially over the last year, it has been difficult even getting that information from them. I do know that the School Board has asked --
Excuse me. You say you have a Charter mandated requirement to review the School District's Capital Project?
Yes. We don't have veto power, but we are charged with reviewing their Capital Plan and also reviewing their siting plan.
So are they required to do anything? I know they don't necessarily --
That's probably a legal rather than a policy question. 151 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET Certainly, over the almost five years I've been here, they have been very cooperative in providing us with that information, even though sometimes there might be some disagreement about the specifics of the plan. There has been some difficulty, however, in this past year moving forward with that plan. Now, on an ad hock basis, as we do community plans, especially if the School District has already made a decision either to upgrade a school or to build a school, on a staff level there's been fairly good communication and cooperation about meshing the community plans that we've done with their plans. But in terms of some across-the-board omnibus joint capital strategy, I will just ask if there's anyone else at the table that has additional information?
As far I know, it 152 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET never materialized. I will check with the Secretary of Education to make sure that my understanding is the last understanding. And we are obviously still very interested in that kind of collaboration.
Okay. As relates to cooperation between the School District and the City, beyond the physical capital improvements, do we have any other inter-governmental type of cooperation with the School District?
Let me cut to the chase. I'll tell you why I'm asking this question. In a school actually in my neighborhood, Blaine School, there was an attempt to construct some play equipment on School District land, which in my estimation, 153 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET I assumed it to be owned by the citizens of the City of Philadelphia, but I'm being told it's not Public Property, which I don't understand. Somebody actually told me it belonged to the Republicans. They may control the board, but they don't own the School District. The citizens own the school. I'm just telling you, this is the kind of stuff I get. The question came up about being able to spend capital dollars, quote/unquote, City capital dollars on property that's owned by the School District. We had a community meeting. We went through the process. Council President, they made a mistake on the clock. We went through the entire process. We had a meeting. We had representatives from Recreation and the School District at the site and we believed we were going to proceed. I mean, people were even selecting the colors of the play equipment. Then I get this note that we can't do it because it's not owned by the City of Philadelphia. Then we go through the 154 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET legal process. It's required to get some sort of lease and the whole nine yards. I'm thinking that the legal hurdle has been resolved. I'm now being told that the budgetary issue, although I requested that the money be taken out of my Capital Budget from the Council district, the decision has been made, again by one of the alphabet organizations -- and they actually referenced your name as the Budget Director -- that we cannot proceed on that expenditure.
Diane Reed, Budget Director. I have just been reading about this issue the last couple of days. It does seem that for our Capital Budget, as advised by the Law Department, that we either need to own the property or have a long-term lease on the property. I would think that the School District might be an appropriate place to inquire about an investment in play equipment. Did you talk to them about that?
They were 155 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET interested in entertaining that request, but they had a long capital process that would have put money in the budget in out years maybe. We have money, the Council district, and we're fully prepared to spend that money at that site. So we got beyond that hurdle. The question I'm asking is not who should spend the money, the School District or the City, the question that I'm asking is if we had a spirit of cooperation, why we can't enter into some sort of an agreement or have a process? I think generally we should have some sort of understanding between an inter-agency agreement that we wouldn't have to, on a case by case basis, have to revisit this every time somebody wants to do something on publicly owned land. Because I still consider the School District land publicly owned land.
It's public owned land, but it's not City of Philadelphia. I would say this is a case of the scarce resources and the impulse to do that is -- 156 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET
How could it be a case of scarce resources if I have money in my Council budget to do it? Explain that to me.
Well, because every single year we have tens of millions of dollars less to spend on capital projects.
Listen to me. I had money in prior years in my Council budget. I'm told the money is there. So I'm interested, along with the community, in spending some of that money on a site. I don't understand what you mean by scarce resources.
I think we are constrained by the Law Department's advice that if we do not own the property --
I wish Mr. Copeland (ph) was here. We actually got an opinion that told us how to do that. We were fully prepared to do that, to enter into a long-term lease agreement with the School District. The School District was more than willing to participate in the process. I'm 157 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET now being told that I can't, the Councilman of the 5th District, allocate money to do the play equipment on the School District land that the School District is interested in entering into a lease.
