Committee Hearing, June 9, 2010

COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA COMMITTEE ON LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - - - Room 400, City Hall Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Wednesday, June 9, 2010, 9:43 a.m. - - - BILL 090910 - requiring pawnbrokers and dealers in precious metals to share transactional information with the Police Department. BILL 100162 - Increase license fees to own a vacant lot, vacant building or vacant wharf. BILL 100251 - Adding portions of Councilmatic District 1 to the list of areas covered in the Philadelphia Building Construction and Occupancy Code under section entitled "Building Standards Applicable to Designated Areas." BILL 100267 - Imposing various requirements on promoters of events at special-assembly occupancies. BILL 100282 - Amending a section of the Philadelphia Property, entitled "Periodic Inspection of Exterior Walls and Appurtenances of Buildings," by providing for appeals. BILL 100308 - Adopting the 2009 edition of the International Code Council Fire Code, BILL 100313 - Held by the sponsor. COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT: Maria D. Quiñones-Sanchez, Chair Blondell Reynolds-Brown Jack Kelly Joan L. Krajewski, Vice Chair Bill Green William K. Greenlee - - - 2 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100162

Good morning. The Committee on Licenses and Inspections hearing will begin. I will note that we are going to change the order in which we address the bills today, and I will call those out momentarily. So if you are here to testify and have not registered with us, please do so on the side. I will note that we have established a quorum with Councilman Bill 13 Green, Councilman Jack Kelly, Councilwoman Joan Krajewski, and Councilman Bill Greenlee. Will the clerk read the titles of the bills for today's hearing.

Bill No. 100162 an ordinance amending Chapter 4-200.0, Subcode "A" (the Philadelphia Administrative Code) of Title 4 of the Philadelphia Code, entitled "Text of Subcodes," by amending Section A-906, entitled "Property Maintenance Code Fees," to increase the license fees 3 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100162 charged to own a vacant lot, vacant building, or vacant wharf, under certain terms and conditions.

Thank you. So is there anyone here to testify from the Administration on Bill 9 100162? And then we have Mr. Zaslow, who has registered with us to testify on that bill. If there's anyone else, please register with the staff at the side. (Witness comes forward.)

Good morning, Mr. Haigler.

Good morning. Good morning, Chairwoman Sanchez and members of the committee. I am Otis Haigler, Jr., Director of Legislative Affairs for the Department of Licenses and Inspections. Today I'm here to provide testimony on Bill 100162, which, if 4 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100162 enacted, will amend the Philadelphia Administrative Code to increase the license fees charged to the owners of vacant buildings and lots. The department supports the enactment of this bill. We further support the intent of this legislation to ensure that the City recoups its costs through the imposition of reasonable fees related to the administration and enforcement of code requirements governing vacant buildings and lots which require the use of its resources for periodic inspection, reinspection, cleaning, sealing, and follow-up code enforcements. Thank you for the opportunity to provide the department's testimony.

Thank you. Any questions for this witness? (No response.)

Seeing none, if Mr. Zaslow can approach the 5 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100162 witness table. (Witness comes forward.)

Good morning.

Good morning, Madam Chairwoman and members of the committee. My name is Darryl Zaslow representing HAPCO, the Homeowners Association of Philadelphia. I have presented to the committee this morning the testimony which initially was geared towards Bill 14 100313 which dealt with the same subject. I will speak more particularly to 100162. Our testimony would be as follows, Madam Chairwoman and members of the committee: Vacant lots that are pedestrian with trash are unacceptable to all of us. Property owners who own good properties that they wish to rent or sell and maintain those properties deplore vacant lots strewn with trash. We applaud Councilman Clarke and we applaud this 6 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100162 committee and the City Council in attempting to find ways to deal with that problem. We all wish to see the blight remedied, but our concern about this bill, members of the committee, is a legal concern, and it focuses on the utterly excessive amount of the proposed license fee. Therefore, we must oppose the bill. Simply stated, the bill, if you enact it, will be an unlawful bill. A license fee, by the strictest mandate of Pennsylvania law, cannot exceed the amount that it costs the city to actually issue the license. The laws of Pennsylvania, court cases of the Supreme Court and Commonwealth Court have construed this question over and over. And it requires -- and I'm quoting here from case law; this testimony which I'm providing to you is from cases of our Commonwealth. 7 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100162 "The fees charged by a municipality for services it renders in performing its official functions must be based on the cost of the municipality performing that service. " And I'll add to that: Even and equally and perhaps a more notable purpose of using your police power to clean vacant lots does not give you the right to charge a license fee which is double or triple, or, in this case, probably about 10 or 15 times more than the actual cost. Again, Madam Chairwoman, I'm quoting from case law. "Where the fees adopted by a city bear no relation to the cost of the municipality in processing the license, the fee schedule is unlawful and unenforceable. And licensees" -- that 8 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100162 would be us because we're paying this license fee -- "are entitled to a refund of all sums which they were required to pay under the fee schedule. Another case. " Now, members of the committee, the violation of these basic concepts of law, which have been clearly articulated in many court cases, make it clear that this ordinance has not been reviewed by competent legal counsel serving this committee. And, frankly, no attempt whatsoever has been made to ascertain the actual cost of issuing this license. The proposed fee for a vacant property or vacant lot license bears no 24 relationship whatsoever to the actual cost of issuing the license. 9 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100162 First of all, it doesn't cost the City of Philadelphia $300 or $350 to issue a license. The present fee, as it now stands, if you don't amend this bill, is inappropriate, it's probably unlawful it's absolutely excessive. We haven't challenged it. We want to be good citizens, we know the financial problems of the City, and we want to be a part of the solution. But when you get to doubling the fee to $750 -- and my good friend Mr. Haigler will tell you that the effort of pushing the computer button that issues a license for a vacant lot is absolutely no 17 different than pushing the computer button to issue to license for a vacant structure. So for, all of a sudden, there to be this fee structure, where you have a $750 fee for a license for a vacant lot, and you think that it's only 300-and-some dollars for a license for a vacant structure, it's just proof that 10 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100162 the fee which you're contemplating bears no relationship to the actual cost of the City.

Now, we in HAPCO, we stand firmly with you in trying to battle against blighted properties, vacant structures, vacant lots in our city. There are many laws on the books which give you power to deal with that, and we encourage you to do that because it assists all of us in combating blight and in making sure that we have a proper climate so that the real estate in our city can maintain its value and not have blighted streets and blighted neighborhoods. We do suggest, however, that the clearest of legal precedents of longstanding in Pennsylvania suggests that this counsel is without power to enact this ordinance. For these reasons, we request and we suggest that the committee decline to favorably report this bill presently 11 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100162 under consideration.

Any questions for this witness? Councilman Green.

Good morning.

Good morning, Councilman.

Thank you for your testimony. I'm not sure that we've introduced a bill that HAPCO's liked this year, but -- (Laughter.) How many of your, I guess, of the properties you represent are vacant?

It's hard for us to ascertain that, but we did do a review of our own board of directors, which is members, and we found that 25 percent 22 of our members had either a property 23 which is vacant because it can't be sold 24 or rented or a lot which is vacant. 25 And this is not a blighted 12 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100162 property; this is a house been on the market, can't be sold and can't be rented; or a vacant lot which they're trying very hard to maintain trash on it. They drive by, they send people to try to clean the property. But I'm guessing, and it's really a guesstimate, percent of our 10 members have such a property. 11

How much 12 does it cost you to maintain a vacant lot 13 or a vacant building in terms of making 14 sure it's clean, there's not trash 15 buildup there, there's -- the grass is 16 mowed, other stuff on an annual basis? 17

I'm not sure if I 18 can provide figures on that. Every house 19 and every lot is going to be different. 20 If you have a nice lot which has grass on 21 it and all you're doing is mowing it and 22 it's a nice neighborhood where people are 23 not throwing their trash out on it every 24 day, it's much different than a property 25 in a neighborhood where, for one reason 13 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100162 or another, it's a haven for trash. And if the owner goes by every day, he can literally be there every day in the morning; and by evening, whether the wind brings it in, which is very hard to control, or the neighbors bring it in, which is just as hard to control, or strangers bring it in out of their cars, it seems sometimes, it really depends on the lot where it is and on the owner. The better you maintain it to start with the less problem you have as time goes by.

Sure.

A vacant structure, if you have a good house, which we all try to maintain good houses, it's in good repair, you just can't sell it or rent, it's locked, it looks fine from the front, you wouldn't even know it's vacant driving by, it's different to maintain that than if you have a property which we work with our members to absolutely deplore that you have some 14 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100162 vacant structure without windows or without a door, which is a nuisance, that's another story. Then you have to clean it, you have to seal it, it has to be safe from people getting in, from children getting, and, from our perspective, just as important, the facade needs to look right. If you have a vacant property and it's like a Hollywood movie set, who cares what's going on behind it as long as no one can get in. If the front of it looks like a house --

I don't mean to cut you off, but the short answer to the question is you don't know.

I do not know.

Okay. So with respect -- Mr. Haigler, it's my understanding that we don't just push a button; we also enforce the laws with respect to vacant properties which costs us money, and we also end up having to seal some of these vacant buildings, 15 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100162 which costs the City significant resources. And we also have to mow these lots and clean these lots and do other things occasionally. And the overall cost of that is in the millions and millions and millions of dollars for the City of Philadelphia on an annual basis. And I just wanted to make sure that if that is the case, we put that on the record.

Yes, sir. It's an entire code enforcement effort. It's not just issuing the license but it's also the cost incurred for inspections, reinspections, cleanup, Municipal Court cases that have to go to court for noncompliance, Law Department costs. It's a public safety concern, so you may have some safety issues. And responding to one of Mr. Zaslow's comments regarding the building itself, it's not our policy to apply this requirement to marketable properties that are just vacant because 16 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100162 they're in the process of being sold. The requirements are primarily for vacant buildings that, for the most part, cause public-safety nuisances and concerns, where we have buildings that are vacant, vacant and open. It's clear that the building is not being occupied or there is no intent to occupy the building because just by virtue of the building condition, the condition of the building itself. It lends itself that it requires this vacant property license.

So it's your testimony that a property that is maintained in a condition that can be sold and is being actively marketed for sale would not be considered a vacant property under this?

That's correct.

Okay. Thank you, Mr. Haigler.

May I comment?

Quickly, 17 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100162 please.

