No. As it relates to the employment aspect, we have a 45 and 5 participating, 45 percent, 50 percent of the hours to be worked by minority and women. The projects at this point are at roughly 30, 32 percent participation.
Do you know what they are separately? Do you know what the break-out is between the two facilities?
The Eagles project is at about 31 percent. The Phillies is around 32 percent thereabouts today.
The goal is 45 -- the goal is 50. 116 3/13/03 - COMMERCE - RES. 020238
45 and 5, right. So neither facility is in compliance?
What we basically do is try to encourage the contractors who are not in compliance to do better. Case in point, on the Phillies project --
We cannot as an organization and as someone who monitors and advises, we can not take any action to force compliance. We're not --
From your perspective, who does have the authority to force compliance, based on your knowledge and information about this whole process?
The owners. Again, it's a matter of whether there is commitment to --
There are three individuals I have listed, the first being Jahad Ali, Madeline Dunn and John Shields who are listed 117 3/13/03 - COMMERCE - RES. 020238 as wishing to testify. Are there any other questions by Members of the Committee from this panel? Councilman Cohen.
Have you ever been invited by the Mayor of the City to come to a meeting with the unions which the Mayor said to the unions, "You've got to comply"?
Could there be anything wrong in being invited to such a meeting?
I'm sorry, would we participate in a meeting if the Mayor invited us to talk about this issue?
Have you ever suggested to the Mayor that he do it? He meets with the labor leaders all the time. He appoints them to top level positions. It would seem to me that the most natural thing if you wrote a report saying that they are not in compliance as to what could be done, 118 3/13/03 - COMMERCE - RES. 020238 the easiest thing in the world would be to have the Mayor call them in and say, "Look, you gave your word and you're not meeting your word." They are totally dependent on the Mayor for many, many benefits that they derive, particularly the prevailing wage rate. It just seems to me that the City just bows down and says, "We can't do anything." There are no incentives, there are no penalties. Why should they do anything other than laugh at us? (Applause.)
And they're doing that, aren't they? They're laughing at us basically when they feel free to violate? What we're doing is in their benefit. Laborers got to be democratic in order to be meaningful to people. It's got to provide a means whereby workers have a sense of dignity when the work, a sense that they're going to be treated fairly by an employer because they have the protection of a union behind them. So what would any labor organization fight against democratization of the process? And why should we permit any labor organization to benefit from government if it violates government policies like 119 3/13/03 - COMMERCE - RES. 020238 equal opportunity for everybody? Seems to me that -- I know you have a difficult job, but it seems to me that you ought to report based on what testimony we heard today indicating that what's needed in this situation is strong action by the Mayor. He is the only one who can in the Administration, based upon what you're telling me if there are no contractual provisions, only the Mayor is in a position. And if the Mayor does it, it won't weaken him one iota; it will in fact strengthen him enormously. People would flock to polls to support a mayor that's saying, "We don't want people idling their time in the community; we want them at work or training for work." Isn't that right? So what you would be doing would be serving everybody's interest. I don't want to preach anymore on that. But I think we have a great job to do. And I've heartened recently by the tremendous new amount of activity taking place in the communities which said, after all these years, nothing basic has happened. And we're determined to end that. And I think these hearings show that that determination is strong and solid, and I think this Committee and the whole 120 3/13/03 - COMMERCE - RES. 020238 Council is going to do everything it can. And we urge the representatives of the Administration to speak to the Mayor so we can have a uniform citywide approach to support the right of everybody to an equal opportunity for a job. (Applause.)
Thank you, Councilman Cohen. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Tasco.
And I'd just like to say to Councilman Cohen, and I think advocacy part from the GPUAC could be helpful in just reminding us that they're not in compliance. But I think the responsibility for what is happening rests with us here in the City Council. We voted on this legislation. We were -- I can't say duped. We were all elected and we should know better. We were told we had to sign this deal. You can rest assured that story won't be used on this Council anymore. But certainly we have a responsibility to give some assurance and make sure that we pay more attention to when legislation comes down that we write in the legislation what we really want to happen. And if they don't like it, then the project doesn't get 121 3/13/03 - COMMERCE - RES. 020238 done. (Applause.)
And I think that's what we have to do. I just hope that -- you know, a letter to us and to the Administration that they are not in compliance. Although we don't know what the enforcement rules are, you just have to let us know what's going on. You're the reporting agency. You report to us. We get these reports. We get a lot of stuff. We need to be reminded that they're not in compliance. And certainly, that's very important. And we will take care of our end of the business in the future. Thank you.
