What about other departments that do not deal directly with the poor?
What about other departments that don't deal directly with the poor?
Well, let me just look at the -- I think other than those departments that we mentioned, that 1162, we've actually gone down a little. There has been a decrease.
The Streets Department. I think Fairmount Park has gone down. I could actually get you a list of how each department compares from '92 till now.
During that same period of time say, or let's say during the last five years, do we have any data that would give us an accounting of those jobs and those activities that were performed by City employees but now have been out-sourced to private consultants?
Yes. We can get you that. 61 2/13/01 - FY '02 OPERATING BUDGET
Do you have a list in terms of the City in terms of how much money it is that we're spending on out-sourcing; and, two, how much money we're spending on consultants?
Yes. We can get you that. I should say that out-sourcing slowed down considerably because the labor agreements that we have restrict out-sourcing to functions that won't result in layoffs of City employees. So, I mean, there's been a slowdown in that, but we could get you the list of everything that's down.
Do you have the amount of money and the number of consultants by departments that we now employ?
And how many -- how many nonunion employees are represented in the 62 2/13/01 - FY '02 OPERATING BUDGET health program that the City runs?
Do you have any idea of what the cost of running that program is?
And a detailed accounting of, you know, the costs in terms of administrative -- I'd like to find out how much 63 2/13/01 - FY '02 OPERATING BUDGET administratively it costs the City to run that program.
Vis-a-vis, I'd like to see it in comparison with how much it costs the labor unions to run their programs.
You're welcome. The Chair recognizes Councilman Kenney.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Just a few more questions relative to the Mayor's actual staff and office. Compared to eight or ten years ago -- let me go back. What is the number of people that are actually assigned to the Mayor's Office now? And I'm including people working as deputy mayors, special assistants, and anyone who's a deputy managing director assigned to the Mayor's function. And how does that compare to eight years ago or nine years ago. 64 2/13/01 - FY '02 OPERATING BUDGET
I don't have -- there's 69 slots in the Mayor's Office now. When you ask, though, what other resources, because we do have lawyers, you know, from the Law Department that serve as part of my staff, for example, I'd have to, you know, go back and do a count that gets the exact number. I think that we -- I know we have more than the previous administration. The previous administration did not have an External Affairs component. I think that has been something that has been missing from the Mayor's Office. With the Charter change, the Mayor has more --
There are -- I think there are three people specifically in that office.
And is that clerical support or is that policy people, or who 65 2/13/01 - FY '02 OPERATING BUDGET are they?
Some of it is people that function with policy capacity and also -- you know, and then there's clerical support for the office as well. There is, for example, responsibility -- the Mayor has broader responsibility for education than before, and so there are two people that focus on education -- Debra Kahn and Shane Kramer. So there are reasons why this Mayor's office is larger.
I mean, I don't have an opinion whether bigger's better or smaller's better. I'm just trying to get a grasp and understanding of what the size is and what that size is for. And based, I guess, on Councilmember Goode's question, I don't know whether he asked for an organization the chart.
You'll be doing that? And I need to know, and you don't have to tell me today, what the five new secretarial areas have increased the Mayor's specific budget, both from secretaries and personnel for support staff. Do you know whether today the Secretary 66 2/13/01 - FY '02 OPERATING BUDGET of Boards and Authorities has ensured that offices appoint -- that all of the offices available be appointed by the Mayor have, in fact, been appointed? Do we know what's left that's not appointed?
I can get you a report on that. There are over a hundred, I guess, boards and authorities, and there are always, you know, vacancies that come up. I can get you a status report on exactly what --
Do you have any sense as to whether or not this problem is -- the openings -- the availabilities are wide or it's getting narrowed or if almost everybody has been appointed?
It's fewer than it was before. Like I said, you know, there are a hundred and, you know, I don't know, you know -- I mean -- some of -- a lot of these entities were defunct essentially. You know, you had -- nobody knew who served. You know, they were just not attended to at all. So I don't know, you know -- I can give you a status report. I can't comment on that. 67 2/13/01 - FY '02 OPERATING BUDGET
Is there any analysis as to whether or not they're in fact needed since they were --
Yeah, they're looking at some of that. They're -- you know, I mean, it's how Philadelphia has evolved. There are commissions for everything, there are boards, you know, for everything. You know. . .