I'm the one that informed the Councilman of that after consultation with the Budget Office and the Managing Director's Office. What I was told, Councilman, again -- and I came right back and sent you an e-mail -- was that the City's policy has been that we can only spend capital money on either property we own or property that we have a long term lease with. That's what I was told is the requirements behind using capital money.
In that same memo you sent to me, there was language from Larry Copeland that said it can be done this way.
I understand that, 158 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET Councilman.
And I'm saying that the School District has agreed to do that. Then you tell me that the MDO and the Budget Director said that they don't want to spend the money on the site.
I do understand that and I do understand that Mr. Copeland sent out an opinion that it could be used legally. What I was told is, the policy of the City of Philadelphia, the Administration, is not to spend money on anything that we don't own or do not have a long-term lease in. That's a policy decision. I don't make policy. I just implement it.
Am I talking to myself? I've already said that the School District is willing to do that.
Councilman, it seems that you are saying the same thing, because Mr. Tustin is saying that we can't spend money if we don't have a long-term lease. You're saying that the School District is willing to enter into a long-term lease with the City. 159 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET So it seems that at this point, rather than debate this in a Council hearing, what needs to happen is a small working group needs to work it through if you are in agreement on the lease issue.
We already had that. That's why I'm asking these questions today because I can't the appropriate response. The way it came to me, even if we got the authorization of the School District to enter into a long-term lease agreement, the Budget Director and the Managing Director decided that they couldn't spend that money on that site. I'm saying, I don't understand it. If it's the Councilperson's district Council budget, the Councilperson and the community want to spend the money on the site, how can the Managing Director and the Budget Director make the decision that -- and the money is allocated -- how can they make the decision that it's not going happen? Based on what?
I suspect there might be some miscommunication, and I'm being honest 160 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET about that. I think there might be some miscommunication. It was my understanding that there was no possibility of a long term lease.
From where? The School District was at the meeting in the neighborhood. And Dana, who's high up in the School District, he committed to doing the lease.
If that's the case I think we would be happy to convene a meeting during this time frame. We can sit in a room 18 and find out what's policy, what's law and for everyone to hear each other speak, because I think that perhaps in doing this via memo there's been some miscommunication. I don't necessarily hear something that's an impossibility. And indeed at the end of day --
Who is going to 161 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET be in the meeting?
I am going to recommend that a representative of the MDO's Office be at a meeting. I'm sure the Budget Director would be happy to be there or to have a representative. CPO. We'll be there. And I would invite you or someone from your office who's knowledgeable about the issue.
To talk about a general policy? Because I don't want to just deal with this particular issue. That's the kind of stuff, you know, you guys tell me no. 14 I go down to the second floor, work out some arrangement. I get mine done. This is not about me. This is about a policy where we're supposed to have some spirit of cooperation between agencies. I still say the School District is owned by the City of Philadelphia. You can say whatever you want. You get those tax bills, so I say it's owned by the City of Philadelphia. You can't have some general policy that authorizes us to enter into these 162 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET agreements on a consistent basis, particularly given the fact that three, four years ago, the Mayor said that he wanted to have a consolidation of capital programs to support communities. Now, we've got these alphabet organizations telling people that you can't do it and it's inconsistent with what the Mayor says.
It would certainly be my recommendation, Councilman. Though the City Planning Commission is a peer agency, it would be my recommendation that we talk about the policy as well as the specific because I would like to also understand the policy.
All right. I guess the bell rang. I'll come back on another issue.
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Blackwell.
Thank you, Madam President. I'd like to ask a couple questions about SEPTA and the Market Street Elevated 163 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET Project.
I really do have other questions, but I thought I would just ask a few on this project. We have businesses that have 9 already shut down. As we've said before, when 10 the project starts they close an area. That 11 may be a month. It may be a couple months. 12 Then they go to the next area. That reopens. 13 And it happens over and over and over and 14 over. We've already had 14 businesses to shut down. Do you know if there are any plans for relief for the businesses, those who are struggling now and those who have shut down and what the future may bring?
Francis Jones, government affairs at SEPTA. As we previously stated, Councilwoman, our dollars that we receive from the federal government and from the other funding agencies are not able to be used to fund or to provide relief to businesses 164 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET directly. What we are able to do, which is what we've been doing and we've coordinated with your office and all the offices of the affected elected officials, is to provide technical assistance to the businesses through a consultant contract that we have working on a day to day basis with the businesses. But as far as direct dollars to the businesses for lost revenues, we're unable to do that.
