Okay. Well, I don't want to be, you know, fully embarrassed here, but I always thought that those scholarships were given to young people that were going to stay in Philadelphia or attend, you know, local colleges. Okay. The Mayor's goal for contract participation is currently 20 percent. And I know, when I read your testimony, you did make a statement that it's 20, but it will be percent, correct? 24
It's our hope 25 and expectation that we will exceed the 47 3.22.10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 20 percent. As I said in response to a question by Councilwoman Blondell Reynolds-Brown, that at the current levels of the current contracts, we are currently at percent, and we still 7 have an RFP out for additional lobbying 8 services. 9 So it's a very good chance that 10 if we select a MBWBE firm that that 11 number could go up significantly. 12
Okay. 13 I'd like to get some information 14 regarding workforce in terms of 15 minorities. 16 What is the minority, woman, 17 and disabled employee count of the 18 current full and part-time administrative 19 staff? Can you get us information and 20 include the title of those staff? 21
Sure, we can 22 get that information to you, Councilwoman.
Okay. And I don't think you do, but does this 48 3.22.10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 administration have anyone that is charged with minority recruitment for the City of Philadelphia? You know, most businesses have minority recruitment and minority-business recruiters.
I don't know that we have a person. That may be a question better to put to Al D'Attilio, our Human Resources Director. But one of the things that the Administration is, in fact, trying to do is to make sure that opportunities for all citizens, all is embedded in everything that we do, be it contract, be it hiring. We are always and constantly looking to make sure that we reflect the city that we serve. So I don't know if they have someone over in HR that does it. I'm familiar with the term "diversity officers"; many firms now have diversity officers, I know many of the law firms have diversity officers. I'm not sure we have a 49 3.22.10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 diversity officer, but we certainly are trying to embed that throughout the Administration and through the government.
Okay. Well, you know, I know that there's a extremely long workforce, but I'm really interested in seeing administratively what we're doing and what we look like.
Excuse me, Councilwoman. You want that for the government, or do you want it for the department? You want it department-by- department; is that what you would like?
Thank 50 3.22.10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 you. Are there any other questions for Mr. Armbrister? (No further questions.)
I'm sorry, Madam Chair. I have one final question. I apologize. Thank you. Mr. Armbrister, you talked about the lobbying within the Mayor's Office. Is there a lobbying budget, or does any department have separate money contracting, Class 200 set aside for lobbying services?
I'm not sure what the total is. We tried -- I guess, 51 3.22.10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 when we came into office in 2008, there were a number of departments who were funding the lobbying efforts. We tried to consolidate that number and we had it at about $300,000 that we had budgeted and allocated. And we were not looking to go outside of the department for lobbying services. Our experience has told us that there are ways to maximize our lobbying efforts outside the General Fund. So, for example, down at the Airport, where there is heavy, you know, interest in what goes on in the federal government and for which we utilize our lobbyists for a lot of their services, it would not be inappropriate to ask the Airport revenue -- you know, the Airport cost center to supply us some funds for lobbying. So as part of this year going forward, the Administration has about $300,000 or so budgeted for lobbying, and I think we have a commitment from the 52 3.22.10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 Airport to provide maybe another 75 to $100,000 for our lobbying. That is the universe of the lobbying that I'm aware of. I'm not aware of any other independent departments that do lobbying beyond those two sources.
Could you just provide the Chair, please, the total throughout the City Budget for lobbying --
And the breakdown of how those dollars are going to be spent by which lobbyists.
Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Armbrister. 53 3.22.10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 The Inspector General's Office, please. (Witnesses Amy Kurland and William Brown come forward.)
Good morning. Please identify yourself for the record. INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: Okay. Good morning, President Verna and members of City Council. I am Amy Kurland, the Inspector General for the City of Philadelphia.
Welcome. INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: Thank you. With me is William Brown, who is the Budget Officer for our office. I am pleased to appear before you for the first time to report on the budget and the accomplishments of the Office of Inspector General. It's been slightly over two years since I began as Inspector General, and I'm proud to report that the Inspector General's 54 3.22.10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 Office is a very different and much-improved office. The proposed Fiscal Year 2011 budget for the OIG totals $1.3 million approximately in the General Fund. The budget contains no increases from the office's initial Fiscal Year 2010 budget. Approximately 1.2 million, or 93 percent, of the budget support the current full-time positions, plus 2 12 additional investigators, and contains no 13 provision for overtime costs. 14 $75,000, or 6 percent, of the 15 budget is for the purpose of professional 16 services, of which $55,000 is for the 17 contracted services of a retired Internal Revenue services investigator. This contract will expire on June 30, 2010, and the OIG plans to coordinate the upcoming bid with the Office of Economic Opportunity and has partnered with them in building alliances with minority-, women-, or disabled-owned businesses in the Philadelphia community. 55 3.22.10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 $20,000 of the professional services budget is for staff training; and the remaining 1 percent, or $15,000, is budgeted for office supplies and equipment. In addition, a cost-effective surveillance program has been developed with other City departments that augments and optimizes OIG staff in conducting investigations. This use of private investigators also promotes efficiency by freeing up investigators to perform more complex investigations. If I may now move to the improvements in the OIG investigations. I believe that the Office of Inspector General is in the process of being transformed into a top-quality investigative agency. We have changed the OIG's priorities, procedures, and methods from top to bottom and have added substantially more experience to the office. The results from last year show 56 3.22.10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 that the OIG now has the ability to successfully work more advanced types of investigations and that our investigative product is more reliable and more fair. The number of criminal prosecutions produced by the office has jumped exponentially, and we are pleased with the first federal charges resulting from the first ever federal OIG joint investigations.