Sorry, Madam Chairwoman. May I comment, please? First of all, may I take a second to introduce Willie Seward, who is sitting with me. Mr. Seward is a member of HAPCO's board of directors. The fact that Mr. Haigler accurately points out the cost of enforcement is all the more proof of why this bill cannot be enacted. A license fee is the cost of issuing the license; enforcement is the cost of enforcement. You can take a property, enforce against it, lien against it, bring the owner to court, fine the owner, whatever you need to do under the enforcement statutes. But the cost of issuing the license is what is at issue in this bill, and you cannot take -- it's case law; I'm not creating it. You cannot take enforcement costs to enforce a housing code or building code, which is what he's 18 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100162 talking about, enforcing a vacant lot or structure, and, in the guise of that enforcement, increase the fee for issuance of the license. The license issuance fee needs to be the cost of only issuance of the license, not all the enforcement that may result from someone failing to comply with the terms of the housing code. Secondly, as to the second aspect, which we appreciate the common sense that we're not going to necessarily be looking for a house which doesn't have anyone living in it because you can't sell it or rent it, but that's not what the law says. The law says if you're a good citizen, if you're a good property owner, when you go into City Hall or into Municipal Services, you need to have this license if, in your honest appraisal of your circumstances, you know my house is vacant. An owner can't go in and say, Well, our dear friend Otis said don't 19 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100162 worry about it, we're not looking for you. We don't have that option. The law says if your property is vacant, you have a vacant structure or a vacant lot, you must have this license or be fined and have criminal penalties against you for not having the license. So the fact that their intention with enforcement is not to enforce against good vacant properties, which we appreciate, that's not what the licensing bill says. The permit, the license is the cost of issuing the license only. It applies across the board to every vacant lot, to every vacant structure in the City of Philadelphia. And no one -- I can't tell my members, Don't worry about it, they'll never find you, they won't know it's vacant. I need to put on the front of our newsletter that if you have a vacant lot or structure, you must pay $750 for the cost of issuing you that 20 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100162 license. I submit to you that that amount is excessive. And not to be indelicate, but based upon the language we lawyers use in court, unlawful.

I just -- we did a little case law search on this kind of bill. There's a lot of cities doing this across the country. It has been upheld in most states where it is done. I understand that you're specifically referring to Pennsylvania case law, but the City of Wilmington, which is a home rule city under the Delaware constitution and legislature, just passed a very, very extremely similar ordinance. It was ruled by the Delaware Supreme Court that a reasonable fee based upon the detrimental effect of property left vacant for long periods of time and further decided that it is permissible, it's a valid regulatory scheme, and further decided that the ordinance is not 21 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100162 criminal, nor penal, because it does not -- it does not retrospectively assess fees. So, at any rate, I just wanted to put that on the record.

It may be relevant down in Wilmington, but here in Pennsylvania, we all abide by our law.

I understand your point. There is no case law in Pennsylvania on point with respect to this specific license fee in the State of Pennsylvania and --

There is ample case law regarding license fees.

I understand that -- (Indiscernible; parties talking over each other.)

This has been held valid elsewhere, and, you know, it sounds like, if we pass this, we'll find out.

We hope not to go 22 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100267 that way because of the exercise of your good judgment, you're going to see that $750 for a lot is an excessive license fee.

Thank you, Mr. Zaslow. Is there anyone else here to testify for Bill No. 100162? (No response.)

Thank you very much. Thank you, Otis. Will the clerk read the title of the next bill.

Bill No. 100267, an ordinance amending Section 9-703 of the Philadelphia Code, entitled "Special Assembly Occupancies," by imposing various requirements on promoters of events at special-assembly occupancies, all under certain terms and conditions.

Thank you. Again, I want to call out to anyone who has not registered and who 23 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100267 wants to testify for Bill No. 100267. Before we begin with the public testimony, I wanted the sponsor of the bill to say a few remarks. Councilman Greenlee.

Thank you, Madam Chair. This bill, as many bills that are introduced in City Council, is in response to a problem. The problem which occurred in many areas of the City, including Center City, was privately promoted events getting totally out of hand, resulting in violence and other crowd-control issues; you'll hear a few examples in the testimony. This is not to say -- and I want to make this clear. This is not to say that most venues in the City or most promoters were problems, but there were enough occurrences that we felt some legislative attention was needed. After talking -- and we introduced the bill after conferring with 24 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100267 the District Attorney's Office and the Police. After talking to various promoters and others in the entertainment area, we realized the original bill cast too wide a net, and revisions were needed -- again, like many bills that are done here in City Council. And that is -- and as a result, we are offering amendments today. The bill now basically does two things. When a promoter totally runs the event -- in other words, when the venue owner turns over operation of the night to a promoter, the police must be notified two weeks in advance. And secondly, it requires the promoter to be registered. I want to thank all of those in the promoter community who worked with us to make this a good bill, particularly Patrick Rogers, who you'll hear testify in a few minutes. And I also want to thank my Steve Masters of the tech staff 25 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100267 and particularly my legislative director, Noelle Marconi, who went through dozens and dozens of meetings to make sure that this is an effective bill. And I hope, after testimony, the committee will see fit to this measure. Thank you, Madam Chair. (Witness comes forward.)

I'm sorry. There was someone else to testify for the other bill, but I know the lieutenant needs to get out of here. (Addressing Councilman Greenlee.) Do you mind if start with the lieutenant?

Yeah, that's fine.

Yeah, we're going to start with the Administration and the lieutenant. And then we'll hear the other testimony, 'cause I know you're pressed for time, so you could start. 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100267

Good morning, Chairwoman Quiñones-Sanchez and members of the Committee on Licenses and Inspections. My name is Brian Abernathy, and I'm here to testify on behalf of the Administration in support of Bill No. 8 100267, which was introduced by Councilmen Greenlee and Clarke. Please note that my testimony is based on proposed amendments circulated by Councilman Greenlee prior to today's hearing, not on the bill as originally introduced. Bill No. 100267, as amended, will regulate certain individuals that promote events throughout the City. While the majority of prompters operating throughout the City are responsible individuals whose work adds to the vibrancy of the City's nightlife, there recently have been a number of events that have resulted in property damage and that have had a negative impact on residents' quality of life. 27 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100267 Unfortunately, when the Police or District Attorney's Office attempt to identify the promoter responsible for the event and hold that individual liable, there are no records available that identify the promoter. Councilman Greenlee's proposed bill aims to create these records by requiring the registration of all promoters operating within the City in requiring that the venues that contract with the promoters enter into written agreements with only registered promoters who have valid business-privilege licenses. The Administration recognizes the hard work of Councilman Greenlee and his staff and the hours spent meeting with stakeholders to craft the proposed amendments. These proposed amendments reflect a compromise designed to ensure that the City's vibrant nightlife and cultural institutions are not adversely affected. The amendments also include 28 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100267 proposals made at the request of the Administration, including those related to exempt certain venues and organizations. We thank the Councilman for those accommodations. While the Administration is supportive of this legislation, we are concerned about the costs associated in establishing this registration system. Councilman Greenlee has attempted to address this concern by raising the registration fee from a one-time $10 fee to one-time $40 fee, which is appreciated. However, we believe that the creation of a paper trail needed by law enforcement officials could be accomplished at a lower cost, without the registration system, through the use of the business-privilege license and the written agreement mandates contained in the bill. Regardless of the methodology employed, the Administration is 29 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100267 supportive of the proposed amendments of this legislation and once again thanks Councilman Greenlee and Clarke for taking on this issue. I'm happy to answer any questions on this bill.

The Chair recognizes Councilman Greenlee.

Oh, no, no. 12

Okay. If we can, therefore, have Lieutenant Healey and the captain approach the witness table. (Witnesses come forward.)

Thank you. Could you proceed with your testimony, identify yourself for the record. LT. HEALEY: Good morning, Councilwoman Sanchez, Councilman Greenlee, and other members of the Committee on Licenses and Inspections. My name is Francis Healey, and I'm 30 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100267 special advisor to Police Commissioner Ramsey. And I'm here to testify, along with Captain Dennis Wilson on his behalf regarding Bill No. 100267. At the outset, the Commissioner would like to extend his gratitude for allowing the Police Department to voice its opinion on this important piece of legislation and specifically to Councilman Greenlee for his willingness and persistence to help the Police Department. With that being said, let me stay that the Philadelphia Police Department strongly supports Bill No. 17 100267. While most promoters with special-assembly licenses in Philadelphia are respectable business partners, there are a few that are not. Regrettably, due to the dangers that these few have created, there now becomes a need for the legislation presented here today. Let me say that the Police Department is in no way attempting to 31 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100267 stifle the music or artistic culture or vibrancy of Philadelphia in any way; we just need to be aware of when and where large events will occur so that we can plan accordingly. Public safety is at stake. Also, if things go wrong, we want the right people to be held accountable. The legislation before this subcommittee has undergone major revisions since its first introduction but now reflects a true collaborative effort between the Police Department, the Councilman, and major business operators that will be affected by this legislation. We had all agreed at the beginning that only a small fraction of promoters and special-assembly licensees were creating the majority of the problems for public safety. So as a collaborative effort, we've reworked the initial legislation into its current form, and we believe it will provide the Police with the information needed to 32 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100267 ensure public safety but does not unnecessarily interfere or impede with the arts, music, or culture that promoted events bring to the City of Philadelphia. And for this reason, the Philadelphia Police Department fully supports the amended legislation and respectfully recommends this honorable committee to do the same. This concludes my testimony, and I'd be happy to answer any questions, along with Captain Wilson, regarding the promoters and the problems that they represent. Thank you.

Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman Greenlee Greenlee.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Just very quickly, more of a comment. Lieutenant Healey, I really appreciate all of the time that you have 33 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100267 put into this. I know it's something that we had to revise a number of times, and you have been extremely helpful. And just for the record, I wanted to note Captain Wilson is the captain of the 9th Police District where I live, and he has been extremely helpful in many things and actually brought some matters to my attention that generated this bill. So, Captain, I appreciate everything you do for the folks in the 9th and the whole city. CAPT. WILSON: Thank you.

Any other questions from members of the committee? The Chair recognizes Councilman Green.

Good morning. LT. HEALEY: Good morning, sir.

I just wanted to ask you on an unrelated matter, 30 seconds, to please contact my office 34 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100267 with all of the police who have been -- a listing of the number of police who have been trained to issue tickets for cell phones and the number and category of police on the street that actually carry ticket books capable of issuing -- LT. HEALEY: Code violation notices?

-- code violation notices for the use of cell phones in cars. LT. HEALEY: Okay.

Thank you.

For the record, I'm still waiting for my Blue Tooth from Councilman Greenlee and Councilman Green since we voted on that bill.

For the record, that might be an ethics violation. (Laughter.)

Any other questions from members of the 35 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100267 committee? (No further questions.)

Okay. Thank you. Seeing none, the Chair recognizes Beth Grossman from the DA's Office. (Witnesses come forward.)