I am told that before this project is over that they have to use industrial-type equipment to dig up the street that could even affect the homes on either side. Is that true? And if it be true, are there plans for those homes that will be affected and that could be damaged due to the use of industrial equipment in this project?
Councilwoman, I'm not familiar with our using industrial equipment. I do know that there's very intense work that has to be done and equipment will be commensurate with the work we have to do in 165 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET taking down the stations and the guide way. I will find out what the process is, how the process works and get that information to you.
Finally, on this subject, the initial date was '06 that the project will be finished. Now it is '08. Is there any work going on picking a new contractor for part of the project that was stopped months ago? And do we have a revised date for completion of this project or do we know if there is a date?
The contract with PKF, which was the contract on the Cobbs Creek package, as I stated earlier, is in litigation, and so we're working through that process. As soon as we have some resolution 18 in working through the surety company in resolving that issue we'll make sure that you're aware of where we are and what we're doing. As far as the completion date for the project, it's our understanding that at this point 2008 is the date of substantial completion for the project. 166 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET
Madam President, I note that it was 2008. I don't know when we had our last hearings, three months ago maybe.
We had hearings and that was the date that this same company that's still working on the project was fired from that end of it. There's nobody working there. We don't know when they will be. We don't know when litigation will finish. We don't know when an RFP or whatever can happen. So it's kind of difficult to expect that a project will have the same completion date when there's nobody even working on it. I put all these things on the record for my colleagues so that when we again, as we did last year, introduce this legislation, you will understand the depth of the problem that we're going through in West Philadelphia due to this project. Thank you. MR. DOONER (ph): Councilwoman Blackwell, John Dooner from the Capital Budget 167 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET coordinating for SEPTA. There is work underway right now to do an interim project in that area to address the utility relocation, some duct bank work, drainage and ordering the steel for 63rd Street. We're going to do that as a separate contract that SEPTA is going to release just to get some of these items moving. As we work it out with the security company and get a replacement contract for PKF, we'll have some of the early stages in motion so that the that the project can kind of get up and running on a faster pace. This project on that end was going to end earlier than any other contracts that are in place for the construction on the east end. Therefore, that's why even with this delay we still think that we can fit within the time line and be completed by the end of Calendar Year 2008.
I'd have to check on that. I was just talking to the project 168 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET manager earlier today. We can get back to you on a better time line on the interim initiatives.
Thank you. Madam President, we also note that this is an area where everybody knows, Chestnut, Market, Arch, everywhere in the City. We have times where it's closed, so seniors have got to go from Walnut Street all the way over to Arch or Race. There are puddles in the street. There's dirt. It's blocked off. Everything that could happen, happened. We certainly thank you for that information. Thank you, Ms. Jones. I heard the bell ring. We'll defer to my next colleague. Thank you.
Council President, I just want to point out that we do have a representative here from the library now.
That's fine. Would he approach the witness table, 169 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET please? Good afternoon.
Good afternoon, Council President Verna. My name is Bill 6 Fleming. I'm the Administrative Services Director for the Free Library.
Welcome, Mr. Fleming. The Capital Budget for the library includes $350,000 to assess the cause of the leaks at the Falls of Schuylkill Branch, repairs to the steps at McPherson and Logan Branches and assess the windows at Paschalville Branch. What does assess the cause of leaks mean?
In this case and in the case of some other similar branches in our system, what we're referring to is these are old buildings, Carnegie-type buildings that were built before 1930, and they all have similar-type problems in that we get moisture. It forms up above the window line. It's the way the buildings take water away from the roof. We've had problems with this for years. 170 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET We've had some success in recent years at our Lehigh Branch and Richmond Branch, which are similar buildings. What we've done is had someone assess the condition of the existing structure, actually do some design work, design meaning come up with a plan to fix the problem, and it also would include the cost of rectifying the problem, the construction cost.
That was my question. Will the $350,000 that's been referred to address the issues not only to assess the problem, but to correct it?
We believe it will. We don't see this as being much different than what we saw at Richmond in the last two years. So we're hoping that the cost will come in at approximately the same level. Our experience is that Richmond cost us approximately $250,000. Lehigh, I think, was a little more. It depends on the condition of the structure. But we believe that's sufficient money with maybe a little pad to get us through. 171 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET
Will that be enough for all four libraries that were mentioned?