Excuse me, Miss Kurland. I've been asked by a couple of the Councilmembers if you could abbreviate your testimony. A copy of your written testimony will be given to the stenographer and it will be transcribed in full. INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: Certainly, Councilwoman. Thank you.
Thank you. 10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 that the Office of the Inspector General has accomplished in the last year. Since our budget has been separated from that of the Mayor's Office and we operate as an independent office, we have had substantial accomplishments. What this means, having a separate budget, is that we make decisions about what to investigate based soley on the seriousness of the alleged misconduct and the significance of any potential misconduct finding, the feasibility of using our available resources to successfully investigate. We make decisions about what to investigate or not to investigate based soley on what we believe is the right thing to do. And, additionally, we are very strict about keeping investigative information from complainants and others extremely confidential. I believe this is what makes us a strong and credible office. 10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 resources on investigations involving relatively low-level misconduct, and we have changed that. We recognize now that low-level misconduct is often the result of ineffective supervision, and we have worked with the departments to ensure that the supervisory personnel are closely monitoring their subordinates. We have begun to focus on much more serious misconduct that may be criminal in nature on situations when people with discretionary authority are abusing their position for their own benefit or to give preferential treatment to others and to other more serious misconduct. Third, we have been using much more sophisticated investigative techniques, and we have adopted a more patient approach that insists on very strong corroborating evidence before a case is completed. 10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 parts of City government primarily because there was no specialization in the office. We have now -- we now have investigators who specialize in certain cases within certain departments, and they have begun to build expertise regarding specific departments of the City. And this has made the OIG much more knowledgeable and has led to much smarter investigations. Fifth, when I began two years ago, the investigators were drowning in absurdly high caseloads; there were approximately 40 to 50 cases per investigator. No matter how hardworking an investigator may be, little progress can be made in this environment. We are now diligent about keeping the caseloads much more manageable. In 2009, we received 688 complaints. 10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 investigator. This is still too high. While our investigations are now more complex and thorough, we have seen the older investigations begin to decrease. Good investigations take lots of time and are resource-intensive, but we believe that the results that come from investigating the right way are definitely worth it. Number six, we have adopted very strong internal procedures to ensure that evidence is sufficient before a case is sustained. We recognize the seriousness of recommending discipline against an employee, and we believe it's important that these recommendations not be made arbitrarily. 10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 disciplinary recommendation. This process of providing a written explanation of our reasoning is critical in making the Inspector General's Office accountable for its actions. Seven, we have greatly improved accountability by holding periodic performance management sessions with the leadership team and with each employee. We make sure that cases are moving appropriately and that the right cases are being given the right amount of resources. Eight, part of our transparency and accountability involves providing more investigation to the public. Even though we are an investigative body that conducts confidential investigations, we have moved in this direction with our website, which provides detailed information about our office, its organization, background, and legal framework.
10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 In the last two years, we have published annual reports that provide statistics and other information about the office's operations in the prior year, and we expect to continue to provide more information on the website in the future. These reforms and improvement have directly resulted in a stronger and more efficient performance by the Inspector General's Office. I'd like to just briefly discuss our results, which are outlined in much more detail in our annual report that I believe has been provided to all Councilmembers. First, in criminal cases, the number of criminal prosecutions has increased dramatically: individuals 21 have been charge criminally, resulting 22 from Inspector General investigations; 23 all of these were felony cases. 10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 office's investigation. And this huge increase is significant because it shows that the office is focusing on more significant cases and has the ability to satisfy prosecutors, both federal and state, that the evidence and the investigation is sufficient to meet the higher criminal standard of proof. We believe that investigating these large fraud cases not only helps bring criminals to justice but also have great potential for returning to the City treasury fraudulently-obtained City funds. And these cases are made possible by combining experience with smart, efficient use of investigative resources that focuses on significant investigations. Regarding our administrative and disciplinary case, we have recommended discipline. 10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 discipline. And when there are appeals, the Civil Service Commission has upheld the imposition of the discipline. In 2009, we recommended disciplinary action against 47 employees; of these cases, 34 employees were terminated and were suspended or 9 demoted. Other actions such as 10 reprimands were taken in 33 cases. 11 Additionally, in many cases, employees 12 have resigned when faced with an OIG 13 investigations. These statistics show that, among other things, the departments agree that OIG investigations were based on strong evidence. We consider this a strong statements of the quality of our disciplinary investigations that the OIG has been sending to departments. 10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 that the evidence in OIG investigations is strong and reliable and that OIG disciplinary recommendations are reasonable. Briefly looking ahead, in 2010, we will be implementing several new initiatives. We will be increasingly focusing on the issue of supervisory accountability in City government. We believe that misconduct flourishes when supervision is lax, and we expect to ask the questions in every case about whether the supervisor was, in fact, doing their job, and did the supervisor know whether or not the misconduct was occurring. If supervisors get the message and they begin to act in a more responsible fashion as supervisor, we believe that the amount of employee misconduct will decrease significantly. S. Attorney's Office, and also by seeking cost recovery more frequently with the Law Department. We will be placing a greater priority on investigating contract fraud. Conducting complicated fraud investigations and forensic audits requires training and experience, and increasing the training we give our young fraud investigators should pay dividends in terms of money saved for the City when fraudulent contractors are caught. And, finally, we will be increasing the use of technology in the office. A great deal of upgrading is needed to make maximum use of the resources. 10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 process. In conclusion, although it will take time before the impact of these changes is visible, I believe that they are already beginning to bear fruit, and we are well on the way to becoming a national model of an independent professional office that uncovers corruption, fraud, waste, and inefficiency.