And just one final request. Bill No. 505 is currently on the calendar in final-passage mode. It is campaign finance reform.
I've sent a letter to the Mayor asking, based on Mr. Burrell's testimony in our previous hearing, that he would be willing to give us some information or some ideas as to how this bill could be made better. Today, I haven't heard anything, and I'd really appreciate some input on the issue. And that goes for any other Councilmembers that have desires to 68 2/13/01 - FY '02 OPERATING BUDGET make suggestions for amendment or change. I'd like to try to get that moving.
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman Goode.
Thank you, Madam President. I want to go back to a earlier question from Councilman Kenney where he talked about the KOZ application and at what point we were going to be briefed on it. I think your response was District Councilmembers have received packages regarding the KOZ application?
I know that the Commerce Department is going around talking to District Councilpeople with the, you know, the laundry list of properties under consideration. You're an at-large Councilperson, I understand.
And why would that 69 2/13/01 - FY '02 OPERATING BUDGET leave me out of the loop?
I don't have a good answer for that. I think that, you know, I will make sure that they (inaudible).
My concern is not just being left out as a member of Council, but that these issues, along with TIF issues, generally, from my understanding of how economic development strategies work, you're actually forgiving taxes in particular districts and foregoing revenue that could be used citywide. And so I don't know what District Councilperson wouldn't want to forgive taxes in their district, wouldn't want to forgive taxes for development in their district, wouldn't want to eliminate as much as possible from their district at the expense of the taxpayers citywide. And I think it's the responsibility of that at-large Councilperson to not only look at the economic development strategy, but particularly tax policies associated with economic development strategy, so it seems that you would more likely have at-large people look at it not only in addition to, but even as a matter of 70 2/13/01 - FY '02 OPERATING BUDGET fairness in terms of development, because if you look at where the TIFs have gone, if you look at where the KOZs are probably -- without even looking at it, I know who developed it, so I know where it's going. It's concentrated in one or two Council districts; is that correct?
No, I don't think that's correct. It's -- there are proposals for the 5th District, for the 7th District, for the 10th District, for the 2nd District.
And in terms -- no, and in terms of the square mileage under the KOZs, are the KOZs' sub zones, the packages we'll be discussing tomorrow will probably be concentrated in one or two Council districts?
You know, I don't -- I don't -- I can't -- I don't know -- I don't have the answer to that. I think that your point is well taken, you know, that there needs to be consultation with 71 2/13/01 - FY '02 OPERATING BUDGET not just District Councilpeople. I think some of the -- and I think that there is a different perspective. I don't know that I agree that the perspective you -- you know, I don't think Councilpeople are eager to make properties tax-exempt just 'cause they're in their district. I mean, that's not the --
That's not the quality of the, you know, of the feedback that District Councilmembers provide, but I think that there is value in consulting broadly, and the conversation certainly needs to be broader than it's been thus far.
In reality, let me be more specific, then. We have forgiven hundreds of millions of dollars in taxes under Tax Increment Financing, and I think there's still some plans to do so. Most of those dollars that have been forgiven have been concentrated in one or two districts. Under the KOZ, in terms of proposed development zones is being a tax policy set up in 72 2/13/01 - FY '02 OPERATING BUDGET those development zones. I'm suggesting that they are probably concentrated in the same one or two districts, and we are forgiving taxes in concentrated development at the expense of taxpayers citywide. But that's not an issue to be dealt with today; it's an issue to be dealt with it tomorrow, we'll deal with it tomorrow.
I mean, you know, I'll make sure they have that, you know, that information for tomorrow. I think that the City has, for example, created tax abatements. Those are citywide in a lot of ways. That's a strategy that has displaced the TIF strategy in a lot of ways. You know, I think it --
And I would suggest it's more fair -- cutting taxes across the board for everyone.
Thank you very much. Are there any more questions for the 73 2/13/01 - FY '02 OPERATING BUDGET Chief of Staff? (No further questions.)