Well, the steps from McPherson are just a totally different problem. It's deteriorating steps. There's a large number of steps there. That's going to be a big problem. That's not a waterproofing problem to the building, that's just the steps.
It would just be concrete. We'd replace what's there with concrete. Paschalville is another one of those Carnegie buildings, unique windows, special-type construction that you can't replace. In fact, they cost a lot of money to replace, based on our experience at Chestnut Hill and Haddington. We want to see what we can do, whether we can put some kind of storm window on top of that or whether we have to replace the windows. That's something that 172 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET has to be decided.
The financial wizard to my right is telling me $350,000 will never be able to cover the correction for the four facilities that are mentioned.
Well, the one facility I didn't mention was the steps at Logan. We've already done that job with prior money that should not be mentioned there. So the $350,000 actually covers the three projects. Before I step into trouble here, we do have some money we're using from '05 to start the process.
Councilman Ramos, I know you're waiting. Could I just ask one more question with the library as long as he's here? The Capital Budget for the library totals $800,000. $250,000 of this is for branch boilers and air conditioning systems. Can you tell us how many boilers and air conditioning systems you will replace?
With that money it 173 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET would probably replace one. One system.
We have a number of branches which are in order that we try to tackle. At Falls of Schuylkill, for instance, we had an emergency repair we had to do with operating funds. So that would fall off the board. So whatever the next one is. I don't have it off the top of my head, but that would go next. We're currently repairing three systems at Greater Olney, Coleman and Kensington.
I would have to get back to you with which one we plan to do next.
Please. While you're there, I would like you to explain how you're able to reduce the $600,000 amount for the branch libraries in the out 174 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET years of the Capital Program?
Well, what we plan to do is certainly within the constraints of the budget that is basically laid out for us by the Administration. A lot of things we're trying to do, depending on the critical nature of the project -- naturally we can't replace and maintain as many things as we would like to with the money -- but we're just prioritizing what's out there and taking care of it as it happens.
If I can add to that. It's my understanding that there was a fairly comprehensive upgrade and maintenance program for the branch libraries over the last few years that's just ending. So we hope with life-cycle spans as they are, that we would not have to go back for some period of time to do substantive repairs, except for emergencies.
That's what we had been led to believe, that all of the branch libraries had been rehabbed. Yet 175 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET we keep coming back with necessary repairs to be made.
Well, we did rehab all of the branches. When you get into mechanical systems, if a mechanical system still has seven or eight years of useful life, you're not going to go in there and make that replacement until you have to. In the case of the branch renovations, I believe the first one we did was in 1994. So we're starting to see problems creep up with those earlier branches that we had done in the renovation process.
It doesn't seem that long ago that we started to rehab them.
Time goes by when you're having fun, huh? Councilman Ramos.
Thank you, Madam President. Ms. Griffith, is there someone here 176 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET from the Streets Department? I know you mentioned earlier that they had left. Are they back?
Yes. We actually got a note. Apparently, unless someone came in recently, they are still in this emergency meeting. They did respond in writing to the Council President's earlier question, but I don't believe there's anyone here now. If there is, could they identify themselves? (No response.)
We were just caucusing. Apparently Ms. Robinson is able to answer the question that the Council President asked, but is not fully knowledgeable about the full range of projects. So you may hit upon a project that she's familiar with, but we would have to excuse her if that's not the case.
I understand. If it cannot be answered now, we'll get an answer later. In the Five-Year Plan under Street 177 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET Department Projects, it states that the Street Department already has inspected and replaced signs at 682 intersections through anticipated funding of $2 million. Flashing signals will be installed at 130 schools over the next five years. Particularly at our last hearing and also going into this year, we all have been so concerned about our schools and students' safety in our City. I wanted to know, was there an assessment made of where you would put these lights, or is it by request only?
I'm going to defer that question to Charlie Trainer, our Chief Traffic Engineer.
Councilman, Charles Trainer, the Chief Traffic Engineer for the Streets Department. Councilman, the first step of the process for the installation of the school flashing signals is an application from the school. We're really concentrating right now on the public schools. I believe we have 42 or 43 applications on hand. We have a 178 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET contract that we just received the bids on, so the paperwork is flowing, which should do those 42 schools. We've already asked the School District to provide us with additional school applications. Any other applications that we get in we'll move with them.