Thank you, Councilwoman, and thank you, members of Council. I welcome any questions.
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman Goode.
Thank you, Madam President. Good morning, Miss Kurland. INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: Good morning.
Miss Kurland, in your written testimony, 68 3.22.10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 you say that the OIG plans to coordinate an upcoming bid with the Office of Economic Opportunity and, thus, partner with them in building alliances with minority-, women-, or disabled-owned business in the Philadelphia community. What does that mean? INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: What that means, Councilman Goode, is that one of our contracts, which is currently being held by a retired Internal Revenue Service investigator, will be up again. And as we did with the surveillance contracts, we will be sending them out -- we will be putting out an RFP and we will work with the Office of Economic Opportunity to make sure that we have minority representation and that that's taken into consideration when awarding the contracts.
So that's something that you will do in the future? INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: 69 3.22.10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 Yes, but if I can say, we really have done that already, in the past. Of the City surveillance contracts that are out, there is 6 percent minority participation there. We 7 do very little contracting; and so, we 8 have also made an effort for our office 9 makeup to represent minority 10 participation. 11
So you do 12 very little contracting, but you do some 13 contracting? 14 INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: 15 Yes, we do. 16
But you set 17 no goals for that contracting? 18 INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: 19 Excuse me. 20
You've set no goals for that contracting in terms of women-, or disabled-owned businesses. INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: We currently have a 20 percent minority participation. 70 3.22.10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117
But you are not required to set goals as a part of that budgeting process? INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: Yes, we have set goals. If I could just have a moment. While my Budget Officer is looking it up, I just want to point out regarding our office makeup: Regarding racial makeup, we have a 40 percent minority participation. And regarding gender, we have a 55 percent women working in the office. Our goals? (Ms. Kurland confers off the record with OIG Budget Officer Brown.) Councilman Goode, overall, our goal is 78.57 percent.
For Fiscal Year '11? INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: For Fiscal Year '11.
Okay. One last question: Do you consider it to be 71 3.22.10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 corrupt or fraud or wasteful for a procurement official to not contract with minority, women, or disabled businesses? INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: I think that that would depend on what the participation was. I mean, I don't know whether there would be any criminal statutes involved that would be fraud or corruption. There may be violations of City policy that we would look into if that was the case.
Have you ever looked into that? INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: We have not had a case like that, no. 17
If there is contracting that happens, a significant portion of our budget of a billion dollars goes toward contracting, and there are procurement officials who have never done business with disadvantaged business, is that possibly corrupt? INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: That is possibly corrupt. 72 3.22.10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 And if I can backtrack a second, because I'm not sure this is directly in response to your question, but we do have several investigations where a contractor claims to have minority participation, but what we finding is that it really is not minority participation, that there may be a minority subcontractor in name only or a minority in name only who owns the business.
And so your officers are investigating -- INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: We are investigating those types of cases.
You're welcome. The Chair recognizes Councilman Greenlee.
Thank you. 73 3.22.10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 Good morning, Miss Kurland. INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: Good morning, Councilman Greenlee.
Just quickly. And I don't want to rehash the whole hearing from last week, but there was concern raised by both the District Attorney's Office and the City Controller's Office around sort of duplication and bumping up against certain other duties. I see you mentioned in your testimony the District Attorney's Office and working with them. Are there times that you've worked with the Controller's Office in either information from them to you, or you to them? What interaction is there with the Controller's Office? INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: Certainly, our mission overlaps the Controller's Office mission, which is to ensure that the City operates honestly and efficiently.
Mm-hmm. 74 3.22.10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: We have not had joint cases with the Controller's Office. My view, Councilman, what I would hope will happen in the future is that we will have a system of referral back and forth. Oftentimes, when we investigate a fraud case and we find that somebody stole money from a department, we would anticipate referring the matter then to the Controller's Office to go in and do a full audit of that department.
Okay. Why hasn't that be done yet? You said you anticipate. INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: We are -- we don't have anything in place right now where we work with the Controller's Office. Again, I hope that that will happen. But to date, it has not.
Mm-hmm. Okay, thank you. Thank you, Madam President. 75 3.22.10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117
Thank you, Madam Chair. Good morning, Miss Kurland. INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: Good morning.
So the fraud cases that you mentioned that are the subject of your report that you put out last week, et cetera, you have not referred those cases to date, with details, to the Controller's Office? INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: Some of the -- I'm not sure what fraud cases you're talking about, Councilman.
Well -- INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: When there's a criminal case, we don't do an official referral. The matter is public. If somebody is indicted, it's public information that a person from a 76 3.22.10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 department was indicted.
So you don't send over a report, with your files, to the Controller when you've discovered that there's been some, you know, inefficiency or waste, fraud, or abuse in a department so that the Controller then has that information to begin with, so that they can then go conduct their own investigation, without having to start over; is what that what you're testifying? INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: We've -- there have been occasions when the Controller's Office has asked us for information about a particular case and we have provided that. But we don't turn over files on a wholesale matter because they contain lots of confidential information, such as the identification of informants and bank-account information, and that sort of thing.
Well, okay. 77 3.22.10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 So I'm not asking you to turn over all of your files. INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: Right.
I'm asking you to turn over pertinent information which would allow the Controller to go ahead and conduct an appropriate audit of the department. INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: Yes, and we certainly will -- we have done that in the past and we --
When they have requested it -- INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: Yes.
