COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA PUBLIC HEARING COMMITTEE ON LAW AND GOVERNMENT Room 969, City Hall Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Thursday, December 11, 2003 5:00 p.m. _ _ _ Bill 030227 - Resolution authorizing City Council's Committee on Law Government to investigate the effectiveness and efficiency of the delivery of public housing resources and services to the low and moderate income residents of Philadelphia by the Philadelphia Housing Authority in cooperation with the City of Philadelphia... _ _ _ PRESENT: COUNCILMAN DAVID COHEN COUNCILMAN JANNIE BLACKWELL COUNCILMAN FRANK RIZZO JASON MAYLAND ELLEN BERKOWITZ ROBERT JAFFE ALSO PRESENT: JOEL M. SWEET, ESQUIRE _ _ _ V A R A L L O Incorporated Litigation Support Services Eleven Penn Center, Suite 600 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103 (215) 561-2220 (215) 567-2670 I N D E X Resolution 030227 By Councilman Cohen By Mr. Mayland 16 By Ms. Berkowitz 18 By Mr. Jaffe 24 By Councilman Rizzo 23 By Councilwoman Blackwell 32 - - - (No exhibits were marked.) - - - 3
This is the continued hearing on the Law and Government Committee, which I, David Cohen, Chairman on Resolution 030227 and which was adopted on April 10th of 2003, is now in session and it's in session under the rule of City Council which permits a continuing forum. There will be no outside witnesses today because today will be a summary of what the cost has been to Philadelphians in both lack of knowledge of what's going on and lack of ability of City Council to perform its duties to protect the people of Philadelphia and to see that affordable housing is made available to them, and to the costs in other ways, that don't need to be specifically mentioned, the people of Philadelphia by the tactics of the Philadelphia Housing Authority in refusing to recognize the authority of City Council to the point where they felt it necessary to obey either invitations of the committee, which everyone else has obeyed, or even in obeying subpoenas, and instead choosing to go to court. So today we're just going to review a few of the items, it will be a relatively brief 4 City Council 12/11/03 hearing, but it will set the foundation for next term's session of City Council which I think will compete the schedule of hearings in a way which will make clear to everyone that City Council is the legislative arm of the City Government and that the state of anarchy in which the executive director of the Philadelphia Housing Authority, Carl Green and the Mayor John Street, have permitted unlawfully and impermissibly a state of anarchy to exist in which there's one department, the city's largest landlord, a government agency whose head and the members of the executive board are appointed by the Mayor and the City Controller of the City of Philadelphia, feel free to act without any controls. The actions of the kind that have provoked what has happened to Philadelphia, where the nation is watching what is going to occur in the Federal probe that began some people say two or three years ago, some people say just a short time ago, and nobody knows the answer as of now except those conducting the probe. But it's that kind of refusal to account for the public responsibility. It's the 5 City Council 12/11/03 atmosphere which makes everybody think of Philadelphia as the home of cronyism and corruption and that everything is for sale. It seems to purvey the decisions of the executive director of the Philadelphia Housing Authority and his feeling that he does not have anybody to report to. It's the kind of situation which results, for example, in his being the head of the Pension Board of the Philadelphia Housing Authority, and his naming each and every member of that board, his choosing a company far away from Philadelphia to conduct what he considers are audits, his refusal to acknowledge his responsibility, leaving open the possibility that millions of dollars have been wastefully spent, instead of protecting the rights of veteran employees of Philadelphia Housing Authority, but they may have been spent for totally improper purposes. Nobody knows whether or not there is a pension fund that in fact really exists because everybody having anything to do with the pension fund has informed this committee that they 6 City Council 12/11/03 of course are bound by the wishes of the executive director who's made clear to them that he wishes them not to participate in this hearing. It is almost an unbelievable situation that's persisted for slightly over eight months. I believe that the Resolution 030227 was enacted by City Council on April 10th of this year 2003. And for that eight months, the government of Philadelphia has been thwarted in its effort to see to it that the estimated more than 70,000 Philadelphians who are housed in some way, one way or the other by Philadelphia Housing Authority receive the right kind of affordable housing, and at the same time the employees who numbers it's hard to say how many at any given time, but something around 2000 employees.