Good morning, Chairwoman Quiñones-Sanchez and members of the committee. With me I have my nuisance bar prosecutor, Matthew Miller, and we ARE both members of the Public Nuisance Task Unit OF the Philadelphia District Attorney's Office. On behalf of District Attorney Seth Williams, I'm honored to be able to testify before you today with respect to the bill, as amended, and I thank Councilman Greenlee for his efforts with this. I will not repeat all of my testimony that has been submitted to the committee, but I just WILL make some 36 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100267 comments. First, I want the record to reflect that please be assured that the District Attorney's Office does not seek in any way to prevent lawful activities or economic development. On the contrary, a vibrant economy improves public safety; and as Philadelphians, we too enjoy it when business prospers What we do support, however, are attempts to hold these promoters who think nothing of breaking the law and endangering the safety of others to be held accountable for their actions. This legislation and its amendments appear to achieve this important goal. And, again, we thank the Councilman. I think most would agree that maintaining the health, safety, and welfare of the public is paramount. And I must acknowledge that what I will term "fly-by-night promoters" are the exception and not the rule. But it's these illegitimate promoters who give the 37 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100267 legitimate promoters a bad name. You know, it's clear that they do not have business-privilege licenses, they do net pay taxes, and it is extremely easy for them to escape liability should anything occur in the venue that results in harm to somebody or something. They have no regard for the negative consequences of overpromoting an event and, clearly, the common sense that overly large crowds of disgruntled people and alcohol is not a good mix and places patrons, staff, and an already overtaxed Police Department at risk of harm. This legislation will prevent events that have resulted in necessary police response and help ensure the safety of the public. Requiring promoters to register with the City, have a BPL, and prohibiting special-occupancy licensees from contracting with non-registered promoters will further this goal. I'm aware that there are some 38 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100267 issues perhaps with respect to having them register with the City, but I would like to submit that I think it is an important and necessary thing to have done. Unlike most businesses in the City that have tangible addresses -- such as food or liquor distributors -- these fly-by-night promoters have demonstrated that they exist in the gray world of the Internet and technology. They don't have offices and can essentially disappear just like that, literally leaving the venue owner essentially holding the bag if something happens at the venue. All they have to do is simply change their website or Facebook page and they are gone They could also use someone's BPL license and misrepresent who they are. This registration allows for accountability and ensuring the legitimacy of promoters Again, it's a nominal fee, and 39 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100267 I believe the benefits outweigh the cost of doing this. It really will protect business owners who contract with these promoters should they be held liable for something that occurs on the premises. It will weed out fly-by-night promoters, and will also be a positive thing for law enforcement purposes, whether investigating a crime or being able to determine when an extremely large event is going to be happening So, again, the District Attorney's Office wants the City to flourish economically, but in the safest way possible Again, I thank Councilman Greenlee and cosponsor Councilman Clarke for their hard work. And Mr. Miller and I are open to answer any questions that the committee should have.

Any questions from the committee for the District Attorney's Office? 40 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100267 (No questions.)

Did you have anything?

I have nothing toed r add.

Okay. Thank you so much.

Thank you so much.

Thank you, Beth, for all the work you do at the Nuisance Task Force. We all know how important it is to the quality of life for the City. So thank you.

Thank you. It's our honor.

Thank you.

So Phil Grutzmacher from the Lawncrest Civic Association. I note that he is being joined by Mr. Dolbow. (Witnesses come forward.)

Thank you. Please proceed and identify 41 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100267 yourself for the record.

Sure. Good morning. My name is Phillip Grutzmacher, and I am the Secretary of the Lawncrest Community Association, and I'm testifying in favor of Bill No. 100267, imposing various requirements on promoters of events at special-assembly occupancies. Our community has been impacted by large-scale, heavily-promoted events and supports further regulation of these activities. We see the need for regulation clearly in two areas: the enforcement of occupancy limits and the need for increased security both inside and outside venues. Our community contains four venues, which have been the location of large-scale events. Two are currently under cease-and-desist orders by the Department of Licenses and Inspections. In each case, events occurred without notification to police and created considerable impact on the surrounding 42 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100267 community, including blocking of sidewalks and streets, public urination, noise, under-age drinking, disorderly conduct, and destruction of residential property. Legal occupancy limits were grossly exceeded in each case, causing safety and fired hazards. These events were heavily promoted posters and electronic media, including modern media such as web pages, Facebook, and Twitter. Such events can easily get out of control. The current proposed regulations would address these issues in several ways. First, registration would ensure that events promoters would be informed of occupancy limits and hopefully encourage them to hold events in venues of proper size. Second day 14-day notice to police prior to scheduled events will enable both the police as well as the surrounding community to plan for the 43 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100267 events. One area that should be addressed in the legislation is events where venue owners function as the promoter of the event. The negative impacts described in this testimony apply to those situations as well. In fact, this has been the case with most of the problems in our community. Normal operations of the venues cause no extraordinary impacts on the surrounding community, but special, heavily-promoted events do. Notice of these events to the surrounding community and the police should be required as well. In addition, additional security should be required outside these venues at heavily-promoted events. This security preferably should be off-duty police officers or bonded security officers, not someone who just dons a yellow T-shirt for the evening. Thank you for your time and 44 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100267 consideration, and I look forward to working with City Council to enact this legislation. And if you have any questions, I'd be happy to answer them.

The Chair recognizes Councilman Greenlee.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Mr. Grutzmacher and Mr. Dolbow, again, more a comment. I understand that this bill doesn't actually touch everything that is a concern, and we understand that. But we thought we would focus on one particular part of this. And, as always, not just me, but I'm sure all members of Council, if down the road, if there's other issues that come up, we're certainly open, as you know, to address them with you, with your association and other people in the City, but I appreciate your support of this bill. Thank you. 45 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100267

Thank you.

Do you have anything to add, sir?

Not at this time.

For the record, that's the quietest I ever saw Mr. Dolbow. (Laughter.)

I don't know. Councilman Green wants to be recognized.

I just want to say for the record that I wasn't sure about this bill, but now that I know that Mr. Dolbow is in favor of it, you've got my vote. (Laughter.)

Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman Kelly.

Thank you, Madam Chair. 46 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100267 I just want to take this time and opportunity to thank both of you gentlemen, especially Mr. Dolbow, for the great work that he does in the Lawncrest community. You're doing everything to improve the lives of everyone that lives in that community. And I know that most people will never give you your due. But believe me, it doesn't go unnoticed, okay? I just want to make it on the public record that you do a great job in that Lawncrest community.

Thank you.

And keep up the great work. Thank you.

Thank you very much. It's because I have great people around. We just share everything and we get it done, and with the work of our Councilwoman Tasco also and all the members of Council. So thank you for making my job easier. 47 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100267

Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Brown.

I do want to underscore Councilman Kelly's remarks, and I was actually going to cite the extraordinary partnership you enjoy with Councilwoman Tasco in that area and the difference it has made on a number of different fronts. So, again, kudos and thank you.

I'd just like to add that I'd also like to -- because of belief advisory board that I sit on, with the cooperation of our Captain McCarrick and Community Officer Maraz and along with Beth from the DA's Office. We have a very good (indiscernible) organization also.

Yes. They celebrated their Community Day this Saturday, and we were all out there, and were happy it wasn't as hot as it 48 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100267 normally is.

But it was hot.

Yes. When it's hot, it's hot up there. Thank you so much, gentlemen. We have one more person that's here that we know that's registered for this bill, and we want to make sure -- 'cause then we need to go back to some testimony from the previous bill. Will Mr. Patrick Rogers from Dancing Ferret come up. (Witness comes forward.)

You may identify yourself for the record and proceed with your testimony.

My name is Patrick Rogers. Councilwoman Sanchez and committee members, good morning. I thank you for this opportunity to speak on the matter of Bill No. 100267. It has been my privilege to live in Philadelphia for almost two 49 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100267 decades, and I've worked in the music industry for of those years, most 4 notably as a club and concert promoter. 5 As you may have already heard, 6 the initial draft of the bill would, if 7 signed into law, have disastrous 8 consequences for the City's music and 9 arts communities. None of those 10 catastrophes were intended by the bill's 11 authors, who crafted this legislation 12 with the noble purpose of enabling City 13 law enforcement to better respond to 14 unsafe events and to locate the operators 15 of those events. I initially called Councilman Greenlee's office to determine when and where this hearing would be held so that I could speak out against this bill. Instead, Julie O'Connell asked if I would explain some of my concerns to her so that she could pass them on to the Councilman. After nearly an hour of hearing me out, she asked me to send some notes to Noelle Marconi, the Councilman's 50 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100267 legislative aide. It became clear to me that Councilman Greenlee was not merely interested in hearing my concerns but in addressing them as well. He desired a greater understanding of the inner workings of the business of promotion, and his staff actively engaged our industry in order to obtain that knowledge. I offered to work directly with the Councilman's staff to reform the bill; and as a result, I had many direct meetings with them in furtherance of that goal. Throughout the process of those meetings, I was in constant contact with dozens of colleagues, not only from my own field, but from others in related fields who were concerned by the language of the bill's first draft. I took their questions and comments with me to every one of those meetings and reported back on the progress that was being made. 51 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100267 I believe I can speak for most, if not all, of them when I tell you that our industry respectfully but vehemently urges this committee to vote in approval of the amendments that have come before you today. These amendments represent an exhaustive collaborative effort on the part of: Councilman Greenlee, Noelle Marconi and other Greenlee staff, Lieutenant Fran Healey of the Police Department, Dominic Verdi of Licenses and Inspections; Steven Masters of the Technical Services Unit, myself, others in my industry and related fields, and other City employees and elected officials who read and contributed to our drafts as they developed. Every effort was made to address every concern raised, and I am fiercely proud of the substantial reforms we achieved, as evidenced by the amendments now in front of you. As a registered Libertarian, I 52 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100267 am disinclined to support additional government regulation in most cases. However, should this esteemed committee vote to approve these amendments, Bill 6 No. 100267 will pose only a minor one-time inconvenience to legitimate promoters who operate within the law while still fully serving the public safety needs for which it was originally designed. As such, I am pleased to endorse the amendments to this bill. I thank the committee again for hearing my testimony today, and I thank Councilman Greenlee and his staff for their tireless to revise this bill. Should the committee have any questions, I would be pleased to entertain them at this time. Absent that, with the Councilwoman's permission, I will return to my seat. Thank you.

I want to thank the industry members. There was great concern in the beginning. There's 53 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100267 been a lot of media attention. And I want to acknowledge my colleague because he did what all of us here on Council are elected to do, which was listen and try to improve the bill to give the residents who are concerned about these issues the quality of life that they want and allow the industry to continue to promote important eclectic opportunities for art expression. So I want to thank you. I know I got calls quickly as chair of the committee and was very pleased to be able turn those over to my colleague, and he addressed all of those concerns. So I just wanted to note that for the record. Councilman Greenlee.

Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you for those comments. I just want to get on the record, Patrick, you certainly did a tremendous job. You put tremendous hours in on this with myself and particularly 54 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100267 with Noelle and the staff. I learned a lot during this thing. I admit, at my age, I'm a Motown guy, so I don't know a lot about, you know, the promoters and your industry, but you were very open, and we discussed things. When we didn't agree, we found a middle ground. And, again, I appreciate everything that you did. And you had a big reason why this bill, I think, is going to become law. And thank you very much.

Thank you for the kind words. It was an educational experience for me as well, but I thank you for making it a positive one.

Well, thank you. And per your testimony, you can go back to your seat. Oh, I'm sorry. Councilwoman Blondell Reynolds-Brown has a comment.

Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. 55 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100267 Good morning.

Good morning.

Let me thank you also for your testimony. And our hope is that you've been -- we're assured that good outcomes can happen when open minds sit down and figure out a way how two different worlds can coexist. That's number one. Number two, what genre of the industry do you represent?

I primarily do nightclub promotion and concert promotion, so mostly I work with either live music or with deejays.

I see. And so, the genre might differ from Motown, old school, to new age, I guess.

It's mostly more modern, electronic-based music.

I see. And those that you confer with in your industry, do they represent different genres as well? 56 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100267

Yes, ma'am.

Such as...?

The whole gamut, from hiphop, R&B, soul, techno rock, a gentleman that does country shows. A wide range.

Well, thank you for your leadership in this effort.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Thank you. We have the last person to testify on this bill, which is Mr. Arthur Green, the ward leader of the 14th Ward. (Witness comes forward.)

Thank you.

Good morning.

Good morning. 57 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100267

I'd just like to say this:

Can you identify yourself for the record?

Oh, my name is Arthur N. Green.

You can proceed with your testimony.

Okay, thank you. I think this is a very good bill, and it needs to happen, 'cause I think that what we're talking about is social control, all right? And we look at what's going on in the city right now, and we're trying to keep the city clean, we're trying to deal with the killings and just the outright sinful nature, if I can put in in -- I can't put it in any other words. And the reason why I say this, you know, I know that this city and everybody in this country looks for peace on earth and goodwill toward men, and I think that's the ultimate goal, all 58 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100267 right? And I know that where I live at, we have a lot of homeowners that get up and go to work, clean up they property; and then, on Saturday mornings, clean up their area and Saturday nights. It's a hell hole out over there. Friday nights, it's the hell hole all over -- glass, trash, noise. And I just want to point out just this one particular incident; this is just how bad it's getting in my neighborhood. Right on 6th and Green is Club Palmers, all right? And we have public nuisance, all right? There was a girl in the car, with her legs wide open, and a young man just doing his thing and everybody standing around, looking at it, like it was nothing happening, all right? So anytime that we can monitor this type of behavior or any kind of legislation that we can put together to monitor this type of stuff, it's a good thing, all right? 59 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100267 There's nothing wrong with making money. I mean, this is a pleasure-oriented country in my mind, all right? But it has to be pleasure with responsibility, all right? Anything the legislation can do to help that, all right, it's very well welcome, and I surely would appreciate. And I sure that my neighbors and I think the whole city would appreciate it. Thank you very much.

Thank you, Mr. Green. The Chair recognizes Councilman Greenlee.

Very quickly, Madam Chair. First, thank you, Mr. Green, for coming down. And I know you were one of the first people to bring the attention of a problem to me, and I appreciate that. And I want to note for the record that you are a musician, you are 60 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100267 an entertainer.

Oh, yes, I am.

So you're certainly not against the entertainment industry.

Not at all.

But you also, I know, are very active in your community, and you want that balance, and you and I talked about that. So thank you very much. Thank you for taking the time to testify.

Thank you so very much. We're going to take some public testimony for our first bill, which was 100162. We have a panel of three people who are coming before -- I know you don't have written testimony, so please make sure you identify yourself for the record. (Witnesses come forward.)

I'm sorry about that confusion. We have, 61 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100267 like, six bills. Thank you.

You're welcome. Thank you very much for fitting us in. We really appreciate it. And thanks to the members of our coalition for waiting; we really appreciate it. Good morning. My name is Jeremy Avalino and I live at 4th and Jefferson Streets, in North Philly, and I'm part of Circle of Hope Church. Circle of Hope is a proud member of the Eastern North Philadelphia Coalition. Councilman Clarke, thank you for introducing legislation to increase the licensing fees paid by owners of vacant land and vacant buildings. This is an issue that I, my church, and the coalition care a lot about. I cared enough to take the morning off of work to come here and speak with you. Many others switched shifts with someone at their job or found child care for kids and grandkids so they could be here today. 62 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100267 We care about this issue because of how much it affects our neighborhood. In the 100-square-block area around where I live in lower North Philly, percent of all the land sits 7 vacant, 25 percent. 8 All of this vacancy is a 9 problem. It invites littering and 10 dumping. It brings down property values. 11 It attracts crime. 12 Just last Wednesday, three 13 blocks from my house, at 4th and Girard, 14 Sabina Rose O'Donnell, 20 years old, was 15 found dead in a vacant lot next to the 16 apartment building where she lived, a 17 block away from Northern Liberties. 18 Yet this vacant land also 19 represents a huge opportunity to solve 20 some of the other problems in our 21 neighborhood. When the Eastern North 22 Philadelphia Coalition interviewed more 23 than 300 residents, the two things people 24 said the neighborhood needed were more 25 affordable homes and access to fresh food 63 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100267 through urban farming and community gardens. To build houses, grow fresh, healthy food, and help jump-start food markets and other businesses, you need land. Since 2007, the Eastern North Philadelphia Coalition has been working to turn the problem of vacant land into a solution. We've researched community land trusts which have been used in over 200 cities and towns in the U.S. to care for vacant land, keep homes and gardens affordable and protected, and give communities a voice. We identified the owner of every vacant lot and abandoned building in our area. We completed a neighborhood plan for a portion of our community. Our plan was even approved last month by the City Planning Commission. In order to implement our vision, we asked our councilwoman, Maria Quiñones Sanchez, to use some of her 64 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100267 Neighborhood Transformation Initiative money to acquire blighted land identified by our community. We made our request to the Councilwoman in December. Since then, we have asked the Councilwoman to meet with the community and provide an answer to our request no 9 fewer than a half a dozen times. We still don't have an answer. This is why a few of us have come here today to tell you, Councilwoman Sanchez, how important this issue is for us. Speaking personally -- and it's good to see you, but I haven't seen the Councilwoman since she was candidate Sanchez. I don't know if I should tell a group of elected officials for this, but I don't have much faith in the political process. Yet during a candidate forum the NPC held in 2007, I was so excited about Ms. Sanchez's vision for transforming vacant land, I went out and voted for her the following month. 65 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100267 More than three years later, I'm here to say I still care about this issue. Hundred of other 7th District voters, all in my neighborhood alone, do too. On their behalf I am asking you, Councilwoman Sanchez, to meet with the community and give us an answer to our request. Thank you for the opportunity to address you all today. I appreciate it.

Thank you. I just want to -- for the record, we're testifying on one particular bill. I'd be happy to continue to hear your testimony. I thank all of you. I thank all of you for the work that you've done. I think it is, as I have committed to time and time again, to use my NTI resources to leverage projects in that direct. I continue to be committed to that. 66 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100267 Our last meeting was in March, for the record. And at that particular time, I said that we would work towards that. The NTI money just got released last week. I think that I have demonstrated my continuing commitment. You're not working just in my neighborhood, in the district, you're in my neighborhood in which I live. So, again, I continue to say I'm going to work with the coalition, as I have for the last three years. We have moved many projects in that time, and I'm committed to continue that discussion, as I have made it clear to many of the members.

Thank you. We look forward to setting up a day where you'll meet with a few hundred of us. Thank you.

Thank you.

Good morning. My name is Christina English, and I'm a 67 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100267 volunteer for WCRP. Hello. My name is Christina English, and I am a proud mother of a beautiful one-year-old child. I am also a co-block captain on the 1500 block of North 6th Street. I care a lot about my community, and I'm here today to talk about the problems I see and what I think should be done about them. I care about this issue of the vacant land in my community because my block has too many vacant properties on my side of the block. There are more vacant lots than standing houses. I can't even walk down the street without -- excuse me -- without being worried about the drugs and the crime that comes along with living near empty lots. Excuse me. I am a part of the Eastern North Philadelphia Coalition. As Jeremy said, we've made a request to our councilwoman, Ms. Sanchez, for her to use some of her Neighborhood Transformation 68 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100267 Initiative money to acquire blighted land in our community. Some of this land is on my block. We want this land to be transferred to our community land trust and turn it into truly affordable houses. This is so important to me because my child and I are forced to live with my mother because I can't afford houses in my neighborhood. We are right between Temple, Northern Liberties, and Fishtown, and prices have really gone up. And it's not just me; I have cousins, sisters, brothers, and friends who all need houses and can't forward it. I'm here today because I want to ask my representative, Councilwoman Sanchez, to meet with the community and respond to our requests to acquire vacant lots so that we can turn something negative in our community to a positive, in (indiscernible) trust. Thank you for time, and I would like to turn it over to Cruz Rodriguez. 69 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100267

Buenos dias. (Mr. Rodriguez testified in Spanish; the English translation of his testimony is attached hereto.)

We have one more testimony. Are you going to testify? I'm going to ask you to be brief. I appreciate all of you coming down because we're testifying on another bill, but I think it's important you're here and you get your comments on the record. I would have liked for you guys to be here yesterday, when we had the RDA and members of the Office of Housing and Community Development, and what we were talking about was land acquisition and NTI. And, unfortunately, you missed four hours -- actually, Monday, you missed four hours of what I thought was very difficult -- I think Councilwoman Blondell Reynolds, who joined me at that particular time, your level of 70 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100267 frustration at that that particular time was expressed by us with the Administration on our inability to get an agreement on releasing NTI and our agreement -- or our frustration about the new disposition policy of the City, which is all market value. We spent four hours on Monday, having a very serious discussion. Tomorrow, I am hosting a discussion with state legislators in Council, after our Council session, to talk about land-banking, so I just wanted to let you know for the record that we continue to move very, very aggressively in Council to try to come up with an agreement with the Administration around the disposition of land. And, unfortunately, that's where I would have loved to have incorporated this testimony in the discussion. I think it was very appropriate at that particular time. So with that, I'm going to 71 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100267 allow for the last testimony, and then we have to move on with the bills. Thank you so very much.

Good morning. My name Doris Barish. And I'm aware of the hard work of all of the Councilpeople. I've attended several meetings and I'm kind of familiar because of my chair. And I just wanted to recognize all of you for your hard work. I want to thank you, Councilwoman Sanchez, for making this effort to schedule a meeting with us so we can go even further. And I just want to say thanks.

Thank you so much. Thank you, all of the members from the coalition, and I look forward to work with you. I'm going to recognize Councilman Green.

Thank you. You know, I just want to make it clear to you, as one of Councilwoman Quiñones-Sanchez's colleagues, that she 72 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100267 talks to the rest of us, especially the at-large people, all the time about the needs of her district. She has taken me touring the vacant land in her district and is passionate about doing something to improve her community where she lives and where you all live. And that has been consistent since I've known her in 2007, and it has been consistently said and done every opportunity she gets to bring us into that community and to show us what's happening so that we can be there to help her get the resources she needs for your organization and other organizations. I do want to point out that, you know, there are extraordinarily limited resources in the City of Philadelphia for things like land acquisition. Even though a Councilperson has allocated to them NTI money, some of it is going to perhaps existing projects that were in place before that Councilperson was in office. Some of it 73 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100267 is -- there are many, many demands on public dollars. And what we have to do is choose between competing ideas for good with limited resources. So whether or not -- and I don't know the Councilwoman's intentions. Whether or not you are allocated NTI dollars for this purpose or another purpose, you can be assured that she is working hard for you with respect to the issue of vacant land, and has been since I've known her. Thank you.