Thank you very much. The Finance Department is next. (Witness comes forward.)
Good morning. Thank you for coming. Would you identify yourself for the record and begin your testimony.
On behalf of the employees of the Office of the Director of Finance, I am pleased to provide testimony on the presented proposed Fiscal 2002 Operating Budget. I'm Janice Davis, the Director of Finance. With me are Rob Dubow and other finance representatives who are available to answer any questions. As has been the custom, I will focus on the requested finance budget for Fiscal 2002. I will also provide the status of those initiatives begun by the Finance group over the past year, as well as the initiatives to be undertaken during FY 2002. The Office of the Director of Finance's Fiscal Year 2002 budget proposal for all funds 74 2/13/01 - FY '02 OPERATING BUDGET totals $821,670,483. The General Fund budget request is $629,015,146. The single largest component budget is employee fringe benefits, budgeted at $575,858,658. Of this, $513,337,000 is funded by the General Fund. This represents a $10,059,286, or 2 percent, increase over the current Fiscal Year 2001 projection. Other large elements of the finance budget include legal services and witness fees, contributions to educational organizations, and refunds and indemnities. The Administration is proposing to provide the Community College $21,767,924 in their FY 2002, an increase of $1 million over Fiscal Year 2001. The Office of the Director of Finance is comprised of seven divisions: Executive Direction, Office of Budget and Program Evaluation, Office of Management and Productivity, Minority Business Enterprise Council, Accounting Bureau, the Office of Administrative Review, and Risk Management. 3 million from the current projection for 75 2/13/01 - FY '02 OPERATING BUDGET Fiscal Year 2001. This decrease is the result of the elimination of a one-time appropriation for a loan to PGW of $45 million and reductions in appropriations across the divisions. The budget anticipates 182 full-time General Fund positions. In its ongoing effort to improve vendor payment process, the Accounting Bureau in June 2000 implemented an automated clearinghouse process for paying City vendors. Vendors who opt for the ACH process receive their payments electronically. This process reduces the cost and time required for post-processing handling of vendor payments. During FY 2002, the City will be required to implement the government accounting standards for Statement No. 34. This statement represents the most dramatic change ever to governmental accounting and reporting. To prepare for this change, the Accounting Division formed a (indiscernible) 34 implementation team that has met weekly to identify and develop solutions for many issues presented by this new requirement. Risk Management continues to reduce the number of injured on-duty and Worker's 76 2/13/01 - FY '02 OPERATING BUDGET Compensation claims annually from a total of 5,270 in Fiscal Year '99 to a projected 4,920 in Fiscal Year 2001. The Fiscal Year 2002 estimate is 4,757 total claims. In Fiscal Year 2001, the Risk Management Division instituted measures to improve the quality of medical services and of disability cases by hiring its own medical director to monitor the City's contractor. In addition, two division employees now offer patient advocacy based on employee feedback. During Fiscal Year 2002, Risk Management will use this assessment information to strengthen contractual requirements on performance. During Fiscal Year 2001, the Office of Administrative Review continues collaborative efforts done last year with the First Judicial District to increase traffic fine collections. In addition to assuming responsibility for the traffic courts fiscal unit, in Fiscal Year 2001, OAR will take over all financial functions related to fine collection. By consolidating collection responsibility, the collection rate is expected to increase from 17 percent to percent. 25 The Minority Business Enterprise 77 2/13/01 - FY '02 OPERATING BUDGET Council will present testimony in conjunction with the Procurement Department.
Other departments, boards, and commissions under the direction of the Office of the Director of Finance -- Revenue, City Treasurer, Sinking Fund Commission, Board of Revision of Taxes, and the Board of Pensions and Retirements -- will provide separate testimony on their budget and initiatives. I am happy to answer any questions you may have at this time. Thank you .
Thank you very much. Miss Davis, what are the requirements of the Government Accounting Standards Board, and how will they impact the City?