It's hard for us to know whether their complaints about unfair actions about the state of disorganization that exists in the agency, about alleged illegal matters that occur in the agency as witnessed the allegations in the lawsuit recently filed by an attorney for Philadelphia Housing Authority, someone whom the authority claims is still an employee, but he claims he's been constructively 7 City Council 12/11/03 terminated. This is a state that ought not to exist, we would never have tolerated it if the landlord was a private owner and to think that a government agency has perpetrated a course of conduct so full of irresponsibility and so full of wrongdoing is really hard to conceive of existing in the City of Philadelphia, and itself probably warrants the kind of attention the city government as a whole is currently receiving from the Federal Government. So I just wanted to mention these few items. For eight months it's been an ongoing story in which the Philadelphia Housing Authority with the responsibility of making housing available to the poorest people in Philadelphia has in fact hired two of the most expensive law firms in Philadelphia and used money that should have been used for purposes of housing, used money to seek to thwart us. In fact Philadelphia Housing Authority apparently feels so powerful that it has assumed the functions of a government agency with the power to investigate council members. It's 8 City Council 12/11/03 threatened the chairman of this committee with the lawsuit for defamation of character, whatever that's supposed to mean under the circumstances. It has threatened to take action against staff members working with this committee, both in the court action which this committee initiated in order to enforce its power of subpoena in accordance with the Home Rule Charter, as well as the efforts, and that was done by the law firm of Wolf, Block, Schorr, Solis, Cohen, and then in another major law firm, both are very expensive law firms, which most people in Philadelphia could never possibly afford to pay, but they served to protect the Philadelphia Housing Authority from having to meet its obligations. The law firm of Ballard Spar has been hired to in turn subpoena the chairman of this committee and a staff member, former staff member of this committee to prove the case that PHA alleges exist, that the Council is aiding the union in its efforts to negotiate with the PHA in a contract that's I think already more than a year expired. I want to say that in my 35 years since my election first in 1967 to City Council, 9 City Council 12/11/03 I've never experienced such arbitrary actions as that by the Philadelphia Housing Authority. I never thought I would see the day when a mayor of the city would support such action. Even as he talks friendship with City Council, he fights it in every way possible. And this effort by the Mayor to turn the City of Philadelphia into a one-man government, run by him with aided like Carl Green, who believe they have no 11 responsibility to the public, they're appointed to serve, is beyond belief. But they are the facts as of now and it is my hope that that will be overturned by the actions of this committee and by the actions of the City Council and ultimately the City Administration and the courts during the next term which will begin on Monday, January 5th. So on this occasion which will be the, probably the last hearing during the current term which expires at midnight on January 4th -- or January 5th of 2004, I wanted to have this report contained, a few comments, not all of them, but some of the highlights that we think have to be dealt with in the next year, and I'm sure they will be in the next term of office.
10 City Council 12/11/03 I think we're going to restore order to government in Philadelphia, that the 78 or 75,000, whatever the number may be, of city residents who are subjected to the whims of the leadership of Philadelphia Housing Authority and the way in which it conducts itself will find that there will be a new day in which the rights will be guaranteed. I think it's been very disturbing that during the administration of Carl Green, and this is one of the main things we wanted to investigate, was why was it that the list of people on the waiting list has grown while the number of affordable units has continually decreased, why is it that the decisions are being made against the best interest of the people who need the affordable housing, and if Carl Green has any explanations we would like to hear them, find out why it is that Philadelphia affords such bleak opportunities for people who need housing. Recently I received a call late one afternoon that an apartment house was being vacated because of an inadequate fire alarm system and people were forced to move at the last moment 11 City Council 12/11/03 and services have previously been provided by Philadelphia Housing in the form of Section 8 certificates to make housing available to these people who have lived there in the apartment house for a number of years were not available simply by arbitrary decision of PHA. At the same time, a huge sum of money was returned last year, that should have been used for housing people, was returned to the Federal Government unused and untold hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions of dollars have been spent, not necessary legal services, legal services aimed not at achieving the goals of the Philadelphia Housing Authority from the point of view of affording affordable housing, but rather of stalling the efforts for people to find out what's happening so that public services could be improved in the city. Now I'm going to ask at this point, we'll just before I do that I'd like to mention one thing. It is the opinion of the Chair of this Committee that there is a concerted effort by the City of Philadelphia to engage in an effort to break down the pension rights of all the employees 12 City Council 12/11/03 of the City of Philadelphia and that the employees of the Philadelphia Housing Authority are used as guinea pigs by the City of Philadelphia to see whether or not union conditions can be thwarted or be broken down so that pension rights can be reduced to current and future employees of the city. It is an effort to follow the path led by Walmart in the nation and particularly currently in the City of Philadelphia to break down labor standards and to introduce or to rather deprive Philadelphia citizens of basic American rights which the labor movement and the people of the United States have attained over the years and to substitute for it instead third world conditions. As technically the United States takes the position on the global basis that we're seeking to approve the condition of the third world countries economies so that workers are paid decent wages and working conditions exist that are humane instead of serfdom, that companies like Walmart and some of our national policies lead in the direction of compelling American citizens to 13 City Council 12/11/03 have economic conditions which more and more resemble those of the third world countries. They do it by denying pension rights, by compelling people that have no ability to prepare for retirement, by having, by reducing or eliminating conditions that provide for health insurance and by requiring work at inferior wages and the government, which ought to be the model employer setting the pathway for good treatment of workers, instead finds itself often in the role of following. And in Philadelphia what's happening is that we're beginning to follow the rules of Walmart and introducing conditions that are very harmful to working people.