Do you think that ought to be a matter of departmental policy, that when you conduct -- complete an investigation, you turn it over to somebody who has also jurisdiction so that they can then do their job? INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: We would be happy to do that. I mean, the way it works right now -- 78 3.22.10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117
You will do that, going forward; is that what you're testifying? INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: Yes. The way it works right now, once we discover something like that, we work hand-in-hand with the department head to try and, you know, explain, based on our investigation, what we found that allowed the fraud to occur.
No, I know, but your testimony was that in the future, you hope to do that, but there's no policy in place. INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: No. 17 When the Controller's Office -- we will turn our information over to the Controller's Office when they go to do a performance audit; that certainly is not a problem.
Miss Kurland, does your office use the services of the Police Department? 79 3.22.10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: We do, Councilwoman. We have two police detectives who are detailed to our office.
Is that reflected in your budget, or does it -- INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: No. 10 These police officers are paid for by the Police Department.
The Police Department? INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: They report to the Police Department. They assist us in criminal investigations.
And are they full-time? INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: Yes. There is no overtime for those police officers, however.
Point of information. 80 3.22.10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117
Thank you, Madam Chair. When you say they assist you in criminal investigations, that's confusing to me because your authority is civil; of course, the Police Department's authority is criminal. So, technically, aren't you assisting the Police Department in criminal investigations that -- where you may have identified some criminal activity? INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: I think our authority is civil and criminal. In criminal cases, we work with the District Attorney's Office and the U.S. Attorney's Office from very early on in the investigation.
I'm confused, though. I mean, the Mayor's Office -- so, okay. So you -- the Inspector General's Office, in your view, 81 3.22.10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 has civil and criminal authority. INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: Yes.
And where does it get the criminal authority other than cooperation with agencies that actually, you know, are supposed to prosecute or investigate crimes? INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: Well, I think the authority is in our executive order, which is 4-94.
So the Mayor can authorize any person within City government to investigate crimes, whether or not they're a sworn officer? INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: Well, we investigate misconduct, fraud, and corruption among City employees and anybody doing business with the City. Sometimes those turn out to be administrative cases, but sometimes they turn out to be criminal cases, and I think that's where our authority comes from.
But then 82 3.22.10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 it's the police that conduct the criminal investigation or the D.A.'s Office, right? I mean, they're working and coordinating with you, but in terms of putting together the criminal case, is that what your agency does, or is that what the D.A. and Police do? INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: We put together the criminal case, having been given direction from the prosecutors as to what's needed to make a successful criminal case.
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Blackwell.
Thank you, Madam President. I'm following up on that line of questioning that my colleague Councilman Green pursued, and that is: On , number 1, you said that you operate your budget separate 83 3.22.10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 from that of the Mayor, as you have an independent office. And my question again is: Well, then, to whom do you report, and to whom are you accountable? INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: Thank you, Councilwoman.
Thank you. INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: We report to the Mayor, and we are accountable to the Mayor. The reason I use the word "independent" is because Mayor Nutter has given us -- he has supported our working independently, and we don't take direction from him as to what cases to investigate or what not to investigate. He's given us the authority to make those decisions. So that's what I mean when I say "independent," but we do answer to the Mayor.
Thank you. 84 3.22.10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 When this office was created by Executive Order 1084 of May 22, 1984, by former Mayor Goode, one of the under-functions, one of them was to prevent -- it says to prevent and detect fraught fraud and abuse. Do you have preventive programs as well? INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: Yes, we do. I, along with the Chief Integrity Officer, have spoken to every single department head and every single inspector in the City of Philadelphia, in the Streets Department, in L&I, and DHS, and we have outlined ethical rules, criminal rules, and what City employees may and may not do specifically, that they may not take money. We also have integrity officers in every department, and we work closely with the integrity officers; we provide training for them, and the integrity officers then go back to their respective 85 3.22.10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 departments and emphasize the prevention of corruption and misconduct.
Thank you. We raise that question because I note that you say you have a much- improved office and with disciplinary action against 47 employees, 34 of which were terminated, and suspended or 11 demoted; we know that aspect of it. 12 But that is why I asked about 13 prevention, since we have so many more prosecutions and so many more disciplinary actions. So we wondered how you viewed your office in terms of if it is mainly and almost soley prosecution. And also, coupled with that, could you explain to the Council how you work with the integrity officers that are under the Mayor's Office? INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: The statistics are strange because when you say that we have so many prosecutions, 86 3.22.10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 does that mean that there are more bad people, or does it mean that we have an improved office? And it's hard to measure that. But I think that I can say confidently that for every person who is prosecuted or disciplined, there are many, many more that are prevented. And that's because I think that when a prosecution or a disciplinary procedure occurs, you're sending a message to City employees and to people who may do business with the City, that we will not tolerate misconduct. So that's the first thing. The second thing, in working with integrity officers, because the integrity officers are active in the department, we have seen a high increase in the number of people reporting misconduct. We have had probably five or six people -- I don't have the exact number -- this year alone who have come forward to say, "Somebody has tried to 87 3.22.10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 bribe me. Somebody has tried to offer me money." And we have a system where, when that happens, the Mayor sends outs a letter of commendation to the City employee. I think also that the department heads, with whom we work closely, such as DHS, L&I, and those organizations, would say that they have seen less -- fewer problems in their departments.
So what is that process like? Does the integrity officer go to his or her supervisor, and the supervisor approaches you? Or what's that process about? I think it says in here that every department has an integrity officer assigned. INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: Yes.
So how do those complaints get to you? INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: The integrity officers, first of all, they 88 3.22.10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 meet at the Inspector General's Office every month, where we provide training and follow-up on various cases. (Timer bell rings.) When a City employee has a complaint, they go to the integrity officer. The integrity officer then brings the complaint to us. We review it and we decide whether it's something that we will handle in the Inspector General's Office or whether we will refer it back to the integrity officer to handle, with our assistance.