I don't know if I have -- I'll give it a go. One of the major changes is that the full reporting entity reports on a full -- instead of modified accrual, on a full accrual basis. It will be reported much as your enterprise funds, or water and sewer, with expenses instead of expenditures. Depreciation will also be captured on General Fund, which is something that's not 78 2/13/01 - FY '02 OPERATING BUDGET currently done. Your account groups seem to exist on a citywide basis, and there are other very technical changes in the accounting. The City will be impacted in that you have to provide some assessment of your fixed assets, and because of the depreciation requirement, keep track of how your fiscal plant actually is being taken care of. There are two ways you can deal with it. And I'm not up on that quite enough, and maybe there's somebody from Accounting who can give you that information a little better than I can. But it forces the City to sort of look at itself as a business enterprise for the general presentation, and the individual funds are still reported on the basis that they've been reported presently. So the (indiscernible) will be a little different.
The annual report will be a little different in its presentation.
Why are you 79 2/13/01 - FY '02 OPERATING BUDGET reducing your General Fund positions from 190 positions in the FY '01 Adopted Budget to 182 for FY '02? What are the positions and how will you be able to eliminate them?
Okay, we've taken the 1.5 percent cut in Class 100 that everyone else did, and some of them were vacant positions that we're choosing not to fill. Two positions we have just chosen not to fill them, we'll sort of circle the wagons and do without it. We don't expect any degradation in service by cutting out those positions.
There are only two vacant positions, you said, that you're not filling?
Well, there are two in particular that we're just not filling. The others -- we took roughly one position from each division and we took five from Accounting, and we're just not going to fill them. And those were vacant positions. We're not firing anybody. Or laying anybody off.
I'm sorry, I'm not following you at all. There is a 80 2/13/01 - FY '02 OPERATING BUDGET difference of eight positions.
So you are not filling any of the eight positions.
Thank you. Please explain what Laughton & Associates do. And why are they designated as PGW's consultants. Why is the General Fund, and not PGW, paying for their services?
I believe that's on -17. It's the Risk Management/PGW consultant.
Good morning, Council President Verna. My name is my name is Joseph L. 81 2/13/01 - FY '02 OPERATING BUDGET Perrello from the Finance Department. The reason why Risk Management Division used Laughton & Associates to provide support for the PGW operations was that PGW operations was without their own risk management support team, and they were in the process of going through some serious insurance renewals, and so the City volunteered to assist them in putting together their renewals for the present and the next fiscal years.
But I think the question is, why isn't PGW paying for that? (Councilmembers respond off-mic.)
PGW was not in a position at that point to pay for it, and our department was asked to pick it up.
Miss Davis, can you tell us, why is the City contracting with PAID for lobbying services in the amount of $78,000? That's also on -17.
That was originally the (indiscernible) contract, and they were doing a 82 2/13/01 - FY '02 OPERATING BUDGET lot of the lobbying for the City, and it was just being handled through PAID. And that's why we were contracting -- making the payment to PAID and PAID was then paying the lobbyist who was providing services to the City.
Also on that same page, can you tell us why the City is contracting with the RDA? What services are they providing for the $150,000? And tell us how long has the City been contracting with the RDA for these services. (Witness comes forward.)
I'm Linda Orfanelli, Deputy Director of Finance. The City has a long-term agreement which was established during former Mayor Goode's tenure, where we had -- which -- this agreement is in effect until 2010. We pay back administrative costs to the RDA for certain programs relating to homeless.
To the homeless program 83 2/13/01 - FY '02 OPERATING BUDGET that they run.
Miss Davis, what happened in FY '01 to cause the indemnity accounts to increase by $15.1 million over its FY 2000 level? Why will the FY '02 requirement be $10.9 million less than the FY '01 requirements? That is on -75.
The increase in 2001 was in anticipation of the Osage Avenue expenditures and the decrease in the following year is because we will be (indiscernible) with those.
I'm sorry, I think we're having trouble hearing you.
The increase was -- the increase in 2001 was because of the Osage Avenue properties, the acquisition of those properties, and the work surrounding those. And it's anticipated that we will be done with that in FY 2002.
Our calculation is that it would be about $245,000 a 84 2/13/01 - FY '02 OPERATING BUDGET property, if there are 62 properties. Is that correct?