And for that reason I was very concerned by what I've been told was a position taken by Carl Green of PHA in its last negotiations, whereby people who started to work for the PHA would have their retirement benefits calculated 20 or 30 years hence when they retired if they lasted that long, their pension rights would be determined by the salaries they earned at the time they were hired, not by the salaries to which they became entitled by virtue of promotions 14 City Council 12/11/03 or the quality of their work. And in an effort to find that out, we found this resistance by PHA and their refusal to even come to hearings. There's an old adage in American life that says if people try to hide something they probably have good reason to want to hide it, reasons that don't stand the scrutiny of daylight. I believe that that applies here and that is what peaked my interest in the pension system and to date I don't know whether this is an allegation, whether it's true, I assume the very worse exists because PHA has had countless opportunities to refute this information but they have not chosen to do so, therefore I believe that maybe the situation is even far worse than what I've been able to conjure up. Same is true of all other aspects of PHA activities. I think that what some people have spoken as a cesspool of inequities when referring to PHA may be a much too complimentary phrase to use about the agency. Why else I have to ask myself would they hide from coming forth and telling their story. And so that is proof to me of the 15 City Council 12/11/03 fact that what is needed is the strongest possible scrutiny and examination. When one person is in control of millions and millions of dollars as Mr. Green is in control of the pension fund of PHA, one wonders why he doesn't come forth and explain what he does with that money, the pension fund. Why is it that everyone has to be appointed by him, and yet he feels free to say there is no 10 accountability from him to the public. He says it by his actions, not by his words. And that is an intolerable situation and it's a situation in all respects which will be given full attention in the next term of City Council and I believe that we will begin to find changes that take place, changes that require PHA to meet it's responsibilities and call to account the people responsible for denying the public the information it needs to make the right determinations and the information City Council needs to carry out it's duties. At this time I'm going to ask several staff members to indicate -- not all of questions they have but questions that they run into as part of the assignment from me of study of 16 City Council 12/11/03 PHA and the kind of issues that they feel are going to need to be dealt with in the forthcoming term. So at this point I'm going to ask Jason Mayland, my legislative assistant to enter into the record particular concerns that he has found in his studies. Mr. Mayland, proceed.
Thank you, Chairman Cohen. My name is Jason Mayland, M-A-Y-L-A-N-D and I am acting in my capacity as the clerk of the Committee on Law and Government. I will read the following into the record. While the investigation has raised many questions into the management and oversight of the Authority, many have gone unanswered simply because witnesses have failed to appear and documents have not been made readily available. However, due to the documents that have been made available to this committee, the contacts that have been made with other city and state agencies and recent media accounts, there is even more reason to believe that a continued inquiry is required for the benefit of the public interest and the transparency of this government 17 City Council 12/11/03 and the Housing Authority in general. Because of the inability of said witnesses to actually come forward a few questions remain. Some of those questions I will read into the record at this time. For example, the relationship of Mr. Lighthead, Chairman of the Board, Mr. Green Executive Director of the Authority with other members of the Authority in their selection of the New England pension, consultants, and of Milium (ph) the actuary, and how are such professional contract services handled. When and how were the administrators of the fund selected? What relationship did Mr. Green, Director of the Authority, have with the pension consultants before coming to Philadelphia? How does the Authority explain an unfunded liability of over $23 million for the fund? Would anyone explain the approximately $500,000 fee assessed for the management of the pension? How is it 248 vested participates 18 City Council 12/11/03 in a one-year period between November 1st, 2001 and November 1st, 2002 exited the fund at a savings of $1.74 million? That is another point of subsequent discussion. In terms of investment, why was the Household Finance Corporation, a predatory lender, selected as one of the vehicles of investment for the fund? Were there two series of actuarial assumptions used in actually preparing the pension report? And has a third party audit ever been examined? Will there be some sort of performance on it as well as an investment on it as well as a feduciary audit? That is all, Chairman Cohen.
Thank you. Let's ask Ellen Berkowitz as staff attorney on my staff as well as legislative department on my staff.
My name is Ellen Berkowitz, B-E-R-K-O-W-I-T-Z. The following apparent failures of PHA in the area of housing require some explanation which has not been forthcoming since no witnesses have appeared. 19 City Council 12/11/03 During the eight months that PHA has refused to respond to counsel's request for information the Department of Housing and Urban Development completed an audit of PHA Section 8 program. The HUD audit reported that PHA, quote, has consistently and significantly under-utilized its available Section 8 funding from HUD. 9 million of Section 8 funds from the authority in August of 2001. Yet, this is still from the audit, about 18,000 families remained on the Authority's Section 8 waiting list as of January 2002 of which HUD estimated the authority could have assisted additional 3200 families. PHA's failure to assist those 3200 families demands explanation. During the same period there has been a 13 percent rise in the number of homeless men, women and children over the past year. Although some of this increase is due to the rise in unemployment, a problem PHA should be equipped to address, many of the newly homeless are in fact employed, but are unable to find affordable housing. The University of 20 City Council 12/11/03 Pennsylvania policy professor Dennis Cohain reported that 70 percent of those eligible in Philadelphia for subsidized housing don't get it. Testimony presented before this committee on November 20th reflected the disparity between supply and demand. A young mother testified she has been on a waiting list for three years and that during that time PHA has made no 10 effort to keep her informed, counsel her or in any way communicate with her about her prospects of finding housing through PHA for her family. 8 million PHA has increased the amount of rent the tenants are required in available units, has required all tenants to sign contracts stating they will not seek housing from the authority for a period of longer than seven years. PHA owes it to Council as well as to HUD to explain why they had to return nearly $50 million at a time when a growing number of families were in need of housing, rents have increased and Section 8 vouchers went undistributed. 21 City Council 12/11/03 Also during this period, PHA's cut back PHA's relationship with the office of emergency shelter and services has deteriorated. In the past PHA worked in concert with OESS to enable families who are at risk of eviction to obtain counseling and financial assistance in the form of grants in time to avoid eviction. The current PHA administration has altered that policy. Over the summer the authority stopped providing OESS with a list of tenants at risk of eviction making it impossible for OESS to intervene on the tenant's behalf before evictions took place; although it is our understanding that PHA has resumed providing a list to OESS. PHA edits the list and does not include all tenants at risk of eviction, rather PHA makes its own determination about who will and will not be a worthy tenant and does not give OESS notice of the tenants PHA does not wish to retain. Tenants with mental health issues for instance or large outstanding balances are not included on the list, thus, OESS is unable to intervene on their behalf. Social services are 22 City Council 12/11/03 not provided in a timely manner, and those tenants most at risk are subject to eviction. Obviously tenants who are evicted as well as the ranks of the City's homeless place additional pressure on the City's already strained social service net. PHA has an obligation to explain to Council why it is no longer interested in assisting at risk tenants and why it has made the City's task to providing services to these tenants more difficult. Finally, despite PHA's non-discrimination policy, PHA has failed to provide an adequate number of affordable units that are assessible to people with disabilities and has withheld vouchers from the disabled.