My first question is, have you ever thought of doing an assessment of where these flashing lights might be needed outside of schools? Right now it seems as though the way that you get a flashing light is if a school calls or if there's petitions in that neighborhood. They go to the district Councilpeople or someone else and then you get put on a list. I'm wondering why don't we, especially since in the last few years we've been so concerned about student safety in our City -- has anyone thought of doing an assessment to see where we actually need these flashing lights and see how much it would cost us and just get those flashing lights out in those areas?
Each school has a 179 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET school speed limit sign on the perimeter streets.
My question is, has there been an assessment or any thinking along the lines of doing an assessment of all the schools in the City of Philadelphia to see where flashing lights might be needed?
We've been responding based on requests. Councilman, there are over 600 school properties in the City of Philadelphia.
Okay. That includes charter schools, parochial, private, all the schools?
Ms. Griffith, has the Planning Commission ever thought of doing an assessment of where these flashing lights 180 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET might be needed by just taking a look at all these 600 schools and see who needs them?
Honestly, Councilman, no, we haven't. We would normally defer to Streets for that kind of assessment.
A couple other questions I have. Charlie, it says that it's $2 million over five years. It seems as though that you'll be able to do about schools a 12 year, and that the cost is somewhere over 13 $15,000. This is not my area of knowledge. 14 But $15,000 is what we pay, $15,000 plus is 15 what we pay for flashing lights? 16
Per school. Between 17 $15 to $25,000 depending on the type of pole 18 and the number of flashers that we need to put 19 in for the school. A one-way street that's 26 20 feet wide only requires one pole post mounted. 21 If it's a two-way street, we now need two. If 22 it's got two lanes in each direction, then we 23 now need an overhead signal. 24
These are open 25 bid contracts? 181 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET
These are electrical contractors that have been approved for signal work with the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation and approved by us.
If you are going to split up $2 million over the five years that means that you will only do this year, 12 or will you do more? If so, does that mean 13 that in the third, fourth or fifth year you 14 might not have money to provide flashing 15 lights in other schools? 16
We have $1 million 17 that we just went out with on a bid. That's a 18 loan from the School District. We expect to 19 do 42 schools on that contract. The contract 20 is expected to start around April, actually on 21 the street, with completion date by the end of 22 the Calendar year. 23
But if you're 24 stretching $2 million over five years, the way 25 it's divided up, it will turn out to be about 182 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET 26 schools only. Is that what you will only do in the first fiscal year coming up?
I think we may even be a little bit lower. In the fiscal year coming up -- well, the $1 million is also going to be going in the next fiscal year.
It's actually a loan that we just received from the School District. We have, I think it's $200,000 budgeted for FY '06, which would give us to 14 20 schools. 15
We have 42 applications on hand right now, which are scheduled to be done with that million dollars.
This is only for the public schools? When do the Catholic 183 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET parochial schools come into play? They have the second biggest school system in the City. When do they get in the mix?
The application system we have, they're in the mix. If we have an application for a parochial school, if we have an application for a charter school or a private school, if they sign the agreement and provide us with the insurance documentation as we get closer to the installation date, they are in the mix. They join the mix along with the public schools.
So of the 40-some applications that you have, they have come from public, parochial, private, charter schools?
Thank you so much. I want to get just a couple questions. May I proceed, Madam President?
Ms. Griffith, last year when you testified under recommended 184 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET FY 2005-2010 Capital Program, I think the fifth paragraph, you stated -- it was over the discussion of infrastructure and public facilities. Councilman Clarke made reference to this issue earlier this afternoon. You stated, "Over the coming months we will work closely with the Managing Director's Office, our other sister agencies, the School District, community-based organizations and, of course, Members of City Council to consider a range of strategies." Was that ever done?
My memory isn't as good as yours, Councilman. A range of strategies for what in specific?
You stated that months after your April 5th testimony, that you were going to work closely with the Managing Director, with sister agencies, the School District, community-based organizations and, of course, Members of City Council to consider a range of strategies on the infrastructure in public facilities' downsizing. Do you remember that? 185 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET
Were you able to convene that group that you stated last year?