I'm also informed that there was some environmental remediation cases that we were paying off.
I'm also informed that there were some environmental remediation cases that we were paying off.
Miss Davis, what does the Administration project the total amount of refunds to be for the personal property tax? Where are these refunds budgeted? Did there not -- how are they paid, and why do they not go through appropriations? Do we have a City Solicitor's opinion on this? (Witness comes forward.) COMMISSIONER KAMMERDEINER: Good morning. I'm Nancy Kammerdeiner, Revenue 85 2/13/01 - FY '02 OPERATING BUDGET Commissioner. We have approximately $35 million in refund petitions for the personal property tax that are pending. Those cover all years that were applied for, and we have not yet broken that down year-by-year to determine exactly how much we will need to refund after we finish the process of collecting on the 1996 tax. That's our next step. We have not yet completed all of the work on identifying the precise amount of the refunds. But (inaudible) is about 35 million.
But why wouldn't it be budgeted? And if it is, where is it in the budget? Is it in the Five-Year Plan?
Tax refunds are paid out of the Revenue account. Only the fees paid are budgeted, so it will go out of the Revenue account, is what I'm being told.
I think they're for current years. We're talking about '94, '95, and '96. COMMISSIONER KAMMERDEINER: The normal process for paying a refund is to pay it from the incoming revenues of the same type. We are in the 86 2/13/01 - FY '02 OPERATING BUDGET process right now of collecting 1996 personal property tax. And then the next phase will be the work with the refunds, and that is why I'm saying that we're segmenting this, and we will be looking at addressing exact amounts on refunds following the collection of the 1996 tax. And those refunds will come from the tax collected.
At that point, we will have to come back to City Council to do a transfer ordinance.
Okay. To the extent that the City moves forward with the blight program, will the Department of L&I be contracting for demolition work?
The way it's envisioned is that the Redevelopment Authority would actually do the contracting.
Yes. There would be a three-way agreement which would allow Licenses and Inspections to actually do the condemnation, and 87 2/13/01 - FY '02 OPERATING BUDGET RDA would do the condemnation -- I mean, the RDA would do the contracting with the --
No, RDA doesn't have the power of condemnation; only L&I does. I think -- let me just -- I think the question you're getting at is --
Doesn't that take City Council out of the picture totally?
We've had discussions with Council technical staff, and we understand that you'd rather have us set it up so that L&I does the contracting, and so we will do it that way. It's not reflected that way in the budget, so we'll have to have a change to the budget.
I don't think there's any Councilmember here, to the best of my 88 2/13/01 - FY '02 OPERATING BUDGET knowledge, that would like it to go through the RDA.
Miss Davis, on , Budget in Brief, please explain the Water Residual Fund.
We have to get that information for you. At a later time, we'll get it to your office.
Thank you. I just have one last question. The Five-Year Plan on states that the Department of Licenses and Inspections will also continue to use its expanded ability to issue tickets and fines for code violations as part of the NTI, with a 100 increase in tickets issued estimated for FY '02. Would you please show us where these additional revenues are in the Budget in Brief, as I don't seem to be able to find them.
This revenue is not 89 2/13/01 - FY '02 OPERATING BUDGET included in the Budget in Brief.
We're taking a conservative approach until we actually see that there is this increase.
I don't know what that means at all. Councilwoman Blackwell?
Thank you. I likewise have a question with regard to tickets. And I wanted to know how the department will move to increase the fine collections. And in the past, when there have been changes, there's been an amnesty for people with outstanding tickets, and we wanted to know how that will work.
No, we're talking about the traffic fine collections. (Witness comes forward.)
We have a very special person here. Okay, you thought you 90 2/13/01 - FY '02 OPERATING BUDGET were going to get away easy, huh?