Councilwoman is also reading my mind. What I wanted to ask is, as we get these monthly update reports, two things: One, I would like a designation in either the letter communicating the report to us, probably in the letter and as well in another section where you have all of your statistics, I'd like a direct determination on these monthly reports as to whether or not this particular project or any other project that you're monitoring is either in compliance or non-compliance. 122 3/13/03 - COMMERCE - RES. 020238 And for your distribution list, certainly that same information should go as it's listed here, Office of the Mayor, Mayor John F. Street; Joyce Wilkerson, Chief of Staff; George Burrell, Secretary of External Affairs; City Council President; PIDC; Jim Roundtree at the MBEC, and the rest. In that regard, Ms. Davis, do you get these reports as well?
Could we add the Finance Director to the distribution list? And secondly, Ms. Davis, notwithstanding whether you ever received one of these reports or not, do you recall since you've been Finance Director in May of 2000 ever having a meeting to discuss the compliance, non-compliance or opportunities to be in compliance for either one of these two projects, specifically with either the Mayor, other cabinet members or high level secretaries?
I don't remember us dealing with the compliance issue, not as it involves the employment. 123 3/13/03 - COMMERCE - RES. 020238
Have ever had a conversation with Mr. Roundtree as director of the MBEC about either of these two projects?
On the compliance side or just how the projects are going?
Just how the projects were going and whether or not there was participation because, again, we look at the entrepreneurial side and not the employment side.
I understand. Well, who is looking an at the employment side in the government.
In the government there is no one department that is tasked with monitoring employment performance. As Mr. Roundtree explained before, if there is a project labor agreement, then his office collects the data. But normally there is no one in the government with that responsibility.
Let me suggest to, at least, Ms. Davis, and I'm always mindful of which part of the government I work in or which side I'm on or not on. It would seem to me that just as a 124 3/13/03 - COMMERCE - RES. 020238 course of public policy, someone in the government should have the responsibility to monitor all aspects of these respective projects, not only on the entrepreneurial side -- and we care about contracts and the like -- but I think there is a larger public policy concern as it ripples through many other aspects of any what any Administration and Mayor Street in particular, is trying to accomplish. It must be a priority of the government that employment is good for the City, that people working in Philadelphia who are of Philadelphia are working. I think it will probably cut down on crime. It will probably cut down on drug abuse. It will probably cut down on a whole host of negative things that impact the City, but more importantly, specifically from your particular perspective, possibly lower the cost of running the government because if we're not taking advantage of these opportunities in this way, then we're going to spend it when the Police Department comes for their budget or DHS comes for their budget or a whole host of other agencies to correct what we're not taking care of. I mean, there are employment opportunities out here. We approve them a fairly 125 3/13/03 - COMMERCE - RES. 020238 regular basis. But someone has to monitor and enforce and insist what happens afterwards. So I would only -- have you had an opportunity to talk with GPUAC about any of these issues?
I'd like to encourage, not only the dialog and the connections -- I mean, who is GPUAC under contract with? Are you under contract to the teams directly? Do you have any contract with the City for this?
No. The contracts for the stadiums is with the owners, the Phillies and the Eagles.
I understand that. But as a part of the EOP approved by this body put you in that contract; is that correct?
By way of our approval process. It would seem to me that the government would then at a certain level, even indirectly, be the beneficiary of the work that's 126 3/13/03 - COMMERCE - RES. 020238 being produced which we required you to do for us working for the teams. How do you get paid?
We're paid directly by the Eagles and the Phillies organization. (Audience reacts.)
That, I did not know. Okay. We'll deal with that. I mean, from our perspective, credibility of the work is not a function of how the dollars are flowing, although I did not know the answer to that question. We can deal with that going forward. You're going to have a wider distribution? You can certainly, whether you have a contract with us or not, you can meet with our Finance Director, I assume, and Mr. Roundtree and other people to make sure that someone in the government is paying attention to this? Ms. Davis was very forthright in her comments at our last public hearing about her commitment and concern about minority and female contracting and other opportunities. And I know her to be a person of her word and that she's going to follow through on the commitment. I mean, we have to make these 127 3/13/03 - COMMERCE - RES. 020238 connections. We have to connect the dots on some of the these things. We all know each other. We are not impossible to find. Everybody's operating in the same two or three square miles of each other. This is not impossible. The Chair recognize Councilwoman Tasco.