Once again, thanks very much.

Thank you.

Can I just say one quick thing in response to that?

Mm-hmm.

I just wanted to say that we really do appreciate the work that you're doing; that's why we voted for you. We're interested in partnering 74 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100267 with you and not just focusing on the limitations of a bureaucracy. So if we can move forward together in that aspect, we're at the table and we're ready for you to come to our table, your constituents. So thank you for your time in dealing with all of this.

I want you go use all of this energy -- again, the stalling has been done by the Administration and not by us in Council.

It sure sounds like it.

But I look forward to being able to use all of the energy of all of the coalition members to help me get the Administration to understand how important this is.

Well, we'll be in touch with -- I think Justin is who we talk to, to schedule our next meeting?

Yes.

Maybe in the next 75 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100267 week or two?

No, it will not be in the next week or two.

Okay.

As I've said in the past, you know, the scheduling of meetings is done when we can schedule it and we have something to report out.

Okay. Thank you.

All right, with that, Councilman Greenlee.

Yeah, very quickly. I don't want to elongate the record. Councilwoman Sanchez doesn't need me to defend her, but I certainly wholeheartedly with Councilman Green and his comments. And with all due respect, if people are not aware of the advocacy she has had, people have not been paying attention. Thank you.

76 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100267 Councilwoman Blondell Reynolds-Brown.

I would certainly be remiss not to echo and underscore comments and remarks by my colleagues. And recognize that even when you might think we are silent, we are indeed paying attention. Councilwoman Sanchez has a vision that is huge and thoughtful and strategic, given, as Councilman Green indicated, extremely limited resources. So ultimately, it's collective will with regards to approaching RDA that's going to move the needle. And recognize also she's been here for three years, not thirty, and it takes a long time to move the needle towards the better good for any community. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Councilman Kelly.

Last but not least, I just want to -- I want to agree 77 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100267 with all of my colleagues here that Councilwoman Sanchez has a very, very large district, believe me.

You represented it.

I represented it many, many years ago, and I know how diverse it is and how many people and how important it is to her. I know that sometimes you get frustrated because you seem to not get a timely meeting, in your opinion. But the Councilwoman has been working, and I'm sure she will continue to work for you and for your endeavors. I really do. I think that she has to meet with a lot of people, there's a lot of groups in that district, and she has to give them all a good amount of her time. So please be patient if you can.

Can I just address that very quickly? We have been patient for months now, and we represent hundreds, if not a 78 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100267 few thousand, of your constituents. It's a very -- I just want to say one thing. I'm glad that you guys -- I think you're working tirelessly in a job I wouldn't want, in a system that's quite broken, to be honest. So we thank you for that tireless effort. Your plans, Councilwoman Sanchez, are a little bit nebulous and unknown to your constituents. We'd like to get you to the table in a meeting that's a little more conducive to a family conversation than this.

And again --

So it's been trying to try to get you to that table over the past few months. And we feel a little -- just a little left out of the process.

Okay. Well, I'm going to end with this. I was very clear in my meeting in March with 79 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100267 you that I was going to meet with you in June, and that was not good enough for you guys. And it's unfortunate because I was in the middle of a budget, where we were defending the Utilities Fund, Community Legal Services, the supportive housing, the Housing Trust Fund. I will meet with you. I just don't -- will not meet you when you give me deadlines and you give me ultimatums; that's not a productive relationship. And, you know, the issue of my agenda not being known, I think I've been very public around my commitment to affordable housing, all the groundbreakings that we've done. And, again, I will meet with the group.

We really look forward to that.

Thank you.

I just want to stress that we very much look forward to 80 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 090910 partnering with you.

Thank you.

Thank you for time.

Again, I really appreciate all of your efforts and all of your work. Thank you. Will the clerk please read the title of the next bill.

Bill No. 090910, an ordinance amending Section 9-603 of the Philadelphia Code, entitled "Pawn brokers," and Section 9-615, entitled "Dealers in Precious Metals," to require pawnbrokers and dealers in precious metals to share transactional information with the Police Department through an Internet-accessible electronic inventory tracking system, to comply with additional safeguards in order to facilitate the recovery of stolen property, to increase the license fee for dealers in precious metals, and to 81 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 090910 enhance the penalties for violations, all under certain terms and conditions.

Before we begin this, Councilman Kelly, who is the sponsor of this bill, wants to open up with brief remarks. I do want to reiterate that anyone who's here to testify for this bill who has not signed in with us, please do so, 'cause we had no 12 preregistered testimony. With that, Councilman Kelly.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I just want to go on the record. This legislation, of course, is necessary. I what it does is, it brings the policies regarding pawnbrokers and the people who buy and sell precious metals into the 21st century. This legislation will assist the Philadelphia Police Department greatly, and it changes the existing laws in several ways. Principal among them 82 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 090910 are: 1. It updates antiquated languages and closes loopholes currently on the books and brings the laws up to speed with the times regarding pawn shops and dealers in precious metals. 2. It enables the Philadelphia Police Department to easily track and monitor items which might have been soled or pawned as a result of a crime which took place. It holds the sellers of items and the buyers to more stringent reporting regarding their identity and the nature of their transaction. And at this time, I would like to commend and thank Commissioner Ramsey, Lieutenant Healey, Detective Tom Peters, and Steve Masters of the Council staff, who have been working -- who have been working greatly to make sure this legislation is not only approved but passed by this Council. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank 83 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 090910 you. I believe we have testimony from the Administration on this bill. Is there anyone here from the Administration to testify on this bill? (Witnesses come forward.)

You may proceed with your testimony. LT. HEALEY: Thank you, Councilwoman. Good morning, Councilwoman Sanchez, Councilman Kelly, and other members of the Committee of Licenses and Inspections. Again, my name is Francis Healey, and I'm special advisor to Police Commissioner Ramsey, and I'm here to testify on his behalf regarding Bill No. 19 090910. As I said before, the Commissioner would like me to extend his gratitude for allowing the department to voice its opinion on this piece of legislation. With that being said, the 84 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 090910 department strongly supports this bill. The purpose of this legislation is simply to allow the Police Department to use current technology to make a serious impact on the flow of stolen property to precious-metal dealers and pawnbrokers that occurs on a daily basis in Philadelphia. The current manual system that's in place is outdated and simply ineffective in tracking criminal activity for stolen property. Regrettably, this industry has historically been laden with stolen property concerns, which necessities the need for additional regulations. Nevertheless, even though the requirements of this bill will substantially enhance law enforcement's ability to investigate and prosecute property crimes, these requirements are simply the codification of sound business practices in an industry so fraught with stolen property. 85 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 090910 The issues that affect law enforcement and legitimate dealers and pawnbrokers alike first involve the true identity of the people actually selling or pawning property. Next it involves the fact that stolen property coming into the establishments are often sold, altered, or melted long before law enforcement feasibly be aware and can take any action. The final issue involves the antiquated system that currently exists in connecting stolen property coming into the establishments and with the information from police reports. Bill No. 090910 addresses each of these issue. Specifically, pawn shops and precious-metal dealers are required to take good identification from individuals pawning property or selling precious metals. They're required to retain any property received, I believe it's been downgraded to, 60 days before it can be altered, sold, or melted. 86 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 090910 And, finally, the bill requires dealers and pawnbrokers to notify the police via an Internet connection of all business transactions for the day. This will allow us to track this property to stolen police reports. These changes will substantially enhance the department's ability to investigate and prosecute property crimes and are long overdue. For these reasons, the departments fully supports this bill and respectfully recommends that this honorable committee do the same. This will conclude my testimony. I have Sergeant Cella, from the Major Crimes Unit, with me to answer any questions that the committee may have.

Thank you. Councilman Green.

Thank you, Madam Chair. 87 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 090910 I want to thank you for your testimony, Lieutenant. I don't have any questions for you guys; you've made it very clear that you support this, and that this is something that's needed that's going to help you enforce our laws. I do want to say for the record that this is the kind of bill that I hope will set an example for the state legislature, because while this will be extremely effective in the City of Philadelphia -- and we're taking a leadership issue on this in the state -- this will be far more effective, just like the cell phone ban, once the State legislature acts to do something like that statewide. So I want to thank Councilman Kelly for this leadership on this issue. LT. HEALEY: On a very quick side note, the information you requested earlier, Deputy Commissioner Johnson's working on it, the information on code 88 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 090910 violation notices.

Okay. CAPT. WILSON: And, quite frankly, this will make Philadelphia the leader in Pennsylvania in this industry. Right now, the software that's proposed to be used is out of MacLaughlin, which is a consortium of federally-funded consortium of regions, and that region had developed a software package up in the New England that tracks very effectively all of the stolen property coming in and out of these locations, and the police in that area, up in New England, are actually making a dramatic impact on property-crime investigations and prosecutions. So this will make Philadelphia the leader, and we're certain that once we do tie into the system with the MacLaughlin software that other jurisdictions in the surrounding communities will follow suit. SGT. CELLA: And if I could add 89 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 090910 to Lt. Healey's --

identify yourself for the record, please. SGT. CELLA: Oh. Sergeant Joseph Cella, C-E-L-L-A. If I could add to Lieutenant Healey's response to Councilman Green, this is groundbreaking in this area. I can attest to the fact from regional crime share meetings that I attend that Chester County, Delaware County, Montgomery County, and Bucks County are awaiting the action of this council in order to take similar action in those counties. And the district attorney of Montgomery County, Risa Ferman, as chairperson of the legislative section of the Pennsylvania District Attorneys Association, is also looking forward to the passage of this legislation here in order to go forward at the Commonwealth level to make this statewide, to enable -- because, obviously, we're a 90 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 090910 mobile society, and suburban burglars do come into the City, unfortunately, because we have more pawnbroker shops than they do in the suburbs. So it is a regional problem and bigger than just our own town.

Point of information, Madam Chair?

Sure. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Brown.

Thank you very much. Councilman Green, do you know if any legislation has been introduced at the state yet on this matter? It has not. Well, let me also commend my colleague Councilman Kelly for moving this matter into this century. I know too often in the Wynnefield section of town, residents become outraged -- well, were outraged years ago, when a new pawn shop opened up on City Avenue, because that was a signal of other type of 91 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 090910 activity. So to have your support on this measure matters. And to know that the counties are looking closely to see how they can replicate is big. Thank you very much. SGT. CELLA: And, Councilwoman, if I could add, that shop on City Avenue that you allude to is not a licensed pawn shop in the State of Pennsylvania. He uses kind of -- he calls himself "a pawn shop outlet" and actually purchases goods for resale at flea markets.

