And the additional $15 million on top of the 40 you already expected comes as a result of Part 1 of Governor Rendell's budget?
Well, I don't know about Part 1, but as far as I was concerned, it was the budget that we had and it did have a 6 percent reduction, yes.
Does Part 2 of the Governor's budget indicate any either restoration of those funds or any additional funding for SEPTA, or is it at all reasonable to hope or anticipate or conclude that as a result of Part 2 of the Governor's budget that the 6 percent cut would be restored or if any additional funding would be available?
I have no direct knowledge about a Part 2 that would benefit us. There have been some discussions going back and forth, but to 258 4/7/03 - Committee of the Whole date no one has presented anything that would say we are going to be restored.
Has SEPTA had any contact with either the Governor's office or any of the legislative caucus leaders in the general assembly?
We are having ongoing conversations with budget and the secretary of transportation. We have individuals that are in Harrisburg I guess having discussions on our behalf, so that is ongoing.
Has the agency itself spent any time either on the phone or any other electronic communication or in person talking to the Governor, the Governor's representatives, or any other leaders of the four caucuses?
When you say "representatives," does that include like the chief of staff out of the Governor's office?
I think he would consider himself a fairly large level official.
We are having ongoing conversations with that office, the budget office, and the secretary of transportation. 259 4/7/03 - Committee of the Whole
For the record, why don't I register my strongest possible opposition to the discontinuance of service, notwithstanding my little recent personal encounter with the R-6. If we can keep the repair activity to a reasonable time on the weekends, I probably won't have many problems with the R-6. You know there is a long history here between the ridership and the agency and that for about a ten-year period of time the R-6 was on the hit list every other year until we finally convinced SEPTA, one, that that was not particularly wise and, two, that we could actually increase ridership through a partnership, which I believe has happened. Now, the R-6 will always be, to use appropriate terminology, will always be representative of the little engine that could. It can only serve so many people, but it does serve a particular constituency and does go through a variety of neighborhoods. It is not and will probably never be the Chestnut Hill local, although under this circumstance it seems that that may not 260 4/7/03 - Committee of the Whole make much difference because the R-8 is on the list as well. So naturally my constituents are going to oppose strenuously any proposed discontinuance of service on the R-6. Now, I need to understand. For City transit you have on your chart here discontinuance of the 35 and a route segment discontinuance of the 27. The options left to my constituents in the Roxborough/Manayunk community are what under that circumstance?
I would have to get it to you. I don't know that right offhand.
Do we know what the route segment discontinuance for the 27 is?
There are a number of inquiring minds that want to know about that. Let's talk about these hearings. Did I understand from the earlier testimony that there were going to be two hearings about all of these service issues in Philadelphia?
And they will be where? 261 4/7/03 - Committee of the Whole
Yes, one a.m., one p.m. I would have to give you the dates. I don't remember the dates. The 19th.
Now, is there something that prevents you from having more hearings and at locations that are actually more conducive to people participating in them?
Other than we wouldn't know how many hearings that would ultimately be needed. There is a limitation to just the staff as we spread it out because every jurisdiction, every municipality, et cetera, would want to hear it. So we thought if we centralize it at least in 262 4/7/03 - Committee of the Whole Philadelphia that we would get the biggest number of participants and we also had the same dilemma when we went out to the counties trying to figure out where to have it that was more central to each one of the counties.
Look, I have an appreciation for a centralized hearing, but what is the real prospect that someone from many of these neighborhoods, especially for the nighttime -- I mean the daytime hearing is impacted by the fact that most people have to work. They don't really have time to run around and go to hearings. The evening hearing at the Convention Center, I mean how many people do we think from neighborhoods are going to either stay in town or, because of other obligations, go home, get either the kids, the family, the spouse, grandmom, somebody, all together for whatever the nighttime activity is and then venture back into town for a hearing that Lord knows when it is going to be over? What makes anybody think that any significant number of people are going to participate in that?
Our past history would suggest that a significant number of people 263 4/7/03 - Committee of the Whole participate in our hearings.
I think for the fare hearings we might have had 5 or 600. Does that sound right? My treasurer pointed out that just for the Kenwood hearing we had there were about 300 that came to public hearings. So our public hearings --
Well, that was a line discontinuance and we did -- you are talking about the ones at the SEPTA headquarters?
I remember those hearings and we did kind of pump up the volume a little bit, but I think that kind of makes the point. They were at the Adam's Mark Hotel. The people that ride the R-6 live out in that neighborhood whether they live in Wynnefield, Overbrook or Lower Merion. I'm not so sure that you have an exact replica of that particular crowd even for that line at the Convention Center. When are you going to do it, 6 or 7 o'clock at night?
I think they start early, 264 4/7/03 - Committee of the Whole 5:00, 5:30. Again, we would have to double-check the time frame, but there is also one in the a.m.