I was just going to say, maybe in the future the GPUAC should be working for the City and maybe the contract paid for by whomever but they actually work for the City because putting them -- well, I mean I trust their honesty, but I think for them and for us it would be better if you were working for us.
May I make just one comment about that? Historically we've been here for over 30 years, years very much involved in 18 this particular business. And we have -- regardless 19 of who we're contracted with, we've reported the 20 data actually as it exists, good, bad, or indifferent. So who we're working with doesn't taint the data any way, form, or fashion.
The numbers are what the numbers are. In that regard, though, on the last page of Ms. Matlock-Turner's testimony, there 128 3/13/03 - COMMERCE - RES. 020238 is a client list. It says "Over the past years, economic development projects unit, partner with organizations to help them successfully launch economic inclusion plans on the following projects," and then there must be 20-some-odd projects here. What I would like to ask you is the data on what the project goals were, MBE, WBE, DBE, and what the actual results were for all the projects on this list. I'd like to be able to understand the comparative analysis of that.
We've got Jahad Ali, 14 Madeline Dunn, John Shields if there are no other 15 questions for this particular panel. Thank you very 16 much. 17 Please identify yourself for the record 18 and proceed with your testimony. 19
My name is Jahad Ali. I'm an 20 African American carpentry contractor. I'm also a member of the Contractors Roundtable African American Chamber of Commerce. I'm a member of Minority Enterprise Associates. One thing I'd like to say, Councilman Nutter, there's a quote by the lawyer by the name of Gary Spencer who says that 129 3/13/03 - COMMERCE - RES. 020238 it's the question that is the great weapon that frees. And we see by the question that you just put to the panel how we arrive at the truth, and it's easy to see why we're 's in the situation today at 6:30, in the evening because we've had organizations such as that for the last years still haven't 8 been able to answer questions that you're asking 20 9 years later. 10 I'm so easy to let them off the hook. I 11 think that there was a plan to dupe Council, and 12 that plan was put in effect years ago and it was 1-2 13 process. No matter what they agency says, they work 14 for the Phillies and they work for the Eagles. They 15 can't say anything or disclose anything that the 16 Eagles and the Phillies don't agree with because 17 they're paying them. And I think that we should be 18 mindful of that. And I think before we let GPUAC 19 come back, I think Council should solicit other 20 organizations to monitor stuff on behalf of the Council because no matter who -- if we give this power to the Mayor, depending on how that political climate might go, the Council will always have representatives of the community on Council and more than like in a majority point. So we should 130 3/13/03 - COMMERCE - RES. 020238 make sure that a lot of that power stays with Council to effect what we want to take place. But I'm here today to -- I wanted to thank the honorable Council for this opportunity to comment on this important issue. I commend you for providing the ordinary citizens an opportunity to describe to you the difficulties for minorities to get construction work or construction contracts. I will not belabor these hearings with a lot of details because many others concerned about these mattered have already provided details in previous testimony. However, I do want to emphasize that there has been and continues to be a systematic and successful program of denying minority contractors and workers opportunities to work in the City of Philadelphia. What is most disheartening is that the City and other agencies designated to ensure that there is minority participation in awarding of contracts, subcontracts and man-hours employed on projects funded by tax dollars have failed to carry out their responsibility and in some cases have been complicit in seeing that minorities do not get work. Agencies like Minority Business 131 3/13/03 - COMMERCE - RES. 020238 Enterprise Council have the responsibility to certified firms and ensure that each contract awarded has minority utilization built into it. MBEC has instead worked against minority contractors. On many occasions the minorities have been scrutinized to death, while non-minority contractors have been allowed to present bogus minority companies and yet receive certification that is routinely endorsed by the MBEC director. It is a disgrace. No one person should have so much power that he alone can sink the entire African American construction community with no oversight. If MBEC had done the job that was mandated to carry out, we would not need these hearings day. Greater Philadelphia Urban Affairs Coalition has become the corporate choice for monitoring and reporting of minority participation efforts on major projects in the City. GPUAC consistently presented bogus information on the stadiums and other projects. We just saw that with the adding of the construction contracts. I contend that these two, MBEC and GPUAC, have been coconspirators with the building trade unions and non-minority contractors to severely limit the 132 3/13/03 - COMMERCE - RES. 020238 opportunity to minorities.