Witnesses from disabled and action testified that in 1999 they initiated a lawsuit against PHA because out of 70,000 scattered site housing units only 28 were wheelchair assessible. In the wake of this lawsuit PHA has retaliated, they have found vouchers even more difficult to obtain and even apart from the class action suit PHA has not taken the necessary steps to make more units assessible and to work with the 23 City Council 12/11/03 disabled community. These are all areas that Council has been waiting for PHA to address but no 5 witnesses have appeared.
Could you give for the record an update on the fact that -- it troubles me that the PHA has not responded. Could you bring for the record, and I apologize if you have already done this, just give us a status report on your legal action or whatever action you're taking because of the noncompliance by the Housing Authority and the administration.
The attorney in the action that you're speaking about that we initiated is Robert Jaffe, staff attorney on my staff. Could you reply to Councilman Rizzo?
The reason I'm concerned is that I also in a recent resolution 23 included the subpoena power because of the troubles with the police department's overtime program where police officers are working for a 24 City Council 12/11/03 private sector and the police officers are being paid but the bills are not being paid by the customers. And that troubles me that if in fact I wanted to subpoena or I wanted information from the Police Department, that they could do a similar situation with the resolution that I'm presently the sponsor of. So I would just appreciate knowing exactly what's going on here.
Councilman, I'd be happy to give you a brief answer now and talk with you and your staff to go into a detailed answer. I'm Robert Jaffe, Special Council, I represent all of City Council, including yourself, Councilman, in this matter versus PHA. Going back to March 2003, Councilman Cohen first informally asked the executive director of PHA to testify before City Council. As of today, middle of December, this matter is before Judge Carrafiello in the Court of Common Pleas Philadelphia, First Judicial District. And Judge Carrafiello holds this matter 25 City Council 12/11/03 under advisement to the present without a decision. What is holding this up is that PHA has requested a stay in the matter. A stay means that we cannot proceed until the Judge says you can proceed. There is another case that PHA is involved with that is before the Pennsylvania Supreme Court. PHA has asked Judge Carrafiello to stay this matter pending the outcome of this other PHA litigation. On November 3rd, City Council and PHA both had briefs, legal memorandums of law filed with the court before Judge Carrafiello. And then prior to that on October 21, Judge Carrafiello heard oral argument. There have been numerous briefs filed, two legal arguments before the Judge and we await his decision. Regardless of what's going on, of course, PHA could come forward any time. PHA could have come forward tonight and the executive director could have come forward tonight to testify, however, they chose to be among the first to really snub City Council and not to come here in order to answer your questions. City Council 12/11/03 Their main argument is that they're a Commonwealth agency, however, the law as it stands today is that PHA is a Commonwealth agency for some things and for other things PHA is not a Commonwealth agency. And it's because PHA does not get Commonwealth funding that they're not a Commonwealth agency, however they do get city funding. We have submitted an affidavit from the finance department and from our own financial head of City Council, Charlie, who have said that we have given PHA approximately $20 million in the past few years. So that while the Commonwealth does not give funding, we certainly do. Of course, the Board is appointed by the Mayor and the city controller. PHA only does business in Philadelphia. So in terms of management and in terms of financing we believe and we assert that PHA is not a Commonwealth agency. They are more so a local agency tied to us by management and by money, and that they should be here. However, they say because for something called sovereign immunity, that means the right to sue them and how 27 City Council 12/11/03 you sue them, because they may be a Commonwealth agency for what's called sovereign immunity. In one way they may be a Commonwealth agency for all reasons, that's what PHA puts forth. We feel that in time and eventually City Council will be vindicated and that the executive director of PHA and PHA will come to testify. We believe that PHA has spent considerable funds of legal money and effort in order to file motions and to delay this as long as possible. They're basically maybe waiting for you to go away Councilman, until they would come and we would hope that City Council means to maintain it's position as the authentic and the only legislative body in Philadelphia with the right to subpoena people who you need to come tell you what you need to know in order for you Councilmen to do your job. Without that you can't do your job, especially when you authorize money to go to the people.