Is that right? SGT. CELLA: Yes. He's a check-casher, and he's licensed in that manner. We've been out there in response to some of your constituents on a number of occasions and investigated that shop.

Okay. Thank you for that information.

The Chair recognizes Councilman Kelly. 92 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 090910

Thank you, Madam Chair. I just want to thank my colleagues here for their comments. And I don't want to get into this, but Sergeant Cella and Lieutenant Healey, that the antiquated system that you currently are using, I'm just amazed that you found anything, I really am. But now I think that since we are going into the 21st century, I think we're going to see a lot of major crimes solved and a lot of, of course, burglaries, I'm hoping, reduced. Okay? And paperless, also, for Councilman Green's benefit. (Laughter.)

Thank you both, gentlemen, for your testimony. Is there anyone else here to testify on Bill No. 090910? If you can proceed to the witness table. (Witnesses come forward.)

Do you 93 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 090910 have written testimony with you?

Yes, I do, Councilwoman.

It's been copied and distributed, okay. I also want the make a note that there is an amendment to this bill, and I want to make sure that you have that prior to you --

Yes, I am, Councilwoman. We just only received that this morning.

Okay. Please identify yourself for the record and proceed with your testimony.

Certainly. Thank you. Good morning, members of Philadelphia City Council. My name is David Kaplan, and I'm an attorney here on behalf of a group of precious-metal buyers that operate in the City that wish to have our voices heard concerning Bill 25 No. 0909010. I thank you for allowing me 94 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 090910 to address you today. Let me make it perfectly clear that my group is an advocate of the law, and I think the genesis of how this bill 6 came into introduction, it's my understanding that there was a couple of bad actors out there, and they were purchasing stolen merchandise, and the City got wind of it, and Councilman Kelly's office produced this bill, which, in principle, is an excellent idea. It's certainly an excellent idea to be a leadership in this city and set precedence throughout counties and also the Commonwealth. And I commend and applaud that goal as well. The group I represent wishes to cooperate with the City and, until this morning, I really thought we had cooperation working with City Councilman Kelly's office. It was my understanding that we were to receive the amendments in advance. A representative for the group 95 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 090910 who will testify today, Mr. Gelber, who is one of the City's many precious- metal buyers, lawfully-abiding precious-metal buyers, that we were working in conjunction with Councilman Kelly's office to be able to take the bill and to make sure that its principles, or guidelines, were not over-restrictive and did not drive precious-metal buyers out of the business or out of the City. When you look closely, examining some of the bills, some of the directives of the bill, there are several concerns. The first concern is that the bill survived legal scrutiny. The City -- the Commonwealth has spoken -- or this is an area that encompasses the Commonwealth's regulation under Title 73, Chapter 27, Section 1934. Specifically, there are several concerns that my group has. Originally, when the bill was introduced, there was a 90-day holding period for precious-metal buyers. And what that means essentially 96 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 090910 is that -- to put you in the position of precious-metal buyers, you have a store and you have maybe to 30 transactions 5 a day totaling 150 to 180 transactions 6 that you would have to hold the metal for 7 submission to the refineries for three 8 months. And that's been amended to 60 9 days, to two months. 10 Essentially, somebody would 11 need to -- gold buyers or precious-metal 12 buyers would need to not be able to use, 13 turn, or convert the inventory, lawful 14 inventory, to dollars, to proceeds to be 15 able to pay their bills. We think that 16 that is untenable; it certainly will put 17 my client out of business and certainly 18 many other precious-metal buyers. 19 Our proposal -- and we thought 20 we were in agreement with Councilman Kelly's office -- orally, we were at an understanding of 14 days, and we thought we reached that common ground, and we didn't have anything in writing until this morning, as I stated. But now we 97 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 090910 found out, at the 11th hour, that that's not the case. There are several other concerns, which are critical and are going to affect lawful operators in the precious metal business. The implementation of an electronic inventory system is an excellent idea. We certainly have to move with the times, into the 21st century. The problem is, when you read the bill closely, it gives a tremendous amount of unbridled discretion. Specifically, it states that this electronic inventory system shall, quote/unquote, be designated by the Police Department. We don't know at what cost that's going to come. We heard about this system from Boston, and we heard about another system that they're thinking of using.

We don't know if that system is going to be feasible or user-friendly or require 98 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 090910 extraordinary upgrades, and, in addition to those precious-metal buyers that don't have computer systems, but should, to operate or upgrade their operating systems. And for all we know, this system could be 5, 10, 15, $20,000. We don't know the cost of it. Furthermore, the bill gives unbridled -- gives the police certain powers to be able to specify requirements to obey with the new law, with the bill. And some of those requirements, for example, are that the police, if they suspect that inventory has -- or that certain inventory is stolen, that the police shall notify the precious-metal buyers, and within hours, the 19 precious-metal buyers shall produce that 20 inventory for inspection. There's 21 nothing wrong with that. 22 What follows that, though, is 23 disturbing in that it requires -- it 24 states that the police can give notice to hold the inventory for a, quote, 99 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 090910 reasonable period of time. What is "a reasonable period of time"? In order for any group or law-abiding citizens to comply with the law, they must have more than just ambiguous and completely unbridled discretion which is subject to whatever the Police Department shall state it is. Again, we're looking to comply, but we need guidelines that are not going to put my client out of business -- or the group, that will not drive them from the City, which small business is the lifeblood of the City. There are several other thing that are critical that will affect the industry of precious-metal buyers in the City if this bill is passed. The penalties. Before I address the penalties, just a procedural requirement. The bill is proposing that forms of ID shall be taken by the precious-metals buyers before the transaction or the purchase shall take 100 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 090910 place. That's certainly reasonable. The only problem is that the forms of identification stated in the bill don't provide for a very common situation. The bill provides that one who wants to sell precious metals must produce either valid state or federal ID, a valid personal driver's license with a photo ID, a valid military ID, a valid passport with photo ID or a valid alien registration with photo ID, or a valid senior citizen ID with photo. Many of the public people who wish to sell their gold come into many of the stores in the group, and they don't have -- they're not drivers, they don't drive, they don't have driver's licenses; they're dropped off or they're taken by car or they take public transportation and show up at the doorsteps of the group, of the stores. A very simple solution would be to just add that a non-photo -- I'm sorry, correction -- a non-driver's 101 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 090910 license ID would resolve that problem. It's a simple issue, but it places the group in violation for restrictive standards that are over-restrictive and burdensome and do not anticipate or understand the business operations from day-to-day. Penalties are a concern. The bill provides for penalties for a first offense for three full months. So we have a hypothetical where we have a person who has never violated any laws, never been shut down, such as Mr. Gelber, been in business years, and has an 16 employee who does not follow procedure, 17 and, inadvertently and without intent, 18 violates the procedure, the law. 19 And that could be as simple as 20 a violation as not uploading the 21 inventory at the end of the -- each 22 business day, which is one of the 23 requirements of the bill. But it's 24 certainly an innocuous situation. 25 Well, in that situation, 102 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 090910 Mr. Gelber's business would be closed for 90 days, three full months; he's shut down, he's out of business. One violation, years, innocuous in nature, 6 he's closed. 7 They post on his storefront, 8 and they also shut down every other 9 location that Mr. Gelber may have. 10 Mr.

Gelber, at the present time, is one 11 location, but there are group members who 12 with have multiple locations. So you 13 have potentially precious-metal buyers 14 that have 10, 12, 15 locations. That 15 would shut every single location down for 16 one violation, first-time violation, 17 three months, and ten to fifteen 18 locations are out of business. 19 The original bill had a 20 $600-per-license fee. The amended bill 21 added $600 per location. So, again, 22 multiple-location precious-metal buyers 23 would be forced with a tremendous cost 24 burden. 25 However, in fairness to 103 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 090910 Councilman Kelly's office, the amendment reduced that from $600 to $200. However, there's a brand-new addition that was, again, read for the first time in the amendment, of an additional fee of $400, which is an annual fee to each location to defray the cost of Internet access of the Police Department. So, in essence, they reduced the 600 to 400 -- I'm sorry, to 200, but they added in a fee of 400, so we're back to $600 per location. Again, a cost burden that is not directly correlated to maybe the cost associated with that. We respectfully request and implore City Councilmembers, rather than feel the need to do a drive-through legislation, because of the approaching summer session, to get the law right and not make it burdensome and put the legitimate business precious-metal buyers out of business. I respectfully request that our group be given an opportunity to review 104 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 090910 the amendments and to be able to make sure that they conform to state law, which we're of the opinion that they do not, because state law has a holding period of five days. So any holding period in contradiction of that is, under the preemption doctrine, in violation. I was told by a representative of Councilman Kelly's office this morning that there may be consumer-protection statutes under the Philadelphia Home Charter that allow to be able to add supplemental regulations. I merely respectfully request the time to be able to research the law to make an informed decision, to be able to see if that is -- is law and in line with the law. We're willing to cooperate. Again, we're not here -- and we thought we were on a cooperative stance with your office, and we implore you to give us sufficient time and address -- allow us to consider the exorbitant hold period, which essentially is the most critical 105 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 090910 issue heard before you today within this bill that will drive precious-metal buyers out of business and/or out of the City. In appreciation of our great city's need to retain businesses that are its lifeblood and create regulation that serves governmental interest while not preempting the laws of our Commonwealth, your consideration of our request is being asked. Unless there are any other questions, which I would be happy to answer and expand on any of the nuances, which are some lesser important points, but nevertheless, the list which I've provided or the illustrative critical issues are not exclusive; they are merely the most important ones. There are lesser important ones, which I will reserve for questioning. But in the interest of maintaining brevity with respect for the Council's time, I thank you for allowing us to be heard. 106 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 090910

Thank you. Councilman Greenlee has one point for clarification.

Yeah, just quickly on one issue that you raised, sir. You said about -- if I heard you right, you said that a non-driver's license would be acceptable, correct?

Yes, Councilman Greenlee.

Okay. Well, the first identification here that Councilman Kelly has is a valid identification document issued by a state or federal government containing a photograph. Doesn't a non-driver's license figure in that?

You are correct, and you raise a good point. However, just as legal training sometimes over-trains or anticipates interpretation of plain-meaning language, that just by 107 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 090910 context of having a separate paragraph, or under item ii, the fact that it has the requirement of a Pennsylvania or an operator's license by any state containing a photograph, if we read that in context with the first state or federal ID, one would have to ask, what was the legislative intent? If they meant to include a non-photo driver's license, why would they have a separate item that addresses federal or state ID? Why wouldn't they just address it in line 2? So it's just perhaps critical reading but excellent point, Councilman.

Okay, thank you.

You're welcome.

That's why you get 12 lawyers and 20 opinions. Councilman Kelly. (Laughter.)