I appeal to this Council to sponsor hearings to investigate how these two agencies have systematically prevented minority companies from participating in a substantial way in the construction industry in Philadelphia. According to the Philadelphia Consortium, the city and quasi-city agencies, business utilization study report, also known as the disparity study of 1998 that was just released this year, since 1969 both the federal government and courts have found Philadelphia trade unions to discriminate against black workers. Even so, the City and other consortium members have repeatedly entered into contractual agreements with the labor unions to provide services. The court stated that in 13 years equal opportunity in the trades have not been as unions have been found to discriminate and contractors have been found to have acceded to that discrimination through passively following the hiring procedures via the collective bargaining agreements. Agencies like the Philadelphia Housing Authority, the Philadelphia Redevelopment Authority spend billions 133 3/13/03 - COMMERCE - RES. 020238 of dollars each year and less than one percent of these dollars end up with minority companies or workers. According to the 2000 census, the City population is 43 percent African American, percent 6 Hispanic, 2 percent Asian, and 45 percent white. 7 Despite these numbers, the practice of 8 discrimination continue to prevail. In conclusion, if we want to seriously find a solution to the patterns of discrimination against the African American and Latino contractors and workers, there must be more direct oversight by this Council. Council must have adequate reporting and monitoring system in place that will allow it to oversee how construction dollars are spent. This is the only way to reduce the opportunity for corruption, inefficiencies and systematic discrimination. While the courts have held that quotas in and of themselves to be unconstitutional, there will be nothing illegal about this Council assuring that City agencies improve their use of minority contractors by at least 500 percent each year over the next 5 years. One thing I'd like to bring a point of the other testimony was, they gave you a document 134 3/13/03 - COMMERCE - RES. 020238 that said that they have a million 500 hours per year. If we round that up just for the sake of my argument to $2 million a year, if we multiply that by $12 an hour that each company is sending into those trade unions, the trade unions have made $25 million over the course of those two contracts that went to their health and welfare fund. Now, we, the City, is paying for that discrimination, and that's what we should hold them accountable for.
I asked GPUAC to give me a dollar among of how those hours translate, and they've got to come up with that person. Next person.
Hi. My name is Madeline Dunn, and I come before you today to talk about a building at the corner of 63rd and Lansdowne Avenue. This building has been vacant almost years. It's 19 the corner of my block. It can be a magnificent 20 building. I've had about four developers over the years that wanted to do this building over. Could not afford to do it. What they actually came back and would say is, "If we made it into an apartment building, it wouldn't cover the debt service." In fact, Henry Smith who is Will 135 3/13/03 - COMMERCE - RES. 020238 Smith's brother was the last person before John Shields here that was at my dining room table talking with their foundation about doing this building over. And then at the last minute when we thought everything was set, he backed up and he said again, the debt service. Now, I guess last June I met this gentleman John Shields. John Shields is a part of Triumph Investment. And they started talking about doing this building, but doing it with their own money. What we needed the City to do was to get us the building, give us the building, and we could do it ourselves. We were joint venturing with Carroll Park Community Council. It's not a Madeline Dunn thing. It's about getting the end of this block looking good and it's about building a relationship with them carrying on so we can hire some of those carpenters who know how to be carpenters or whatever else without going to the unions. I really think it's time -- and I always was a union person because my husband was always a union man. He was electrical union 43 years. But a lot of things have not changed that need to change. So at this point I would say, people need jobs. We 136 3/13/03 - COMMERCE - RES. 020238 need work done. We need to get it done with people who can do it. Just as we were ready to do our contract, RDA says you have to do prevailing wage. I'm going to let John tell you prevailing wage would mean when we have a half million dollar capital to work with that we have verified, and then to say that, what that does to our contract.
That's right. And my block would look the same. They don't give a shit. Excuse me.
But you just couldn't hold it. That's why I love you. Please identify yourself for the record.
I'm Chief Operating 137 3/13/03 - COMMERCE - RES. 020238 Officer for Triumph Investment Group and Development Corporation. We are a multi-million dollar corporation. I've been in Philadelphia all my life. I'm a die-hard Philadelphian. I'm one of the few of my original group of friends who is still here, and I intend to stay here.