What does the state, 28 City Council 12/11/03 the Supreme Court case have to do with what we want to know here?
Let me interrupt Councilman Rizzo on this basis. I believe that what is at issue -- The Chair wants to note the presence of Councilwoman Jannie Blackwell coming in. The reason this issue is being raised by the law firm for PHA is it's purely a stalling tactic. What the lawyers are saying is, you're in the wrong court, we can't even deal with your issue because the Commonwealth agency, they have a right to be exclusively sued in Commonwealth Court, yet the Home Rule Charter calls for City Council whenever it issues a subpoena which is not respected, the Home Rule Charter requires us to pursue the court action in the Court of Common Pleas. Isn't that one of the fundamental questions?
Just a plain stalling tactic to delay time hoping to discourage us from 29 City Council 12/11/03 proceeding.
We simply followed the law really not expecting this kind of litigious action. The Home Rule Charter says we should do it a certain way and that's all we did. And we feel that the Home Rule Charter says what it says and we followed it. We also want to point out --
Because if we didn't do that of course they would be in court saying you didn't follow the charter.
You didn't follow the Home Rule Charter. So I agree with Chairman Councilman Cohen, that my experience with the legal representative PHA has been basically delay and threats.
Councilman Rizzo, you know, I can have a reputation for once getting on to something for sticking to it and that may be bad as well as good. But I think in this case it will prove to be good, because were it the case that ultimately the decision would be that we had to go to Commonwealth Court, everybody knows we would be in Commonwealth Court. But what we're trying to do is to vindicate the language of the 30 City Council 12/11/03 Home Rule Charter which says if the subpoena is not obeyed, the way to enforce it is for the president of City Council, which he has done, to sign an affidavit that the subpoena was not complied with and for the attorneys for City Council to institute suit in the Court of Common Pleas and enforce the subpoena and that's what we're doing and I believe the reason they need to pay these lawyers these huge sums of money is because these lawyers, big law firms, are expert on stalling tactics. And the big law firms know better than to do it because at the same time that their stalling our city government they are the beneficiary of all kinds of millions of dollars from the city government on bond deals. So sooner or later, these law firms are going to have to be brought into line because they can't serve two masters, they can't be for city government and fight it. And in city government we're sworn, it's our duty to make sure that what we do is correct and supportive of the citizens of Philadelphia. So I would be happy in my role as Chairman of Law and Government and if I continue in that position, I will -- in whatever 31 City Council 12/11/03 position I may continue on in the next term, I will be very happy to work with you, because I intend to pursue this matter if we go all the way to the Supreme Court of the United States because we've got to put an end to the kind of lawlessness, maybe it's a little different from cronyism and corruption, but I think the difference between that and the stalling tactics is to prevent the City Council from carrying out it's function. I think it's all part of the same pattern of saying we're the total boss of all the city's money and all the city's power and we're going to conduct business as we see it, everybody else be dammed and we've got to put an end to that and put the people of Philadelphia back in control of the city government.
Councilman, I'll be more than happy to work with you on this issue because, again, when council -- it troubles me that when an agency that wants to hide under the state agency veil, when in fact they are given, what was the number, $20 million of city money --
Well, they're given 32 City Council 12/11/03 money and -- even if they weren't given a penny, their responsibility is the biggest landlord in the City of Philadelphia. Some people call them slum lords.
But beside that, they in fact are given a substantial amount of money according to the --
I'd like to make a statement, if I might. I think if I might, Mr. Chair, is it okay?
The Chair knows and Councilman Rizzo knows that I'm also commissioner on that board, the PHA Board. I know, for example, that today Mr. Green is at the Pennsylvania Society which I did mention earlier to our staff, and that he would not be here, but I think that part of the whole issue is that this whole matter is in court. I believe that the Chair of this committee and Mr. Green and/or various persons on either side have been unable to come to some agreement about how they deal with the issue, the 33 City Council 12/11/03 court issue and testifying in this Chambers and that that's part of the issue. I don't, I don't believe -- I don't believe Mr. Green is irresponsible. I do certainly agree that PHA is one of the biggest landlords, I'm proud of the record we have with something like 80,000 people and that PHA has made a big difference in the lives of many people. I'm proud to be on that Board, but I believe that we're at a legal impasse because it is in court and I haven't been in at those meetings. I was only in one a year ago last spring but I believe that the Chair of Law and Government Committee and the head of PHA have not been able to agree on some legal basis to frame a discussion in these Chambers.