Thank you, Madam Chair. 108 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 090910 Mr. Kaplan, thank you very much for your testimony, and thank you again for your cooperation. You have been very, very cooperative in this whole process. But there are some questions that, of course -- Councilman Greenlee just addressed one of them that I was going to bring to your attention. But I would like to say that the days which you're objecting to, I 13 would like to get Lieutenant Healey's 14 version or comments about why it's necessary for the Police Department to respond to that. But, let's face it, your client, I'm sure, is very legitimate and is a good businessman, and we certainly don't want to put anyone out of business in Philadelphia; God knows we need all the business we can get in Philadelphia. But there are many, many people -- not many, but there are a few people out there that are not legitimate, and 109 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 090910 they're not doing the things that they should be doing, and they're skirting the law, if not breaking the law. And this is why this legislation is so important to get on the books. We can make changes to it during time, and we'll be working with you on that, but we have to address the problems that are out there. Councilwoman Brown addressed a problem in her area that people have been working -- I guess been doing a lot of illegal activity in regard to selling of all sorts of jewelry and precious metals, and God knows what. But we have to make a stand and we have to send a message to them that it's not going to be tolerated. We're not going to be -- I think that we're not going to be the city that's going to allow this practice to continue. We just -- we just can't. So I would like to bring up Lieutenant Healey, if I can, to address 110 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 090910 that days that you seem to be really objecting --

Thank you, 5 Councilman Kelly. 6 May I make a correction, 7 though, on the record that we're not 8 objecting to the 14 days; we merely raise 9 the issue that it is in contradiction 10 with the state law of five days; however, 11 my group was willing to concede to that 12 14 days, not object to it. 13

Oh, all 14 right. Then that's not necessary, then. Again, I want to commend you for your cooperation in this matter.

Thank you.

And I think that we can work with you in the future, we really can. We don't want to see anyone out of business.

Thank you, Councilman Kelly. And we can appreciate the need to be able to weed out the bad actors to be able make the industry as 111 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 090910 clean as possible, because, let's face it, bad actors ruin it for the good actors in any industry. And we're onboard, we're completely in a cooperative stance, as I initially said. But at the same time, I'm certain that your office and that the City of Philadelphia does not want to implement things that would be over- restrictive and put people out of business. As you astutely mentioned, it's important to preserve business in the City of Philadelphia. Can I make -- I'm sorry.

I wasn't sure 'cause I know that your client is here to testify. If he just wants us to submit his testimony for the record or have him read his testimony. (Addressing Mr. Gelber.) Do you want to just put it in the record?

(Addressing Mr. Gelber.) Do you want to read it? 112 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 090910 (Mr. Gelber shakes head.)

Okay. I just want to make a note, and we'll make sure that we give it to the stenographer.

Okay. I would just like to just expand on the most critical point, and that is the hold period of 60 days and even if the hold period was hypothetically 30, which the amendment now is 60 days. The price of gold or precious metal is a volatile industry; it changes on market-based fluctuations and on a day-to-day basis. A 30-day holding requirement essentially is... insisting on precious- metal buyers being able to make predictions that they are not able to predict that even a most qualified economist could. If somebody comes into a store and the price of gold is $1,000 today, they purchased the gold for 900, they make their $100-profit they're entitled 113 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 090910 to. In 30 days, that price of gold can go from $1,000 to $800, in which case, that would cause a tremendous loss based on 150 to 200 transactions per week. It's simply over-restrictive, it's simply unreasonable, it's simply more than what is necessary for law enforcement to be able to do their job. Fourteen days is absolutely -- I'm advocating a very reasonable requirement. You have this requirement for an inventory system, and at the end of each day, that inventory's going to be uploaded. That's two full weeks to be able to take that -- conduct their investigation or provide written notice to the precious-metal buyers. But 30 days would put this group out of business. Thank you.

Can I address this?

Yes. You may proceed, Councilman Kelly. 114 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 090910

Thank you, Madam Chair. Mr. Kaplan, one of the reasons why we purposely put it at 60 days is because in this day and age, a lot of people, of course, are away -- they could be away for two weeks or three weeks before they come home and find out that their home was burglarized, there's a lot of property that's missing. And if you're saying the 13 days, the Police Department would be 14 handcuffed; they wouldn't be able to do anything because the material would be wiped out, be gone. This way, I think it gives them an opportunity and it gives them the time that they're going to need. Now, we can tweak that later, but right now, I think that's a legitimate, I think, complaint that the -- or a legitimate tool that the Police Department can use. They need that time to track down some of this material which has been 115 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 090910 stolen, and that's the reason why we have -- right now, we've reduced it from 90 to 60, and I think that's a reasonable amount of time. Thank you.

Thank you, Councilman Kelly. With all due respect, just a brief response. For the -- I guess what's important here is being able to ask, At what cost will that come? And although I agree with you, it certainly would give the Police Department 30 days to be able to conduct their investigation, but at the cost it's going to come would be for tens of thousands of dollars' worth of purchases be frozen for a month. In essence, it's like owning a grocery store and having to be forced to take the cash from the proceeds of the grocery store and completely hold them for 30 days. It's not uncommon for a business to do 15 to $20,000 a week in 116 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 090910 their industry, so we're talking about 60 to $80,000 a month. So, basically, what this group would have to do is either have the resources to be able to fulfill that and back 60 to $80,000, which, in a bad economy, is not going to be the case; or go out and secure a loan to be able to pay their creditors and rent and license fees and be able to sustain, and they simply cannot afford to do that. And that's the cost of the 30 day. With all due respect to the Police Department, an extending of the time would come at a tremendous cost and an impossible and untenable way of forcing a policy to do business that would drive them out of business.

Okay. Since we have no further -- do you have --

I would just like to invite Lieutenant Healey up here to give us the reason -- and Sergeant 117 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 090910 Cella to come up and give us their reasoning for having the 60-day time period involved in this.

Sure, Councilman.

I thank the witnesses. If Lieutenant Healey could come forward.

And Sergeant Cella.

Is it possible to reserve the right to briefly rebuttal after Sergeant Healey?

We have a hearing at 11:30.

Oh, okay.

I wanted to just note for the record --

This will be very brief.

Yeah. I wanted to note for the record you said we were speeding through this. And, unfortunately, those of in us Council 118 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 090910 would disagree; we don't speed through anything.

I'm sorry. I just meant the passing -- taking it from committee. I didn't mean today's forum; I meant taking it out of committee.

But I am sure that the bill's sponsor will be willing to continue to work with you if further amendments need to be made later on, but we do intend to move this one out of committee today. You know, there's two different weeks of voting, so I'm sure Councilman Kelly will continue to work with you. With that, Lieutenant? LT. HEALEY: Yes. Once again, Francis Healey, from the Police Department. In reference the 60-day -- originally the 90-day, now the 60-day requirement, from a law enforcement perspective, unlike violent crimes that are reported actually contemporaneous 119 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 090910 with most incidents, and there are a couple of different exceptions, with property crimes, there's a delay in the reporting or property crimes from when people do become aware. Even once they become aware, oftentimes, victims are traumatized and don't realize what's been missing. So they'll make an initial police report and, at a later point in time, amend that report saying, you know, my jewelry box from the garage is missing as well, or my guns missing from the gun cabinet. For those very reasons, in addition to the reasons that the Councilman mentioned -- the delay from people, you know, vacationing and stuff like that -- it's just that a lot of times, the property doesn't come into our police reports until days, weeks, sometimes even months after the fact, where a victim will come back and say, Listen, I had something in storage, I had something in the back bedroom I didn't 120 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 090910 realize missing; I need to amend the police report. And we'll do so. That was the initial reason why we asked for the time period. Now, granted, hopefully we will be able to track things in a quicker, more effective manner in tandem with the new computer stuff that's associated with this. So, you know, we'd be willing to work with you to see what is the bare minimum that the Police Department could work with. I mean, the last thing we want to do is inhibit business. We too want businesses to flourish in the City. So I would be willing to work with the Councilman and the industry to see what is a reasonable number of days that we can all work with. So 60 days may be a little too much; I've been talking with the experts. The bottom line is, we need a little more than two weeks but what point do we need to come up with, and I think 121 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 090910 we could work something out.

Thank you. Councilman Kelly, anything else to add?

Nothing to add. Thank you, Lieutenant. Thank you, Sergeant.

Thanks to all of you for your hard work on this matter? Anybody else here to testify on that bill, on Bill 090910? (No response.)

Seeing none, will the clerk read the title of Bill No. 100282.

Bill No. 100282, an ordinance amending Section PM-304.10 of the Philadelphia Property Maintenance Code (Subcode "PM" of Title 4 of the Philadelphia Code), entitled "Periodic Inspection of Exterior Walls and 122 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100282 Appurtenances of Buildings," by providing for appeals, under certain terms and conditions.

Thank you. (Witness comes forward.)

Otis, if you want to proceed with your testimony.

Good morning.

Good afternoon -- no, morning.

No, it's still morning.

Doesn't feel like it.

Good morning, Chairwoman Sanchez and members of the committee. I am Otis Haigler, Jr., Director of Legislative Affairs for the Department of Licenses and Inspections. Today, I'm here to provide testimony on Bill No. 100282, which, if enacted, will further clarify that appeals of façades can be made to the 123 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100282 Board of Licenses and Inspections Review after a decision rendered on the appeal that was made to the Board of Building Standards. Simply put, the first appeal regarding this matter will be made to the Board of Building Standards and Appeals. The Board of Building Standards' decision will be made -- or can be appealed to the Board of Licenses and Inspections Review. The purpose of this bill is to further clarify and highlight the sequence for making such appeals, and the department, therefore, offers no 16 objection to the enactment of this bill. Thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony, and I will be happy to answer any questions.

Thank you. Anyone here to testify on this bill? (No response.)

Seeing 124 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100380 none, will the clerk read the title -- thank you, Mr. Haigler. I believe you're going to stay there for the next couple.

Yes, I am.

The clerk will read the title of the bill for 100308.

Bill No. 100308, an ordinance amending Subcode "F" of Title 4 of The Philadelphia Code, entitled "The Philadelphia Fire Code," by adopting the 2009 edition of the International Code Council Fire Code, with certain amendments thereto, all under certain terms and conditions.

Thank you. You can proceed, Mr. Haigler.

Good morning, Chairwoman Sanchez and members of the committee. I am Otis Haigler, Jr., Director of Legislative Affairs for the Department of Licenses and Inspections. Today I'm here to provide 125 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100380 testimony on Bill No. 100308, which, if enacted, will amend Title of the 4 Philadelphia Code for the purpose of adopting the 2009 edition of the International Code Council Fire Code as part of the Philadelphia Fire Code. Pursuant to Act 45 of 1999, also known as "The Pennsylvania Uniformed Construction Code Act," all municipalities that have opted to enforce the Pennsylvania Uniform Construction Code locally must enact legislation adopting the Pennsylvania Uniform Construction Code and Model Codes adopted thereto, following the publication of the latest edition of the codes. A thorough and comprehensive review was conducted in order to ensure that all previous local amendments that were adopted by the City were carried forward with the adoption of the 2009 edition of the Fire Code. Thank you for the opportunity to provide the department's testimony, 126 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100380 and I'll be happy to answer any questions.