I have made major contributions to this City over the years, working through the Negro Trade Union, through other training programs, so I'm well aware of the problem that exists for getting labor, training labor, and so forth. One of the things that we want to do at this building is to put our home base, that's one of the things. The other thing that's going to happen out there is the building is just not going to be for us. It's going to be a gathering place for other minority contractors, community people that would come together. We will strategize and figure out how we can first make our neighborhood better, and then move out of that perimeter to other areas of the City. Together, if we pull our resources together financially as well as manpower and 138 3/13/03 - COMMERCE - RES. 020238 credibility, I think e can do the kinds of things that you just spoke about.
We have $500,000 allocated to the reconstruction of this building.
If Madeline's proposal goes -- if she says these other problems have arisen, if you have to use the union work that Madeline says, how much money would you need?
They said prevailing wage, and so I understand that that works in levels.
We didn't ask them for any 139 3/13/03 - COMMERCE - RES. 020238 money. We just asked them for the building. So now they're saying that because they're giving us the building, we have to follow some federal guidelines. And in investigating that, I understand that's a crock; that is not true at all. So what we're looking to do is to get some support from Council. Because this is not the only project we want to do. There's a building at 60th and Haverford that's been vacant about years. It's 11 like gateway, a segue into Overbrook. 12
You only have to 13 Davis Bacon if there's federal money involved. 14
If there's no federal money involved, you don't have to follow Davis Bacon guidelines.
Ms. Dunn knows that based on our conversations, we are going to seek to get a resolution to this particular issue. I mean, again, there has to be a balance in the public policy discussion between the interest of people trying to work, the importance of paying good wages, and getting projects done. And it makes no sense that in an effort to pay good wages, nothing 140 3/13/03 - COMMERCE - RES. 020238 happens, because then you have a hundred percent of nothing. Now, I don't believe that that's the goal. I don't think that's necessarily -- it's certainly not the City's goal. I don't think it's necessarily the union's goal. It's clearly not the residents' goal. It ends up being reality by default. You can have all the great ideas you want. You can want to build the monument to the sky. If your money is too short and the price is too high, it's not going to happen. And so you have all this deterioration and stuff falling down. And people have ideas and want to go forward, but for lack of money and some of these other complications, nothing happens. Now, that can't be good public policy. It cannot be the goal of this government to have great projects that can not be funded and end up just being wonderful ideas that turn into, not dreams, but nightmares. I mean, that is not the goal, that's not the interest. We need to work it out..
So let me ask you a question. Is there any way -- let me tell you that right now I've been on my block it will be 40 years in May of '04, it will be 40 years. And right now we have two houses. One was given to an agency and the other 141 3/13/03 - COMMERCE - RES. 020238 house, the family just moved out. They broke up, the husband and wife. And roof is collapsing, it's coming like it's sinking. And there was one where the old person died and it was an heir property and they never sold it. Now, this was a block that everything was intact. Now I have four houses that look awful. Now I'm not moving. This is my neighborhood, and anybody knows I've fighting the bars druggies and everything. This is my neighborhood; I'm not going anywhere. And not only do I want to do this building, I want those other buildings done. And I'm saying if I ask the City to give me buildings that people are not paying taxes on it and we can get these buildings done and up and running again, do I have to deal with unions? Do I have to do Davis Bacon?
Well, it's interesting. I think what's going to benefit all of us, certainly me and I think some other Councilmembers might be in this position, but also the general public. There are actually some provisions for certain types of work. And I think one of the lines of demarcation is -- I remember 142 3/13/03 - COMMERCE - RES. 020238 this debate about is it eight units or more. I think that may be the number. And that there are certain guidelines that go with eight units or more and there are certain other guidelines or virtually no guidelines that go with or less. If you're a 7 eight or less situation, the rules are completely 8 different. I think that we need a better understanding of what's the law, what are the rules, what's the general practice, what's been the history and the tradition and kind of lay all that stuff out so we can better understand what in the world is going on in the first place. And then because we're a City government, I think our primary focus has to be on, well, what is the law? What are we required to do based on the funding source, based on the dollar amount, based on the number of units? And then go from there. Because, you know, to some extent all this historical stuff is not benefiting many of us. I don't