Councilwoman Blackwell I'd like to say I only made one request plus one demand. The request was a personal invitation to Executive Director Green, who appeared originally and the second in the form of a demand was the subpoena. Now, I don't know of -- there's never been anybody in my long history in city 34 City Council 12/11/03 government that ever had difficulty in understanding that a subpoena from a council committee compels you to attend. Mr. Green doesn't like the time he says, well, the time is not picked by Mr. Green for the committee's hearing, the time is picked by the chairman of the committee. I picked that time and that's the time it's going to be. Mr. Green is going to be here and he's going to be here at 5 o'clock, whenever he comes, and he will be coming whether it's going to be an order of the Court of Common Pleas or the Commonwealth Court or the Supreme Court of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania or the United States Supreme Court. I won't be done with this until we vindicate the power of city council. I don't understand how he dares draw his check each pay period and refuse to recognize his public responsibility. I don't know how he's going to make up for the already eight months of lost time because that will have to be computed at some point. He'll be responsible for dealing with that situation and I don't know how he's going to do that. But right now he stands in contempt of the city counsel of Philadelphia. 35 City Council 12/11/03 He's ignored every one of our subpoenas, every one of our invitations. He wants a different time. We don't want that time. We want 5 o'clock. And that's the time of the subpoena. He doesn't make the decisions. He apparently feels he runs this committee, maybe he feels he runs every committee, maybe he feels he runs everything, that I don't know. But it's the committee which sets the times of the hearing and that time has been set for 5 o'clock and that's going to be the time that the hearing will take place. And he's going to meet that time. I can't understand why 5 o'clock is not good. Is he fearful there might be people here. Is he fearful that employees of his who stop working by 5 o'clock may attend the hearing, they have a right to attend the hearing as the public always has the right to attend. They have the right to do now even as the attorney for PHA is here today listening to this and if he hasn't, I'm sure he'll be going over to the clerk and get a transcript because his lawyers work on the theory that maybe the chairman of the committee or a member of the committee is going to say 36 City Council 12/11/03 something inappropriate so they can then threaten him. That's what they have done with me, they've have done it to staff members. That's not a legitimate law purpose. I don't see how the City of Philadelphia ever permits the employment of law firms that can test the authority of City Council in one arena yet benefit by millions of dollars in another arena. That's going to be an issue that's going to have to be dealt with, and I tried to deal with it in another hearing when council, the same council that represents PHA, not this gentleman that's here today, Mr. Kessler appeared in another matter. I don't believe he has the right to pick and choose what committee hearing he's going to go to. He either recognizes the authority of City Council or he has no business being permitted by City Council to attend any of its hearings, that also would be another matter that will have to be dealt with. That's the only -- there is no argument between Mr. Green and myself we never discussed an issue because he doesn't permit it. The only issue discussed was he 37 City Council 12/11/03 said he understood and knew and respected my position on affordable housing because he feels it's the same as his position and he feels we both have this common purpose. That may well be, but if he has that purpose, I think he expresses it in strange ways, Councilwoman.
Because what has happened is the list of applicants has grown, the waiting list has gotten longer to meet and at the same time, the number of affordable units has been reduced. I would have to take issue with you if you said you were proud of the record, because in the instance I referred to I believe before you came in about an apartment house that was declared dangerous and had to be evacuated. In the old days people could get Section 8 certificates and find new housing, but instead the city was put to big expense and the people to great discomfort because they had to go to some little hotel that the city managed on last minute notice to arrange to house the women and children that were involved. And I don't understand why Section 8 certificates were not made available to them. Now, PHA has always had double duty on Section 8. One duty was to make them 38 City Council 12/11/03 available, the second was to enforce them to check and see if there are complaints about how they're being used to see whether the complaints really in fact related to Section 8 usage. Our experience has been that often private owners of land are thought to be Section 8 because sometimes don't take care of their property. But if in fact they are Section 8 people, then PHA does have a duty to do something about it. Section 8 tenants ought to be as good tenants as anybody else. In fact, they ought to appreciate the housing more than anyone else because they're getting it at a low cost and they're getting a sense of independence and a new opportunity to start a fresh life. But PHA defaulted on both purposes. The PHA was a source of information from us that many complaints about long practices by Section 8 people turn out not to be Section 8 tenants but tend to be private tenants or private owners. In a way that is good for everybody. (Inaudiable) growing need to have affordable units and a smaller number of them available, so I can't agree with you Councilwoman Blackwell that PHA does a good job. Would be a good job if the reversed happened. I would like 39 City Council 12/11/03 to see more affordable units and the waiting list getting shorter so we come to the time when there is no waiting list.
Well, Mr. Chairman I believe as you said that you and Mr. Green agree more on issues than you disagree. But certainly I think PHA has won national awards countrywide in some of the things they do in job training and fixing up units, landscaping and lighting and all kinds of issues where they fix up lighting. I don't know the specific instance, nor did I issue the location of the issue you mentioned or where that is, and I don't know the circumstances. I mean, we have a homeless agency, OESS, office of services to homeless adults that deals with people who are homeless. PHA is not our own city homeless agency, it's the Housing Authority. But certainly the whole issue of Section 8 --
The whole issue of Section 8 and who gets certificates is another one that we have to consider because some of our very colleagues and council don't want them in their 40 City Council 12/11/03 neighborhood. So you you know the PHA has to consider if they give them in my area it may be okay. But if you go in certain areas in other sections of the city, there are debates about having Section 8 certificates there or having -- or being inundated certainly with Section 8 there. So the issues all gets complicated but I believe that -- I believe that if there could be a framing, which you don't believe in, of the discussion, perhaps we could get past this point and finally let me say --
-- all he does is come, if there's defense, why doesn't he make it? The reason he doesn't try to make the defense you're making for them is that he knows it's not so.