I would really like to strongly encourage additional thought on some regional hearings for city transit or city and suburban rail passengers. It is at least more likely that you would have a representative group of people from West Philadelphia at a West Philadelphia hearing. I would think the same might possibly be true for South Philadelphia. You already have basically a Center City location. I think Councilwoman Tasco raised the issue again. Whether you work or not, trying to venture back into town if you live in Mt. Airy to come to a SEPTA hearing, especially given -- I mean let me ask you this question: Has this level of proposed either cutback or elimination of service ever been proposed in SEPTA's history?
I would have to double-check the history. I'm not really sure.
Not in the eight years I've been here, no. 265 4/7/03 - Committee of the Whole
It would seem to me that we want to try to have a few more than the regular average normal round of hearings. Regionalize them to four or five -- you know, cut the city up into four quadrants or five sectors and make sure that you can hear from as many people as possible. The flip side of that is, although you won't particularly enjoy it at the hearing, you know, the more people to express a concern and an interest about all of these issues I think at a certain level become potential supporters or can be more focused in their concern about what is going on here because I don't necessarily know that anybody is going to be looking to us to fill your $55 million gap, so if you are going to get people all wound up about this document and the timing and how it goes down and all of that and if you are going to have all of these hearings, I think you need to maximize participation in order to at least demonstrate a fuller understanding and concern that people have about what is going on with the system.
We actually thought we were doing that by expanding it to ten hearings, but I 266 4/7/03 - Committee of the Whole will take it back and we'll kick it around. We are doing ten hearings throughout the five-county area.
I understand. Let's talk about some local issues. You know that I was out on Friday on the Market-Frankford El doing a tour. The streets department has -- there was a concern about the light level, the amount of light under the El at night. There are lights attached to the superstructure. There was a concern that the lights were not functioning. The report from the Streets Department in a nighttime observation is that all of the lights are working. I believe one of the concerns here -- and I now think I better understand it -- there are a couple of areas where the roadway is blocked. When the road was completely opened and if the lights are working, the additional light you get under the El more than likely comes from vehicular headlights. If the area is cordoned off and cars are traveling less frequently on Market Street because it is a zigzag mishmash of barriers and obstacles, there is probably an immediate decrease in the amount of light under the El because there are no cars there, which creates an unsafe condition 267 4/7/03 - Committee of the Whole for residents and neighbors because they can't see what is going on. There has been an uptake in criminal activity including, as I read in the morning newspaper, apparently somebody was shot and killed at 62nd and Market last night. The police department from the 19th was out at the tour on Friday. It seems to me that there probably is now an additional need for an upgrade in the lighting directly under the El such that whenever these areas get closed off -- and we will have a separate discussion about what is closed off -- there is still light under there. So I think the neighbors' observation that it is darker under the El is correct, but the reason they think it is darker is not necessarily correct because they think the lights aren't working. The lights are working. There is less light under the El because there are no cars under there. So I need you to take a look at how we increase the light directly in the area under the El between the columns right down the center of Market Street. Second, I believe we are supposed to get together shortly to talk about this issue of the one 268 4/7/03 - Committee of the Whole lane open to vehicular traffic. Councilwoman Blackwell raised the issue today. The issue has been raised on a number of other days. We'll potentially have one of the best looking superstructures out there. Unfortunately, there won't be any businesses left to take advantage of the great superstructure and the new train stations because we are facing the potential that most of them are going to die before this project is over. I'm sure that is not SEPTA's goal, but it is a potential reality and we have to figure out how to keep a certain amount of traffic flowing and moving on that street. I understand that there are challenges. Having done the tour, I'm much better versed in what is going on. On the other hand, especially for some of this underground infrastructure work as compared to the center lane support structure work, there are some situations -- and we certainly see it out on regular city streets that don't have posts down the middle, but we see it on wide city streets where they are able to keep a lane of traffic open in residential areas just so that people can go back and forth. It may slow things down a little bit and 269 4/7/03 - Committee of the Whole Lord knows this is not a project that we want to slow down --
-- but there has to be a balance between safety, getting the job done as quickly as possible, and the preservation of businesses and the viability of Market Street. It is a complete mess out there and we won't have anything to be particularly proud of other than a superstructure, but there are not going to be any businesses out there by the time this project is done based on how it's going. The last issue is it was my observation on Friday that there were actually a couple African-American males who were working on the job site. I restrict that to a couple. I would strongly encourage -- at least for the time that I was out there. I would strongly encourage that either as a part of any increased security that we are going to try to provide out there or if there are efforts to keep some lane of traffic open or if there are any efforts to -- the Councilman raised an issue about the cleanup. The job site is a mess and I understand on the interior you are going to have 270 4/7/03 - Committee of the Whole some problems, but much of that interior debris and dirt and other mess ends up getting outside those gates and flowing out into the neighborhood. There are all kinds of different work opportunities, but certainly one of them which may provide some immediate employment for neighborhood people literally is just working to keep the neighborhood in a fairly decent shape, which may present some job opportunities. Obviously there are other people out there who have skills who may also -- as I'm told, who are also part of -- who are members of unions who are not being called to work, and so I and others will continue to reemphasize the need to seek people out who are in fact union members, who do in fact live in that neighborhood, and that the agency as the owner of the project, who has a contractual relationship with its contractors, should insist. And if we can provide, I will certainly get to you the name, address and phone numbers of local people who are members of unions who are not being called to work on that particular project. It is a disgrace if there are people in the neighborhood who could work but are not being called for whatever 271 4/7/03 - Committee of the Whole reason and are sitting by the phone for a call that is never going to come.