have a lot of interest other than as a person who loves history in some of these issues because it's not helping to redevelop either community that I represent or other places in the City. So I'm not sure who the real beneficiary is. 143 3/13/03 - COMMERCE - RES. 020238 And when we look at the numbers, at least on these big high-profile projects, and it's not just on the big high-profile projects, because we get these other reports every month or so from OHCD. I mean, you want to talk about the Phillies and the Eagles and all of that stuff; let's talk about the Business and Technology Center project at 1741 Callowhill Street, just to pick on. Percentage of non-Philadelphia workers on the entire project, 65 percent. Chinatown North, Phase II, 59 percent. These are projects with just a few hundred people on them. I mean, this is all over the City. You've got to love it if you can come to this town, make all the money you want, ultimately leave, pay your taxes somewhere else, send your kids to a different school system. You only have to pop back and forth across the bridge, you pay your $3 or whatever the case may be or you get your EZPass and whatever that costs and pop through at 5 to 10 miles an hour. It's a great place to work. It's just that hardly anybody wants to live here. Well, what's the incentive? I mean, if you can live in Maryland and work in Philadelphia -- I don't know what they're doing in Maryland, but it's not bad deal. So I'm 144 3/13/03 - COMMERCE - RES. 020238 trying to understand what's going on with the rest of us. We stayed. We toughed it out. So whether it's the big high-profile projects or the four little houses down the street, there's a lot of work opportunities out here. It doesn't mean we're going rehab every house in the City. But we don't have to do all of them. And in some instances, all we have to do is free these properties up for -- last I checked, we're in America. People have a right and an opportunity to make money. We don't live in Iraq or Bagdad or any of these other places. Free this market up, give people the opportunity to work, both union and other people who have their little businesses and are just trying to make a living. That's where the opportunity is. I mean, as much deterioration as there is in most communities around town, there would be a whole lot of work for a whole lot of folks. We don't need to fighting people about whether there's work or not. There's plenty of work out here.
We have just purchased a 5-acre parcel of ground in North Philadelphia near Temple Hospital. We're developing 63 houses, market 145 3/13/03 - COMMERCE - RES. 020238 rate houses on that land because from our surveys there's no decent housing available for the people that must live here, the police, the fireman.
They can't find it. Also from our understand, this would be the first market rate housing built since Yorktown.
Any other testimony? Please identify yourself for the record.
My name is Colin Jamal Johnson from Jamal Electrical Contractors, and I'm a local contractor in the City of Philadelphia. And I started business in 1988. And from the onset of me being in business, I always had a hard time getting the Public Works jobs because I historically been a non-union contractor. And from me dealing with the unions, I found it very difficult to excel as an entrepreneur, as a businessman because, apparently, they just didn't like me. I was a participant with a lot of Public Works jobs under the Goode 146 3/13/03 - COMMERCE - RES. 020238 Administration. Apparently, I was doing some pretty good jobs, me and a few other contractors that were African American. But apparently when Rendell came over and pretty much handed the job to the unions, our work suddenly just dropped. So now we're really just sustaining ourselves off of the private sector. But some of the main problems that we were having was, when we had these jobs, the general contractor had a clause saying that he needed work site harmony. And when we came in as non-union contractors and the unions picketed us because we were non-union, the general contractor said that because he has a work harmony clause in his contract that we are potentially endangering our contract. So those are the problems that we were having. And because of the contractors asked us were we union, they pretty much said "we can't use you." But I find that if it's a Public Works job and there's no law stating that we have to be union, then I think that a by the City and by the CDCs under this illusion that these jobs have to be union, I think that the City has to come in and do something to stop this intimidation, to stop this illusion that, you know, contractors have to be 147 3/13/03 - COMMERCE - RES. 020238 union; because historically, African American contractors, we haven't been in the union. I think maybe the City has to put some kind of situation out that allows a non-union contractor to participate on these Public Works jobs. They shouldn't have to be exclusively union to participate in them.
I'm going to get you some information about that in a second.
In closing, I just think that, you know, until we rectify this situation with the unions which are predominately are ran by white males, the staff members are predominately white -- for instance, like in the Elevators Unions, there's no African Americans, from what I understand. It's 100 percent white union. And if they get in these public jobs they should have some obligation to the make-up of the City.