Thank you. I note my time is up. Thank you, Miss Kurland.
You're welcome. The Chair recognizes Councilman Rizzo.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Good morning. 89 3.22.10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: Good morning, Councilman.
Being around the government for as long as I have, I have heard of cases where people have gotten themselves in trouble because of poor departmental policies. You mentioned earlier supervision and following up on the preventive side of what you do, because you'd like to put yourself out of business, I'm sure, and have an honest government that works well. But what happens -- and, you know, I have a few cases in my mind, and I'm not going to say it publicly, and it's something going to talk to you about privately, is that I don't think some of these people would have done what they did if, in fact, they were well- supervised. And I think they did what they did because there were no policies that could prevent them from being caught. 90 3.22.10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 And I'm struggling with this 'cause I don't want to -- I think you understand what I'm trying to say. What do you do with the operating departments, after you do have someone either suspended or fired or prosecuted, to prevent someone else from doing something similar like that in the future? I know you put the fear of God into the rest of the folks. But every department -- and there's issues that I could talk to you about all day that, because of lack of good policies and good information, allow people to do what they do. INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: Yeah, I agree with you completely, Councilman. Some departments have very well spelled-out policies; some departments do not. And I don't believe that we can recommend discipline for somebody for violating a policy if a policy doesn't exist. 91 3.22.10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 So, in order for us to recommend discipline, there has to be a policy, and the person has to have violated that policy. And we -- I think we stick with that
Well -- and I don't want to take too long on this, but if information isn't available to supervisors about certain aspects of a person's job because of just poor management, that, I believe, after you do your investigation, that somebody has to -- a light bulb has to go on and say, Well, we've got to if I can that so nobody else does it eight years from now. INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: Right.
Anyone would be stupid to do it six months or a year later, after someone, you know, is taken out in handcuffs. INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: Yes.
But my point 92 3.22.10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 is that there are so many things in the government that, because of policies and because of management and because of procedures, people say, you know, "I can get around and benefit by this lack of good management." INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: Mm-hmm.
And I'm sure you see that. INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: Mm-hmm.
And I'm sure that part of your job would be to recommend to employing officers, I call them -- commissioners and heads of department -- that they've got to fix this after you detect it. Is that a part of the process? INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: Absolutely. And the best example that I can give you is with DHS after the unfortunate situation with Danieal Kelly. When a number of people were indicted, we 93 3.22.10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 then took over that case on an administrative level, and we reviewed up two different chains of supervisors. We recommended that eight supervisors be fired basically because they were not doing their job; and, in part, that's what allowed that situation to happen. Those eight supervisors were fired. And we now work hand-in-hand with the Commissioner. In many of our DHS cases, we recommend different training policies, different supervisory procedures, recommendations that supervisors meet with social workers more often, that they review paperwork. And we've put those recommendations in writing. And, in fact, next week, I'll be speak to the DHS staff about these new procedures.
Just one last thing, an example, and I'll talk about it because it's already public. 94 3.22.10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 If the process was better- managed and supervised, should the cell phone issue that occurred have ever occurred? INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: It's hard to speculate, sir. I think that probably, if there had been a situation in place where every single cell phone was accounted for, and there was somebody in place to make sure that the records all matched, that wouldn't have happened.
How do you get authorization to make undercover recordings? INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: Councilwoman, we don't have authorization to make undercover recordings. That 95 3.22.10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 occurs in situations where we are working with the U.S. Attorney's Office or the District Attorney's Office. And then we are a part of a case where there are undercover recordings. But my office does not have the authorization to do that.
I was going to ask who makes that determination for, you know, for probable cause. INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: Right. It's made by the U.S. Attorney or the D.A.
And I assume you'd have to have judicial approval? INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: If the rules are different -- on the State level, there is a requirement for judicial approval; on the federal level, the U.S. Attorney may authorize that.
I'm just looking at your testimony. INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: Yes. 96 3.22.10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117
Is that on ? INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: In my testimony, I said that we are making more use of that type of investigatory technique, and I'm sorry if I was not clear on that. What I meant was that in cases that are initiated by the Inspector General's Office that then become criminal, those techniques are used when authorized by law enforcement.
Thank you. Also, you state that you need to create a case-management system within your office and that you have begun to establish one. Are the requested appropriations in this year's Operating Budget; and if so, what is the amount? INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: Okay. The case management system that we have begun, we're working with the Department of Technology to do that. 97 3.22.10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 They are developing a case-management system that I think will be of use in six or seven different departments. We're being used sort of as a test case for that. Mr. Frank tells me that the approximate cost of this, which will be spread among the different departments, is in the neighborhood of $20,000.
Thank you very much. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Brown.
Thank you, Madam President. I'd like to continue follow-up to Councilwoman Blackwell's questions. INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: Yes.
Where you indicated that there are integrity officer in each department. INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: Yes.
So these are staff persons who also have the role 98 3.22.10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 of integrity duties? INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: Yes. These are people who have other jobs within their own respective departments, but they also serve as an integrity officer, as a liaison to the Inspector General's Office.
And so, are they recruited? do they volunteer? do they go through orientation? INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: It's a little bit of each. We, of course, have high standards for who can be an integrity officer. Usually what happens is, the department will come to me and say, We'd like this person to be the together officer. And then, you know, we usually say yes.
I see. INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: And then when they come to the Inspector General's Office for their periodic meetings, that's when they receive 99 3.22.10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 training.