No. Two of the staff members of the School District who had -- I wouldn't say promised -- but indicated they would be interested in meeting are now no 12 longer there. The director of facilities planning -- I believe that's the title -- has left and another staff person and her office has also left, and we've had some difficulty in reconnecting. There is a consultant that's been brought on board at the request of School Board members. They've met with us and we've conveyed our concerns to them, that we would be very interested in reconnecting and reopening a dialog across the board. As I said earlier in response to Councilman Clarke's question, on an ad hock basis, given a specific project we often can 186 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET communicate. But in terms of overall strategy and some kind of agency to agency agreement, we have not been particularly successful.
Because it was not just the School District, although the School District was a big part of it. But we were talking last year about facilities and physical deterioration and that we needed to upgrade and do things a little different because of the times. We no longer have a two million plus population when some of the structures went up. We have a 1.5 or less population at this time. Then what I wanted to do is go back to something I said last year, and that is that when the Philadelphia City Planning Commission comes into being early '50 -- I think you probably remember this statement. It's probably verbatim the way I said it last year. That Dilworth and those thinkers of that era and leaders looked at the idea of a Planning Commission as the engine of creativity. That's the way they envisioned it. 187 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET Their idea was that the Planning Commission would be thinking ahead of all of us Philadelphians, and that they would group, like you suggested last year, that you would group with the Managing Director, sister agencies, Members of City Council to take a look at this issue of infrastructure of this City. It didn't happen. I understand that we all get very tied up with our work. But this is something that the founders, that the people that had the vision of a Planning Commission were thinking of. That this body would have the foresight to think ahead of us in what the City would look like. It doesn't mean that it would come to be, but that there would be some sort of plan, that there would be some thinkers together that would say, this might be what the City should look like years from now. We get rid of these old structures. Our population is smaller. We deal with the School District. Although I have a better understanding of your testimony this year than 188 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET I did last year -- that's not your fault. I guess I was going through my rookie experience last year. But I don't see anything about things that we have been hearing in this City about Naval Yard development. And it's going to be housing and it's going to be business and it's going to be entertainment. Very little on River City, on NTI. What's your thinking on slot parlors? Should it go here? Should it go there? What after the Comcast skyscraper. Should we have another skyscraper that's 70 stories high? Antiquated zoning laws in this City. When are we going to tackle antiquated zoning laws and regulations in the City? The way the Planning Commission was set out by the thinkers of this Commission was for it to do precisely this, look ahead of us. Put everything in a big plan. Although I'm encouraged by some of the things that you presented today and you did last year, I don't see this visionary charge that the Planning -- do you have a new chairman of the board now? 189 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET
Last year you didn't have one or the person was leaving. He had different ideas and contradictory ideas to what should be done in a lot of areas when it comes to the Planning Commission.
Councilman, I hope you will be here when I give my operating testimony. Because indeed all of the elements that you have laid out you will find in that testimony that focuses on what the Planning Commission is going to do. Today I am really a representative of this unfortunately diminished Capital Program Budget, which relates mostly to maintaining our facilities and trying to keep leaky roofs from leaking. We do have a number of new initiatives working with MDO and Fairmount Park on a comprehensive open space plan, doing a three-dimensional view of Center City so that we can test out things like skyscrapers and how they're going to impact on the City, et cetera. 190 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET I think I signed off on, I think, the final draft of that operating budget testimony. It should be conveyed to Councilmembers soon, and I very much look forward to this dialog at that time. I do remember you were one of the Councilmembers who seemed really enthusiastic about some of the initiatives that the Planning Commission had put forth. And I do want to let you know where we are with those initiatives. I apologize for misunderstanding your initial question. Although we have not been as successful with the School District, there are two what's called cluster meetings with the Managing Director and other members of the Mayor's Cabinet that have been grappling with this issue of how do we do more with less and how do we right size infrastructure. It's not so much reflected in the Capital Budget because that really speaks to, as I said, just maintenance and operation. We would be happy to, perhaps along with the Managing Director's Office, to sit 191 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET down with you and in more detail talk about the kind of right sizing for 1.4 million.
So when you come before us the next time on operating budget, you will have another written testimony that would outline some of things you just articulated?
Okay. What you presented was a very good idea. I think that you should try to get convened this group to talk about, you know, long range strategies on how to handle deteriorating facilities. You stated here Members of City Council. So I'm willing to be of any help that I can in getting that group together. Thank you, Madam President.