From what I understand, the Elevators Unions, they're a hundred percent white. Now, if they're getting Public Works jobs and their membership is less than 10 percent, I 148 3/13/03 - COMMERCE - RES. 020238 think that there should be some kind of situation where if you're 90 percent non-African American and you're on these Public Works jobs, the unions are the benefactors of these Public Works job and the African American and minority community are not on them, then the City should say, "Hey, look, something's wrong here." You've got to have some kind of leverage to tell these guys to open their doors. Now we've got the laborers union sewed up, but even African American contractors, we can't even get contracts to use the labor union people because we're not even in the mix with the benefactor public dollars. It seems like the unions just took the City dollars over, like they're disenfranchising the African American contractor, the African American entrepreneur, even the African American workers. We can't even get no Public Works jobs because these guys exclusively got control of the public dollar jobs. And this has been going on for a long time. It got to the point now where we're actually being disenfranchised. We're going out business. We can't provide for our family. We're just surviving just off the private sector. If you don't have a 149 3/13/03 - COMMERCE - RES. 020238 large customer base, you might not even survive in construction because you need to make -- in order for a contractor to build capacity, he needs or 5 6-digit contracts. These are the dollar amounts that he needs to give his workers 401Ks, to give his workers health benefits and become a real legitimate contracting force in the City. Well, that can't happen. The proliferation of this can't happen if we're not the benefactors of the Public Works projects, because the private sector, they already don't hire us because the private sector is basically corporate America. Those are the ones that give out the 5 and 6 and 7-digit contracts. So in order for us to build capacity, it's all we really can participate is in the Public Works jobs because we very rarely get any of the private sector jobs. And it's been documented. It said that for every billion dollars in Public Works jobs, 32,000 jobs are produced. And we're not even getting any part of that benefit of public dollar jobs. I think that for the sake of the African American existence in the construction industry, we 150 3/13/03 - COMMERCE - RES. 020238 need Council or we need some kind of government body to come in and try to shake this thing up because it's not working now, and we're suffering from just attrition at this point because we can't grow substantially without the 5 or 6 or 7-digit contracts, which we get that opportunity from Public Works jobs. And since the unions got that sewed up, it's like they're high-jacking the Public Works jobs. Thank you.
Thank you. Ms. Davis, since as a high-level official in the Administration, I need to make a request for, at a minimum, a legal memorandum; if not, a legal opinion. This will be somewhat just a number of different points. I'll leave it to your discretion to figure how to ask the question. I need a document that lays out the issues that have been raised today from strictly a point of information with no judgment, just an explanation. I need to better understand a couple terms, one of which is prevailing wage, Davis Bacon. I need to know what, if any, law, ordinance, or statute requires either prevailing wage or Davis Bacon requirements as well as union 151 3/13/03 - COMMERCE - RES. 020238 contracts or contract participation. I need to know what the provisions are specifically with regard to City construction, State construction, and the use of City capital dollars.
Yes. The quasi-public agencies like SEPTA. I'd like to better understand the provisions of Section 3. And as we discuss on the housing side, I have vaguely some information in the back of my mind, this was a big debate a couple years ago, the issue -- and again, I believe the magic number is 8. It may have been 10 or it went to 10. But I have a recollection that there was a big debate a few years ago about how many units became the threshold which determined whether or not work was subject to union workforce or non-union workforce in the housing area. I thought it was a number of units threshold.
Adding to your request for Ms. Davis, Executive Order 5-95 PLA, the Public Labor Agreement, I'd like to get a copy of that.
Thank you. And I recognize that that was not the greatest dissertation on how to get the information, but you understand what it is I'm looking for.
I had started kind of writing down myself because I wanted to be a little more enlightened on some of things that people were bringing up.
Councilman Nutter, one thing I wanted to ask was, in the future when you bring back GPUAC, would it be possible to bring back some of the other committee members that are on those advisory committees, for instance, like John Macklin and Tony Lewis so we can get a better idea what actually goes on at those meetings.
The sponsor of the particular resolution, Councilman Ortiz, I'm sure will make that request.
I think there are no 23 further questions of the committee. This committee which is hearing testimony on Resolution 020238 and 030038 will 153 3/13/03 - COMMERCE - RES. 020238 reconvene and will be in recess until April 23rd at o'clock a.m., at which both resolutions will 4 continue to be heard and testimony will be taken. 5 The panel that we were going to hear on 6 Resolution 030038 on the DAP Program will be the 7 first panel at the next hearing on April 23rd at 10 8 o'clock a.m. That panel was not heard today, and by 9 agreement between the two sponsors of the resolution 10 and great cooperation, that panel will be the first panel. And then any other individuals testifying either on that resolution or other resolutions will be heard after that. Thank you very much. (Council adjourned at 6:50 p.m.) - - - 154 C E R T I F I C A T I O N I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing proceedings of the Council of the City of Philadelphia of March 13, 2003, were reported fully and accurately by me, and that this is a correct transcript of the same. RE: COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ___________________________ Lisa C. Bradley, RPR and Notary Public