Yes. Good morning, Madam Chair. I'm Dominic Cermele, Deputy Finance Director for the Division of the Office of Administrative Review. I am not and have never been an advocate of amnesties related to any fines, for the simple reason that they don't work. You will -- I don't know how it worked in your family, but in my family, when my children would have overdue books at the Free Library, they always waited until there was an amnesty before they returned those books. And then after the amnesty was over, they would continue the same type of behavior. And the same is true with traffic fines. Amnesty just does not work; it just causes people to delay and wait for the next amnesty. Coupled with that, you have the problem of individuals who miss the amnesty period, having paid just before the amnesty starts, and they tend to sue you because they were not treated equally under the law. So I anticipate that there will be no 25 amnesty period. 91 2/13/01 - FY '02 OPERATING BUDGET
When will this start, and what will these fines be? Or how much will they increase?
We anticipate increasing fines on a percentage basis. That is, we will do that incrementally by changing the type of notifications that go out to individuals by more vigorously enforcing -- or getting the Traffic Court to enforce more vigorously booting and towing related to Act 2360, the law that allows for the impoundment of vehicles that are unregistered or driven by individuals who are uninsured. We have regular meetings now with the Traffic Court. There is a good spirit there for increased enforcement. They are looking at other methodologies for collecting fines, including putting people out on the street. They've, for many years, have had enforcement agents. They've decided now they'll actually use those enforcement agents out on the street.
How much in terms of money are we talking about? How much will the -- for example, what will a parking 92 2/13/01 - FY '02 OPERATING BUDGET ticket increase by? How much is it now and what will it be?
I'm sorry. We -- if you're asking the amount of revenue coming in, or are you asking --
Do we anticipate increasing the cost of fines by Council action?
I'm asking the revenue coming in and what the average ticket will be increased by, the violation.
There are no current plans to increase individual violations.
But that does not mean to say that in the area of parking tickets, we are reviewing, as we do every year, the relationship between our ticket prices and ticket prices for fines by other similar municipalities around the country. So we will review that again this year. And if it is appears that there are -- 93 2/13/01 - FY '02 OPERATING BUDGET that we are below the average for other large cities, we'll look at that. And we'll weigh that against whether the cost of -- for instance, there's an immediate problem that we're looking at now. If you park on the street and get a ticket for overtime parking, the cost is $15, which is actually cheaper than putting your car in a garage. That means for some people, it's to their advantage to get a ticket rather than put it in a garage. That's not good thing parking management. So that's something we may look at. And if we determine that that is a vital option, then we'll come before Council to look to change those, but there is no budgetary impact right now.
It seems to me -- I hear what you're saying -- that when we decide that we want to expand our Center City businesses, et cetera, everybody complains about -- and I'm not advocating that the City lose revenue, but it seems to me we've got to think about how we -- where we charge and how much, because people complain all the time about Center City parking, and we don't have movies and that sort of thing now. You know, you've got to go far 94 2/13/01 - FY '02 OPERATING BUDGET for some services, or if you go to a restaurant. We get a lot of complaints. In past years, of course, we've gotten complaints about businesses that would stop to unload and get ticketed when they went in. So I haven't heard those kind of complaints as of late. But all of us hear complaints about the amount of parking fines. I don't know what they charge in other cities, but it seems to me that our fees are high here. At least that's what we hear. People complain all the time about coming in town and the fees they have to pay to park.
I have some preliminary information on what fines are in other municipalities of similar size, and I'd be happy to send that to you.
Thank you. If you will submit that to the President, she'll make sure we get it.
Councilman, do you mind if I ask Mr. Cermele one question?
(Inaudible, off-mic.) 95 2/13/01 - FY '02 OPERATING BUDGET
Have you been getting any complaints from restaurateurs in Center City or from any of their customers? People pay $14 for valet parking, only to find that their car is parked on the street directly across the street from the restaurant that they're going to. I mean, why would anybody pay $14 to park on the street?
Yes. We don't get a lot of complaints in that area. What we do get --
-- a few complaints on are companies that do that and then get a ticket for the individual, remove the ticket from the individual's car so that the individual doesn't know that he wasted $14 and now he's gotten a fine. And then the first notification that the individual gets is when my office sends notification that he owes the fine and a $23 late penalty. Obviously, that raises much angst among those individuals and, of course, they take it out on me or my hearing examiners. When we do come across those things, we 96 2/13/01 - FY '02 OPERATING BUDGET report that information to the Department of Licenses and Inspections, who regulates the valet parking individuals.