Mm-hmm. Has it been customary for there to be two detectives assigned to your office? INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: Previously --
Or is that a new practice? INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: Previously, before I started, there was a unit in the Police Department called the Internal Investigations Unit, and there were seven detectives in that unit.
I see. INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: But they were up in the Northeast, and it was difficult to work cases together with them. So two of them are now detailed to the Inspector General's Office, and the other five have other jobs throughout the Police Department.
I see. In your testimony, you state 100 3.22.10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 also how, on occasion, you have to partner with the federal government on investigations. How do you -- what process or -- it wouldn't be a strategy. What process do you use to break down the costs, those tied to the feds and those tied to your office? INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: I'm not certain how the cost is broken down because we have full-time investigators, and the federal authorities also have full-time people.
Mm-hmm. INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: It's just part of what the caseload is.
I see. INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: I will say, though, that in certain -- the example I would give is the case of Brenda Wilkins, who was indicted basically for stealing a house. She took a house that was supposed to be low- to moderate-income people, and she moved it into a different program and gave it to 101 3.22.10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 her daughter. When we began investigating that case, we determined that she really should be charged with a crime rather than just fired. She was indicted, she was convicted; and at her sentencing, we requested restitution to the City, and the judge did order that she pay -- I believe it was approximately $65,000 back to the City. So in a case like that, while the costs of investigation were probably equally borne by my office and the U.S. Attorney's Office, because of our involvement, we were able to get able restitution to the City in the end. And then after that, we worked with the Law Department and the Pension Department, and Miss Wilkins has now forfeited her pension, which is worth about $550,000. So the costs that come back to the government, back to the City, because of our investigation, I think, are really 102 3.22.10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 substantial.
Yes. With the heightened role and visibility of your office, what are the trends? Are we seeing fewer investigations or more, or what? INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: I think we're seeing more sophisticated investigations. We're spending less time doing minor personnel matters. We do fewer residency cases than we initially did. And we are spending a great deal of our time doing much more complex fraud cases.
And what might you attribute fewer residency cases to? INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: We have a very effective surveillance program now. When I started as Inspector General, the investigators in the office spent a substantial amount of their time conducting surveillance. You can imagine 103 3.22.10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 that's very time-intensive to determine whether or not somebody lives in the City. Now, my office does all of the background investigation when we have a residency complaint. We determine where the person pays their taxes, where their water bills are paid, where their children go to school; we do all of that background information. And then we ask the department whether they would like to pay for surveillance.
I see. INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: And that minimizes the cost of a residency investigation, because the surveillance companies do it and bill the department.
With those surveillance companies, are there or is there representation of MBE/WBEs? INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: Yes. It's 20 percent representation right now.
Okay, 104 3.22.10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 then. Thank you for your testimony. INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: Thank you.
Councilwoman Blackwell, did you want to be recognized?
Yes, Madam President. We are concerned. During these budgetary times, it appears that we have five departments who may overlap. Obviously, the Inspector General, the Integrity Officer, we have the Ethics Board, we have the District Attorney's Office, and the Controller. So that is five areas. And we really would like clarity on -- and my colleagues here were talking about it, on how they differ and how they're the same during these harsh budget times, so we better understand what their role is and how we should support them. INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: 105 3.22.10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 Councilwoman, I can very briefly describe the differences. And then I have a chart that's been prepared that outlines the details a little bit more, with some examples. But just basically, the Ethics Board, their jurisdiction is the Ethics Code, and they investigate and impose penalties for violations of the Ethics Code. The District Attorney's Office has authority over criminal investigations, not any kind of administrative investigations or misconduct that's not criminal. The Controller's Office, as I understand it, conducts broad performance audits of every department, and they are bound by accounting standards and are looking in a bigger picture to see if departments are being run officially. The Chief Integrity Officer works very closely with me. She is responsible, I believe, for prevention, 106 3.22.10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 for education. She receives complaints of problems that may occur and then refers them to my office for investigation. We work with her to make recommendations for better contracting policies and better department policies. I think that's all.
Sure. While our witness looks through that document, I would underscore the request to actually see those departments because a visual grid is very, very useful. INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: I can hand it to --
If you could forward to Madam Chair, she'll make sure we get a copy.
107 3.22.10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 Councilwoman Blackwell, are you finished?
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman Green.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I guess we're officially in the afternoon, so instead of "good morning," I'll say "good afternoon." In response to budget questions last year, the office provided copies of memorandums of understandings that it has with the Police Department, the Prison System, the Department of Human Services, et cetera. The one with DHS provides that DHS will transfer $250,000 per year to OIG to fund several investigator and support positions. Having looked at the budget detail for both OIG and DHS, I'm not clear how this $250,000 is reflected in 108 3.22.10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 the budget. Neither department indicates an interdepartmental transfer with the other. Can you address that? INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: Yes, Councilman. I don't believe that we are operating under those memoranda of understanding anymore. The Budget Officer can answer that in more detail as to how our budget was arrived at. But when we did not have a separate budget from the Mayor's Office, we worked through those memoranda of understanding. Now, as we have a separate budget, I don't think that there's any transfer going on from one department to us. But, again, Mr. Agostini can answer that in more detail.
Okay. So can somebody confirm that those memoranda of understanding are no longer in effect? INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: They're in effect just to the extent that we have the same goals and we work 109 3.22.10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 together. And I believe that part of our budget comes from other departments, but I see Mr. Agostini coming. (Budget Director Stephen Agostini comes forward.)