When things are in court, remember we have -- we deal with our Home Rule Charter, we have the administration to deal with for the most part in the courts, but PHA has state and national officials they have to consider and whose laws they have to abide by, not just ours. So it becomes more complicated when 41 City Council 12/11/03 you ask them to testify on issues that don't impact just locally, they impact state wide or nationally.
Councilwoman Blackwell, I have to tell you he has never been asked to testify on anything except on the subject of the resolution. His one request made of him is to appear here at a hearing, and when the invitation didn't work he got a subpoena, which the resolution provided for, and he still didn't appear. And even when I called him about two weeks ago to let him know that a hearing was being postponed, he refused to take the call. Never called back to find out what I was calling about. So please, there's no problem, all he has to do first is to appear and that would deal with the contempt situation and thereafter we have to talk about what happens to PHA, all the questions about him, and what's happened as a result of the loss of eight months while people of Philadelphia of their right to know what's going on with PHA. And how does he compensate the people of Philadelphia for his denial of their rights? That's the question Mr. Green is going 42 City Council 12/11/03 have to deal with. But he's created, all he had to do was come, he could have come here today. His attorney has been here at every meeting so they would know at every meeting that is taking place and they would all know that people are entitled to come.
Mr. Chair, it's hard when people are in court, people are reluctant, to -- I wasn't there, but if hearsay is correct in this case, I believe there have been a meeting or two where the two of you tried to work it out in your office.
I never tried working anything out. I told him from the beginning all he had to do is come to the hearings. Nothing to work out.
So you had your attorneys and he may have had one and you can't frame the discussions. And yet he's in court.
Councilwoman Blackwell, the thing you do is you come, and at the hearing if you have a question you raise it or you have your attorneys raise it. There's no question. When you want to talk with me I met with him in 43 City Council 12/11/03 his office, we had several meetings. But he always wants to make the decisions and not have the chairman of the committee make the decision as to the time of the meeting. We've never got beyond the time because he doesn't want to come at 5 o'clock.
I don't believe it's time, I believe it's the issue of the whole matter being under judicial review.
We discussed that, he knows how and if his attorney is drawing his huge sums of money from the poor people of Philadelphia as their fees, don't know how to advise him, he better get new attorneys. We all know that if he's asked a question that's not proper they have a right to object and advise him of his rights at that time whether to answer the question or not. I feel silly telling him that, they know that, they know that this is all stalling and it doesn't mean anything..
I heard you say yesterday these lawyers need to volunteer yesterday.
That's why they charge 44 City Council 12/11/03 so much money.
I heard you say yesterday, Mr. Chair, that many of these lawyers need to volunteer, at our hearings yesterday on bond stuff.
I'd like to see volunteers be hired rather than have poor people that can never afford --
Other than hire a neighborhood lawyer, get the city collecting their taxes, hires the most expensive lawyers in the country to handle these matters.
Present company excepted on volunteering services. No, but in all fairness, Mr. Chair, I wish we could move beyond this. There are so many people that we care about who would like to see us find a way to get along when I do believe at the core of it we all believe and want the same things for the citizens of our city.
You're earning your fee today, sir, by your applause. But there's no 45 City Council 12/11/03 dispute at all. I have no dispute, I don't know what he's going to testify to. Whether he's got to come here and he's got to come here when the committee sets the hearing date, when the Chairman of the Committee exercises the right to determine that time, he's got to be here then. He's not the one one that makes the decision as to when. And the only reason I can think that he doesn't want to come at 5 o'clock is that he will prevent the employees of the agency from coming during the day. He may well order, in my judgment this is why he doesn't want to have the hearing during the day, why he wants it during the day, because he wants to bar people from coming and he has no 16 right to do that. The people that work in this agency are city employees and they are also citizens of Philadelphia, they have a right to be able to come to the hearing and they are intimidated and they are fearful of Mr. Green because they tell me all kinds of stories about his vindictive conduct. I've never referred to it because I didn't want to until he was here so he could defend himself or explain away this conduct. 46 City Council 12/11/03 But the reason the hearing was set at o'clock to make it possible for everybody to 4 come freely, and for him and no one at PHA to have 5 a record of who was here, even if he grants them leave, he can then punish them for coming, for taking leave on a day when he's issued an order that they should not take leave. And the people in the City of Philadelphia are going to be free to come to council hearings without any fear of intimidation. This committee is going to insist on the right to hear from the employees of PHA and have them have the right to hear the testimony because otherwise we cannot do our duty. And when Mr. Green acts as he is acting he is hurting this council from doing its duty. He wants to intimidate his employees in my judgment. This is the only possible reason he can have for objecting to come at 5 o'clock because he's looking for some way to prevent his employees from hearing the story from him. And that's wrong, he has no right to do that. He has no right to bar his employees from hearing his testimony. And this is not the first time, 47 City Council 12/11/03 that I've held hearings at o'clock. Whenever I felt that the city employees were involved and there was any concern they expressed at all their ability to attend freely, I always set the times so they can hear it because they are Philadelphia citizens as well anybody else. Councilwoman you know that's so and you know the respect that I have for you and your husband over all these years.