I'll tell you, I think a lot of our business people in Center City are really being hurt as a result of that. Personally, I think it's a disgrace, I really do.
I'm not talking about the rate. I think it's unconscionable that somebody pays $14 for valet parking, only to walk out of the restaurant and find that your car is parked directly across the street.
That is contrary to the ordinance that Council has passed. The individuals who --
It's happening, it's happening much too frequently, and I think somebody ought to be looking into that.
Thank you. 97 2/13/01 - FY '02 OPERATING BUDGET The Chair recognizes Councilman Kenney.
Thank you, Madam Chair. On that note, you know, we did pass a bill a number of years ago outlining the responsibilities of valet parking operations, and one of those responsibilities is to have the secure, off-street parking facility to take the cars to. Part of the problem, I think, has been because of the popularity of a lot of these restaurants and because of the high profile of perhaps some of these restaurateurs in Center City, L&I has been somewhat reluctant, perhaps the Parking Authority has been somewhat reluctant to kind of clamp down on that practice. I'm wondering whether or not L&I probably doesn't have the personnel to deal with this issue and whether or not it should be something that's in the hands of either the Parking Authority or your office.
Actually, the Parking Authority does enforce it on behalf L&I. That is, if a vehicle is left in the loading zone that the 98 2/13/01 - FY '02 OPERATING BUDGET valet company's using for the staging of those vehicles, if it remains in the zone too long, then they issue a ticket to the valet company, not to the individual.
Now, there was a myriad of requirements. I mean, there was licensing checks for drivers, there was insurance checks -- I'm sorry, licensing checks for drivers, the elimination of the ability to take over parking meters. I mean, restaurants generally are doing this kind of willy-nilly, just shutting down parking meters, putting up A-frame signs in the middle of the street and doing this valet parking operation. So I'm wondering whether or not maybe a request from the Council President or from Councilmembers to the Parking Authority to look at this a little more closely, but I know that that kind of enforcement will immediately bring a cry from restaurant owners who feel that they're being imposed upon because of this enforcement.
Well, the Parking Authority does have a new Executive Director now, Reverend Bill Moore, and last night was his 99 2/13/01 - FY '02 OPERATING BUDGET official swearing-in. I find him to be an individual who is very sensitive to the needs of the community, particularly the business community, and I think that is something that you ought to communicate with him, something he would look at very seriously.
Judge, in your conversations with the Traffic Court and with the Police Department and with other organizations that -- or entities that you deal with in trying to do your job, has there been any discussion at all as to the extension of the live-stop car confiscation program citywide so that the ultimate vision of anyone driving in the City of Philadelphia unlicensed in a car where the tags do not match the registration or the car is not registered, that anywhere you're stopped, that car will be impounded in order to send a message to the 50,000 or so scoff laws who basically laugh at everybody else who pays their insurance rates, that they're just not going to abide by the law. I mean, we've been a frustrated because it's been a pilot program in, I guess, South Philadelphia and in eastern Center City for a 100 2/13/01 - FY '02 OPERATING BUDGET number of years now, and I think people around the City would look for this relief.
It is a subject that Judge Perri and I will be addressing tomorrow morning at a.m., in fact. 7
Would you be 8 interested in having some discussion with members 9 of Council, either the Public Safety Committee or 10 Streets and Services to try to figure out where we go from here?
Yes, we would be very interested in that, and I will discuss that with Judge Perri tomorrow because he would be equally interest.
Thank you very much. Miss Davis, the Five-Year Plan shows that the Administration is slowing down the reduction of wage and business privilege tax. Reductions projected over the next five years are less than half the reductions of the past five years. Could you explain the policy behind that decision and how you think it's going to 101 2/13/01 - FY '02 OPERATING BUDGET affect our ability to retain both jobs and residents?
Actually, we just carried forward the reductions that were included in the plans over the last couple of years. We didn't change --
We didn't change any of the out-year numbers from last year's plan.
Actually, if you looked at last year's plan and the year from the year before, this is how it's been laid out.