Thank you. Well, I mean, what I want to understand is, if, during the course of the next year, in addition to what you're being allocated, that memorandum of understanding would allow an additional essential transfer of $250,000 INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: No, no. It's my understanding that there is no additional money coming from any memorandum of understanding. Our budget is what's before you right now.
So that provision of the memorandum of understanding has been deleted, or it still exists in the memorandum of understanding? INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: I guess the memoranda are out there, but we 110 3.22.10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 don't operate under them.
Councilmember, Miss Kurland's representations are what we've done in the budget. While the memoranda may still be out there, we had no plans to make additional expenditure transfers or resource transfers in addition to what's here. We thought, at the time last year, that those memorandums, while it made sense to have them, created a very cumbersome way to try and track dollars and track what was happening. We thought it would just make the most sense to just set aside money for the purposes of funding the office.
Thank you. 111 3.22.10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 Miss Kurland, you indicated earlier -- maybe I didn't understand it clearly -- that you need to be authorized to surveil, for surveillance. Does that apply to residency? INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: The surveillance contracts that we have are used in residency cases.
Okay. You indicated that the monies for that surveillance have to be paid by the operating departments? INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: That's the way we work, that's the way the contract works.
Where does that show on paper? Where is that budgeted in the other departments? How significant -- how much money are we talking about? INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: We're not talking about much money. (Ms. Kurland confers off the record with OIG Budget Officer Brown.) 112 3.22.10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 In each case where surveillance is authorized by the department, the cap would be $500.
And that comes out of an operating department's budget? INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: Yes.
I'd like to know, when the Budget Director gets back to the table, is that miscellaneous? I mean, how is it shown in the Streets Department or -- INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: Well, It'sless than 15,000 per year. So I believe that would be under Personal Services.
Thank you. That answers the question. Thank you, Madam President.
Thank you. Just for clarification, there 113 3.22.10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 was an MOU at the Prison System that provides that a Prisons employee will be detailed as an OIG investigator; is that still in effect? INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: That's still in effect, yes.
So, in addition to the positions in your 10 budget, there are from 2 from Police and 11 1 from Prisons? 12 INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: 13 That's correct. 14
Is there any 15 other staff detailed to the OIG from 16 other departments or offices? 17 INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: No, 18 that's it; it's those three. 19
Is there any planned for the next year? INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: No, there wasn't. Oh, I apologize there is one more. There is a position in the Budget Office, in the Recovery Office, for a 114 3.22.10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 accountant/auditor financial investigator, who is part of our Compliance and Control Program that we are doing with regard to ARRA money. So that person will be paid for by the Recovery Office but detailed to the Inspector General's Office. That has not happened yet, but that's in the next year. And it would be for two years during the ARRA funding.
And that person's duties will be...? INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: Compliance and Control Program.
With respect to federal stimulus money only or -- INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: With respect -- Yes, yes.
Okay. The OIG's budget detail indicates several positions, including a second deputy. You may have heard my conversation with Mr. Armbrister, where we asked that if there were any vacant 115 3.22.10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 positions that you be prepared to tell us how long those positions have been vacant, what the specific job duties are of those vacant positions, and how those functions have been performed while those positions have been vacant. And it's in that context that I these questions. INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: Okay.
The OIG's budget detail indicates several positions, including a second Deputy Inspector General, an investigative analyst, and two investigators that are either new positions or have been vacant for an extended period of time. What job duties will be performed by each of these positions? INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: Okay. Councilman, because we have just started our budget, they have only been vacant since the creation of our separate budget, which would be during this fiscal 116 3.22.10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 year.
Just as a -- that is what the MOU was supposed to be funding last year. In other words, you were contemplating getting to 7 positions, including these types of 8 positions, through the DHS funding and 9 other things. 10 INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: 11 Right. 12
So these 13 positions have essentially been open for 14 a long time, even though they weren't in 15 your budget last year because you got the 16 money availble for them through the MOU, 17 even though you never exercised it. 18 INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: I'm 19 not sure exactly -- and I think if you were to add up all of the dollars in the MOUs that we had written, it would not be the amount of money which is our budget. So I don't know which positions were vacant and which are newly created.
So what was 117 3.22.10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 your bought approved last year? INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: For Fiscal Year '09.
For the current year, I'm sorry. INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: For the current year, it's the exact same: It's approximately $1.3 million.
Okay, okay. Fair enough. INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: Okay.
So what duties will these positions have? INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: Okay. The -- well, I'll start from the premise that we receive -- I believe I testified that we received about 680 complaints but we were only able to open close to 300 of them. We basically have too small a staff to do the kinds of investigations, the quality of investigations, and the number of investigations that I would 118 3.22.10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 like to do. The investigative analyst position is, they provide support to the investigators. They do background computer checks, they analyze financial information, they prepare charts and graphs, and they organize files. The investigator has more of an on-the-street, if you will, type of job. They provide an investigative plan, they work with the prosecutors. If it's a criminal case, they interview witnesses and they write reports. The deputy position that would be required is, right now, we have a Deputy Inspector General who supervises all administrative investigations where we recommend discipline in the departments. We currently have no Deputy Inspector General who supervises all of the criminal investigations. That's being done right now by the First Deputy, who has much of a -- much more of a 119 3.22.10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 broad-ranging office-management-type job. She has a lot of duties coordinating with department heads and doing policy-type work. But she now is also supervising all of the criminal investigations.
And that job -- so it's getting done today. INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: It's getting done at the expense of doing fewer cases.
Okay. How many cases do you -- so you prioritize your cases -- INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: Exactly.
-- basically based on how meritorious you think they are. INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: Yes.