I'm not sure whether you are asking a question or if you just want me to acknowledge that I hear you. The area --
I assume that the sound system is working. What I want you to say is I heard you and I'm going to do something about it.
Well, I heard you and I'll look at what I can do about it. The contractors have a contractual obligation to clean up the site. So that one especially I will look at that immediately because they are obligated to keep the site areas mopped up, cleaned up, et cetera. So I will look at that one.
It is not happening and it was not a pretty site out there the other day. I understand it is a construction site, but, you know, there's already a significant amount of disruption. We shouldn't add insult to injury by leaving the neighborhood in worse shape than the way we found it.
Thank you. 272 4/7/03 - Committee of the Whole Thank you, Madam Chair. I'm sorry. And what is going to happen on this issue of additional regionalized neighborhood hearings on this plan?
I will have to go back and look at resources. The problem we face is that everybody would want a regional meeting and we just can't do but so many meetings. We will have to look at it. I will have to kick it around with the staff in the office.
When you say everybody would want one, what does that mean?
If I do one additional hearing someplace else, another location would want a hearing and another and another and another and another and at some point in time we just don't have that many resources to have as many meetings as everybody would like and going in specific jurisdictions. So we thought we were actually doing the better thing by doing it centralized so that everyone could hear what the other person's concerns might have been, not just a regional, something specific for that group. So the Chestnut Hill people could hear 273 4/7/03 - Committee of the Whole from the Kenwood people, et cetera, and so everybody could hear everybody else's concerns.
I understand the theory, but I think the practical application is that you are only going to get so much participation from so many people at a centralized location like the Convention Center either o'clock in the 9 morning or 6 o'clock at night versus some ability to 10 accommodate the life-styles that people have. You know, look, we are all on the government payroll. We can be at a meeting at any time of the day or night. It is what we do. Other people, as I often say, they have like real lives and they have things that they have to do with themselves and most of it is not focused on us or what we do, but the prospect of going to a neighborhood meeting or something that is near your neighborhood is much more likely as opposed to venturing in town in the evening for something like this.
I will look at how many additional hearings we can have. I'm not going to promise at this point we are going to do all regional because it would consume a lot of effort 274 4/7/03 - Committee of the Whole and, again, I'm not really sure --
You are talking about a massive change in how the system functions and operates. And are we providing free parking for all these people that are coming to the center?
For a point of order the Chair recognizes Councilman Goode.
Thank you, Madam President. Miss Moore, there are going to be ten meetings in five counties?
But the majority of the fare revenue and the highest county subsidy comes from Philadelphia?
Well, I have five counties 275 4/7/03 - Committee of the Whole that I have to deal with on an equal basis.
But the majority of fare revenue and the highest county subsidy comes from Philadelphia?
The highest local -- yes, the highest local subsidy comes from Philadelphia.
You are more concerned about the client ridership in Philadelphia and the subsidy from Philadelphia I'm assuming of the five counties?
But you are more concerned with Philadelphia I'm assuming?
You may want to talk to your chief financial officer about how much fare revenue and how much subsidy comes from Philadelphia.
When you talked to your board on March about this doom and gloom 25 plan about drastic service cuts and fare increases, 276 4/7/03 - Committee of the Whole I'm assuming at the time you told them you were only anticipating a 1.5 percent decline in ridership as a result of that?
Of the fare increase. The 1.5 percent decline is just as a result of the fare increase.
So you are assuming only a 1.5 percent decline as a result of the fare increase?
Two years ago what were you anticipating in terms of decline in ridership because of the fare increase?
I'm sorry. One more, Madam President. 277 4/7/03 - Committee of the Whole
That 1.5 percent then was not based upon obviously this level of discontinuation of service?
And it also was not based on discontinuation of service on these lines. So what is supposed to happen with regard to discontinuation of service on these lines? You are assuming some dropoff because of fare increase, but you are not assuming additional dropoff because of additional discontinuation of --
So the ridership is expected to climb by more than 1.5 percent. Just 1.5 percent is based upon the fare increase?
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman Kenney.
Madam Chair, I'll pass. 278 4/7/03 - Committee of the Whole
Are there any other questions for our witnesses? Seeing none, this committee will stand in recess until tomorrow at 1 o'clock. Thank you all very much. (The hearing adjourned at 5:40 p.m.) 279 4/7/03 - Committee of the Whole I N D E X QUESTIONING OF: ROB DUBOW 2 CHARLES ISDELL 14 DIANA NEFF 63 RALPH BLAKNEY 69 ALVA MARTINEZ 153 FAY MOORE 192 280 4/7/03 - Committee of the Whole CERTIFICATE I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing proceedings of the Committee of the Whole of the Council of the City of Philadelphia of April 7, 2003 were reported fully and accurately by me and that this is a correct transcript of same. ______________________________ Cynthia A. Whyte, RPR (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.)