You're welcome. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Tasco.
Thank you. On of the Budget, Item 49-1, under the Managing Director's budget, 192 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET "City-wide facilities make critical renovations and other improvements at City-owned sites on an as-needed basis." Tell me about that. What sites are included in that $2 million? Who makes the decision on how the money is spent and what sites get improvements?
That's essentially the MDO's emergency fund. I don't know whether there's a representative that would like to speak to that in more detail. I see a representative. MR DONAGHY: The money that's in that line item is used for emergency repairs to facilities when they pop up. It's not designated for any particular buildings at the beginning of the year. Traditionally, historically we have used, at least this much this year, in trying to make those emergency repairs to facilities. It is City wide. It's not just restricted to any one department.
Could you give me an example? 193 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET
Yes, I can. An example is the room we're sitting in today. Some of the money that went towards the renovation of the damage, the flood damage here in this building, came from that line item. Those are the type of emergencies that we have. Things that are completely unexpected and that we're not anticipating in advance. As I said, we generally have used that type. I can give you a list of projects for your review that we have used this money for in the past.
Is this a traditional pot of money that has been in the Managing Director's Office and for how long?
I'd like to talk about the airport. Where is the Planning Commission? 194 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET
Ms. Griffith has stepped out of the room just for a moment. She'll be right back.
Okay. Madam President, the Planning Commission is out of the room for a moment. Skip me and come back.
Thank you, Councilman Rizzo and Madam President. Actually, I may need her also. Actually, a couple of quick questions. Ms. Schlotterbeck, is she here? And actually CPO and/or Rec. Two questions; one with respect to Public Property and one with respect to CPO issues. Actually, Recreation also. A few years back there was a proposal to look at City Hall, particularly first floor reuse for some sort of retail commercial activity that would help raise some revenue. Is there a copy of that document?
Joan 195 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET Schlotterbeck, Public Property Commissioner. If I'm familiar with the report that you're referring to, I think it was done by the Controller's Office.
I think I might somewhere in my files. I have to look.
I introduced a resolution recently to have public hearings. And as soon as the budget stuff is done we wanted to talk about City Hall in general, the use of it and particularly some potential reuses of some of the space on the first floor. If you can get that document to the Council President --
Can you get that to the Chair, a copy of that in preparation, rather than us having a hearing and then asking for that?
The other thing, as it relates to facilities, particularly 196 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET recreation facilities, years back there was a determination that there would be -- I think it was $1.5 at one point per Council district?
I'm assuming that was based on the geographical area of the Council districts and the number of people that we subsequently represented, which was like 150,000 or 160, whatever it was at that time. Recently -- and this has nothing to do with you guys -- we had a re-districting in this Council, and as a result of the re-districting, there was somewhat of a redistribution of recreation facilities in various Council districts. I can speak of mine in particular where I picked up a number of facilities. Most of them, if not all, were relatively old and conditions were, as suspected, somewhat suspect. I'm not asking you to come up with a formula to figure out how to redistribute the Council's $1.2 million. Now you're talking about $400,000 to Councilpeople. I think 197 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET that's something that I probably would only get one or two votes for here in Council since I picked up the majority of the new facilities. In your City-wide analysis of facilities that needs to be done -- because there's two pools; there's the Council allocation and there's the City-wide allocation. Can you look at a strategy that -- frankly, this is a somewhat self-serving question -- could give me some assistance? Because I will not be able to, based on your recommendations, even if we were able to get the $1.2, accommodate all of the facilities that I have in the 5th Councilmanic District with that money. I think you actually said as it relates to swimming pools I have like --
As part of the assessment report that we started this past year, which we'll have in May, it will be all of the A and B facilities. That assessment report, even though it's going to be recommendations per facility, it will be 198 02/23/05 - FY '06 CAPITAL BUDGET rolled up into one spreadsheet. So we'll be able to look at all of the hundred facilities at one glance and look at, what are the hot issues or the major issues that need addressing through capital funds across the board, not by district, but all the facilities. So it really wouldn't relate to a Council district, per se. It would relate to all hundred. So we will be looking at that to see which is the best place to place the capital funds. So I guess what I'm saying is, part of our review of that will be looking at it from a facility base and not necessarily a Council district base.