So you've been able to -- you have cases that you think less meritorious, less likely to result in administrative or criminal proceeding, and they're at the bottom of 120 3.22.10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 list. So what we're talking about is spending money to move further down into a list that is less likely to result in any action being taken by the Inspector General's Office? INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: I wouldn't really characterize it like that because we do have many, many cases that we are unable to pursue because of limited staff --
Well, there's no way to know whether or not -- INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: -- that are meritorious.
Well, that raises a good point. So with respect to the staff time, what percentage of your overall staff time is administrative versus criminal in terms of what you are pursuing? INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: If I could just have a moment. 121 3.22.10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 (Ms. Kurland confers off the record with OIG Budget Officer Brown.) I'm sorry, Councilman. I don't know that I can break it down in terms of percentage. I would --
I'm not going to ask you to try to struggle with it now. If you could provide that to the Chair. INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: Yes.
Can you tell me how much A.D.A. earns newly out of law school? INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: I don't know.
Okay. Of the 3.3 million in savings based on employees who were arrested or terminated in administrative actions, this total is based on sort of a two-year salary projection of the positions counted in your report. How many remain vacant? INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: I 122 3.22.10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 don't know whether all of those people were replaced or none of those people were replaced, and that's what --
I'm a bit confused by the claim of savings, given that, you know, if you start with the overall presumption that we've cut every department to the bone and there's no 10 more real cuts we can make in terms of positions, and then you have an Inspector General essentially getting people terminated or resigning, and then saying that we've saved two years' worth of salary as a result of those terminations, it's sort of interally inconsistent messaging. INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: Mm-hmm.
Either there are a lot of people not doing their job who we can eliminate even just through performance audits also; or, you know, there's some kind of disconnect in these numbers. 123 3.22.10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 If you could help me with that. INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: Yeah. Well, the first thing I would say is that I think that the people who are removed from the rolls should be people who are not doing their job. The number we have here, in taking two years of somebody salary, I agree with you Councilman; it's an arbitrary number. But it's an extremely conservative arbitrary number. In the federal system, if somebody is terminated from their job, the way they calculate the savings is, for example, if the person is 30 years old, they would say, Well, that person would have worked for another 30 years, the pension contributions, and they add all of those things up, and it's an extremely high number.
Sure, but that's not realistic if the position's being filled. INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: No, 124 3.22.10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 I agree. And --
So I'm dealing in the real world and not how the federal system does it. INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: Right.
And, you know, you can't get realer than Philly. INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: Right. And I agree that that is not a realistic way to do it. And I don't know what the realistic way to do it is other than to hire an actuary to come in and try to calculate it.
But really, I mean, if the position's re-filled, you've eliminated -- you've done a good thing and you've gotten someone who should not be a public servant out of that position. INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: Right.
And I commend you for that, but... I'm trying 125 3.22.10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 to think of a polite term to say it is inaccurate to say that we actually saved 3.3 million, isn't it? INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: I think it is inaccurate. We're taking an estimate to try to --
Why, you know, did the Inspector General put forth a report that is inaccurate with respect to the savings? INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: Well, I do drop a footnote at the bottom of that number that says this is not -- you know, this is a rough estimate. There has to be some way to --
But it's not really even a rough estimate, as you've just testified. INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: It's an estimate, sir. I don't know what else to say. It's based on a two-year projection.
But we're going to -- presumably, the position is 126 3.22.10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 needed, and we're re-filling it. I guess I'm bearing a dead horse at this point, but would you say it's a wildly inaccurate rough estimate? INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: No, I don't think it's wildly inaccurate. I think it's a conservative estimate.
Even if we re-fill the position? INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: Well, even if you re-fill the position, you're still savings on the pension contributions for the person who was fired.
Sure, but then you're making pension contributions for the person who's hire. INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: But you're starting again.
Sure, sure. You're saving on pension payments and actuarial assumptions, which you bring back to present value at a discount rate, which is, you know -- 127 3.22.10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: I'm going to let Mr. Agostini answer this; he's better at numbers than I am. (Budget Director Stephen Agostini comes forward.)
Councilman, I think we agree on this. I think that it is -- I think what the officer is trying to do is show that the savings are savings because they're no longer the subject of theft of some form of embezzlement of City funds. And I think in that respect, they do represent savings because it's no longer being stolen. But to your point with respect to how they play into the budgetary process, I think we're all in agreement that to characterize them as savings from a budgetary perspective gets a little confusing 'cause they're not really things we can throw into the budget at a later point in time.
Thank you. 128 3.22.10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 So, let's see here. I've read your report; it looks like you've done good work. If we eliminated your four vacant positions, what percentage cut to your budget would that be? INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: It would be approximately $90,000. I don't know the percentage, sir.
Four vacant positions? You have four vacant positions, right? Isn't that two vacant positions? INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: Just a moment. (Ms. Kurland confers off the record with OIG Budget Officer Brown.) Yeah, we currently have two vacant positions.
I'm sorry. The budget suggests you have four vacant positions.
Excuse me, Councilman. That report was based on a November increment. And since then, 129 3.22.10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 we've hired two investigators.
Okay. So if we de-fund four positions which haven't resulted in, obviously -- the past investigations that are a part of your report were conducted with a staff of 11 people plus the other people? 12 INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: 13 What you see in our annual report from 14 2009, that was done with 15 people. 15
So if we eliminate four positions, how much would that save? INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: I don't think we can calculate how much it would save, but I can tell you that for another --
Well, how 130 3.22.10 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BILL 100117 much are the two people who were just hired earning? INSPECTOR GENERAL KURLAND: That's approximately $100,000.