I feel the same for you. I really don't think time is the issue, Mr. Chair. I think it's the lawsuit that's the issue. I don't think time is the issue, I think it's the lawsuit. That's my guess, that's my opinion. I don't know, of course but my opinion is when matters are in court people are reluctant to have a discussion, a public discussion.
I don't understand Councilwoman what your references to lawsuit preventing him from coming. He's free to come at any time, the lawsuit doesn't stop him from coming in any way at all.
But I don't believe the time of the day is a big issue. 48 City Council 12/11/03
He even violated the laws in Philadelphia by refusing to obey the subpoena. The Home Rule Charter by which all of us live says that when somebody violates the law by not coming when subpoenaed by a city agency the way in which the City Council vindicates the power of subpoenas by instituting a lawsuit of the Court of Common Pleas. We did not want to do it, but he made clear he wasn't coming. He declined to attend when invited without the issuance of any subpoena. I think he was actually invited on two occasions before there was a subpoena. I know at least once but I think it was twice, then we subpoenaed him because he made clear he wasn't otherwise coming. He caused the lawsuit. He's the one that really brought it about. We brought it about because that's what the Home Rule Charter says. We're not going let Mr. Green or any city official violate the laws of this Commonwealth by not obeying the mandate of the City Council. This was an action taken by all of City Council when they passed this resolution, 49 City Council 12/11/03 they passed it unanimously at the time. So all he has do is to appear, now how he'll ever make up for the loss he's caused us over the eight months, I don't know, but I know Council is expending an awful lot of money on staff salaries, on my salary and other salaries for which maybe the City Council has the right to be compensated for. People of Philadelphia have lost what they could have saved if as a result of his testimony we find ways in which to make more affordable housing available to people that could have been made available a year earlier then I think there may be some legal responsibility in his part for that failure, but all he's doing is continuing to worsen the situation, but he seems to relish in that. So we all love and respect Councilwoman Blackwell very well, but she's not making the decisions. If she were making the decisions, she would be here if she were executive director because she knows how City Council feels. If people are not going to respect our authority there is nothing else as nearly as important as being able to function as City Council. 50 City Council 12/11/03 And the law firms know that and I find it very inconsistent that on the one hand the law firms believe they have the right to come to City Council hearings where they set the terms, where they feel friendly and accepted but not to come on other occasions. I've never heard of that kind of ability on the part of any law firm to pick and choose when it comes to a government function. But apparently these law firms are so big they feel they write the laws themselves. I don't know how else to explain it, but this case will never end in my judgment until PHA is forced to comply as every other agency always has with the law in Philadelphia. And then to find a way to compensate the people of Philadelphia and the City Council for the lost time that we have suffered as a result of their failure to obey the law. And the reason I've not involved the action of the members of the executive board is I respect all of them. I think they're fine people on the executive board. But I don't think they have anything to do with making the decisions. Seems that the chairman of this 51 City Council 12/11/03 committee, that it's the executive director, he himself is a member of the board, isn't he? Isn't he one of the members of the board?
If not he seems to make all the decisions for PHA and I think it should be the reverse, the board is supposed to control him. I think the board has the power to order him to appear, it causes me to wonder why the board doesn't do that, but the Mayor is the main appointing authority of the board. Certainly has every right to tell Mr. Green you're under duty to report, don't embarrass me, don't create these problems for me because I would find it very embarrassing if I were in Mayor Street's position to have the commissioners that I'm responsible for acting the way which Mr. Green is acting. All right. Does anybody else have any questions? Does the attorney for Wolf Block want to say anything for the record? You're free to say it.
All right. Let the 52 City Council 12/11/03 record note there was no reply by the attorney or waiver of his hand indicating he doesn't wish to be heard. Is there any other person who wishes to be heard at this hearing? Anything else from Mr. Mayland, Ms. Berkowitz, Mr. Jaffee, Councilman Rizzo?
Yes. If I may for the record, the record should indicate that I am the only person in the room except for Your Honor, Councilman Blackwell and City Council staff, that I think it is appropriate for that to be.
I don't see any reason not to or to put it in. I announced at the beginning there would be no witnesses, certainly none that I know of. You saw no table set up for witnesses because today's purpose was merely to bring to an orderly end for this term of council's business and to provide the basis for the committee to begin next term where we finish off this term. All right, there being no other business to come before the Committee, the Committee in Law and Government will stand in recess until the call of the Chair. 53 City Council 12/11/03 Thank you and thank you Councilwoman Blackwell, we all love you as you well know, over many years, and Councilman Rizzo for coming here today. (Hearing concluded at 6:20 p.m.) - - - 54 CERTIFICATE I HEREBY CERTIFY that the proceedings, are contained fully and accurately in the stenographic notes taken by me upon the meeting of Committee On Law and Government, taken on December 11, 2003 and that this is a true and correct transcript of same. ______________________________ MOLLY A. ALBER, RPR and Notary Public (The foregoing certification of this transcript does not apply to any reproduction of the same by any means, unless under the direct control and/or supervision of the certifying reporter.)