Thank you. We can proceed with the testimony from the Fire Department. Mr. Richard Bailey, proceed, please. DEPT. CHIEF BAILEY: Thank you. Good morning, Chairwoman Sanchez and the members of the Department of Licenses and Inspections Committee. I am Richard Bailey, Deputy Chief, Fire Department. I'm in charge of the department's Fire Code Unit, which is responsible for maintaining the City's Fire Code. I am here today to seek your support of an ordinance to adopt the 2009 International Fire Code, with amendments that are needed to address fire hazards in our city. The new code will be known as "The 2010 Philadelphia Fire Code," and will continue the City's use of our latest national fire code to safeguard 127 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100380 residents and businesses from the hazards are fire. Most of the changes in the 2009 international code from the 2006 edition are minor. There is one section that was added to the new code that will have a financial impact on existing buildings. This section has also been added to the new building code which regulates new construction. This section requires owners of high-rise buildings, but excluding high-rise apartment buildings, to install luminescent tape or paint in exit stairways on the edge of the treads on the top of the rails, around the perimeter of landings on protruding obstructions, and on exit discharge doors. The markings are intended to guide occupants exiting a building in an emergency where the primary and emergency electrical power to the egress lighting has failed and the building is in darkness. 128 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100380 This addition to the Building and Fire Codes was prompted by the car bombing in the parking lot of the north tower of the World Trade Center in New York City in 1993. Regarding the luminous exit marking requirement in the new Fire Code, the department -- meaning the Fire Department -- is planning to exempt existing buildings that have the following: a sprinkler system installed throughout the building and the building's exit stairway lighting is connected to an emergency generator or other secondary power source. The department is planning to permit this exemptions because they believe that a building sprinkler system would contain a fire to a small area, and the sprinkler system confining the fire in a building having a emergency generator, the probability of the loss of primary and emergency power and the building is unlikely. 129 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100251 Thank you. This concludes my testimony.

Think. Anyone here to testify in addition to the Bill 100308? (No response.)

Seeing none, will the clerk please read the title of Bill 100251.

Bill No. 100251, an ordinance amending Title 4 of the Philadelphia Code, entitled "The Philadelphia Building Construction and Occupancy Code," by amending Subcode "PM" (The Philadelphia Property Maintenance Code), by amending Section PM-704.0, entitled "Building Standards Applicable to Designated Areas," by adding portions of the 1st Councilmatic District to the list of areas covered, all under certain terms and conditions.

Thank you. In addition to the 130 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100251 Administration, I believe Stacy Irving will be testifying for the Center City District. She can also begin to approach the witness table. You can proceed, Mr. Haigler.

Good morning, Chairwoman Sanchez and members of the committee. I am Otis Haigler, Jr., Director of Legislative Affairs for the Department of Licenses and Inspections. Today, I'm here to provide testimony on Bill 100251, which, if enacted, will expand the requirements of the Property Maintenance Code, Section 16 PM-704.3.1 related to security devices on commercial business establishments to all establishments within the 1st Councilmatic District. The department offers no 21 objection to the enactment of this bill. Currently, the provisions of this section 23 only apply to certain designated areas of the East Passyunk Avenue Business Improvement District located within the 131 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100251 1st Councilmatic District. The proposed bill will expand the requirements governing the design and maintenance of security gates that are located on commercial business establishments to all business establishments in the 1st Council District. Certain requirements of this section include prohibitions on solid security gates that prevent visibility into the establishment when the gate is lowered and requirements to maintain the gate free of graffiti at all times. Thank you for the opportunity to provide the department's testimony. And I will be happy to answer any questions.

Thank you. No questions at this time. If you could just remain in case there's any questions. Will Miss Stacy Irving please approach the witness table. (Witness comes forward.) 132 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100251

Good morning.

You can proceed with your testimony.

Thank you. Good morning. My name is Stacy Irving, and I am the senior director for crime prevention services at the Center City District. In 1994, the Center City District worked in partnership with the Department of Licenses and Inspections and with City Council on the passage of legislation requiring security grills or gates to have 75 percent or more visibility when installed in Center City. This program has proven to be very successful in Center City and has helped to create a more open and attractive environment. As you can see from our publication Storefront Security Grills, published in 1994, we offered suggestions to merchants on how to secure their storefronts and contribute to a greater 133 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100251 sense of safety on the street. In the late '80s and early '90s, merchants throughout the City installed solid-metal security gates, which closed off the entire shop window from view. What we learned at the time was that many of them had installed solid gates only after hearing about a crime in the area and after they were approached by representatives of security gate installation companies who were eager to capitalize on an opportunity to make a quick sale. These security gate salespeople were in a one-size-fits-all business and rarely advised shopkeepers on alternatives. But while these gates may have given the owners a greater sense of security, they had other negative effects on the businesses in the entire commercial corridor, block, or neighborhood in the following ways: Solids gates do not allow police or fire personnel to look into a 134 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100251 shop to determine if anyone has entered such as a burglar or if there is a fire burning inside. They allow a thief who may have entered through the rear of vacant neighboring storefront or rooftop perfect cover while stealing inventory from the business. Solid gates prevent potential customers from window-shopping after hours. They also discourage other businesses from locating in the area for fear that the neighborhood is unsafe. They prevent interior lighting from illuminating the sidewalk, give the shop and the entire street a dark and foreboding feeling, and may actually deter customers from walking on the street. Solid gates also create an opportunity for unsightly graffiti that diminishes the attractiveness of the block and the community. 135 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100251 It was our conclusion that solid gates were actually counterproductive and that they created an unsafe, isolating, and desolate perception that only served as a template for graffiti. In addition, if a business is burglarized and the police responded, they would be unable to see a perpetrator inside. Many merchants were apprehensive about changing from solid gates to a more open grill, fearing an increase in burglaries or broken storefront windows, but there fears were unwarranted. There wasn't an increase in burglaries or broken windows as a result of merchants switching or installing more open security gates. In fact, in 1994, there were 270 burglaries reported in Center City; in 1995, the following year, burglaries declined to 220; and in 2009, to 117. The increased visibility gave shopkeepers the opportunity to highlight 136 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100251 their storefront window, promote their products and services, provide additional lighting onto the sidewalks, which, in turn, helped to animate the block. As a result of the more open security gate, requirement, merchants and the business associations were very happy with the overall change in the public environment. Lastly, if businesses are able to available themselves of any incentive programs to help them offset the costs for installing new security gates in order to be in compliance, they will be more inclined to make the improvements. These funds are critical to small businesses to help them offset costs for security improvements, especially in a challenging economy.

In conclusion, we have found that requiring the more open security gate has a positive overall impact on the commercial corridor and creates an attractive and safe business district. Thank you for the opportunity 137 6/9/10 - L&I - BILL 100251 to testify on behalf of this bill.

Thank you. And thank you for all the work that you do at the Center City District. Is there anyone else here to testify on this bill? (No response.)

Seeing none, we are going to recess for 30 seconds and go into our public meeting. (Short recess.) * * * 138 6/9/10 - L&I - PUBLIC MEETING

The Committee on Licenses and Inspections will now go into its public meeting. For the record, Bill No. 100313 is being held by the sponsor, so I will proceed with asking Councilwoman Blondell Reynolds-Brown for a motion on the amendment to Bill No. 100162.

Madam Chair, I move that Bill No. 100162 be amended. (Motion duly seconded.)

All in favor. Any opposition? (No opposition.) And a motion to move the bill, please.

Madam Chair, I move that Bill No. 100162, as amended, be reported out of committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended so as to permit first reading. 139 6/9/10 - L&I - PUBLIC MEETING (Motion duly seconded.)

All in favor? (None opposed.) Bill 100162, as amended, will be moved out of committee favorably, and the rules of Council will be suspended to allow for first reading at our next public session. The Chair recognizes Councilman Kelly for a motion on the amendment to Bill 090910.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I move that the amendments to Bill No. 090910 be adopted. (Motion duly seconded.)

I'd like to make a clarification there. I'm looking at a handwritten amendment to the holding period, which would change it from 60 days in the current amendment to 30 days.

Yes. 140 6/9/10 - L&I - PUBLIC MEETING

And so, it's that -- that's the only change from the amendments before everybody. Thank you, Councilman.

Yes. Thank you, Councilman. That is the only change from the previous changes that we made to this bill.

Can I get a second? (Motion duly seconded.) All in favor? (None opposed.) Councilman Kelly, a motion to move the bill.

Madam Chair, I move that Bill 090910, as amended, be approved be this council. And also, I request a suspension of the rules in order that this bill may be heard at the next session of City Council. (Motion duly seconded.)

All in favor? 141 6/9/10 - L&I - PUBLIC MEETING Any opposition? (No opposition.) Bill 090910, as amended, will be moved out of this committee with a favorable recommendation, and the rules of Council will be suspended to allow for first reading at our next public session. Councilman Green, can I have a motion for Bill No. 100251?

I move that Bill 100251 be reported from this committee with a suspension of the rules to allow for first reading at our next session of second.

Can I get a second? (Motion duly seconded.) Any opposition? (No opposition.) Bill No. 100251 will be moved out of the committee with a favorable recommendation and the rules of Council will be suspended to allow for first reading at our next public session. 142 6/9/10 - L&I - PUBLIC MEETING Councilman Greenlee, could I get a motion on the amendment to Bill 4 100267?

Thank you, Madam Chair. I move the adoption of the amendment to Bill No. 100267. (Motion duly seconded.)

All in favor? Any opposition? (No opposition.) Councilman Greenlee, can I get a motion on the bill?

Thank you, Madam Chair. I move that Bill 100261, as amended, be reported out of this committee with a favorable recommendation and that the rules of Council be suspended to allow for first reading at our next session of Council. (Motion duly seconded.)

All in favor? 143 6/9/10 - L&I - PUBLIC MEETING Any opposition? (No opposition.) Bill No. 100267, as amended, will be moved out of this committee with a favorable recommendation, and the Council rules will be suspended so as to allow first reading at our next public session. Councilwoman Reynolds-Brown, can I get a motion on Bill No. 100282.

Yes, Madam Chair. I move that Bill No. 100282 be reported out of committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended so as to permit first reading. (Motion duly seconded.)

All in favor? Any opposition? (No opposition. Seeing none, Bill 100282 will be out of this committee with a favorable recommendation and the rules of Council 144 6/9/10 - L&I - PUBLIC MEETING will be suspended to allow for first reading at our next public session. Councilman Green, can I get a motion on Bill No. 100308.

I move that 100308 be reported from this committee with a favorable recommendation and that the rules of Council be suspended to permit first reading at our next session of Council. (Motion duly seconded.)

All in favor? Any opposition? (No opposition.) Seeing none, Bill 100308 will be moved out of this committee with a favorable recommendation, and the rules of Council will be suspended so as to allow for first reading at our next public session This concludes the Committee on Licenses and Inspections. Thank you, everyone, for your patience and your 145 6/9/10 - L&I - PUBLIC MEETING time.

You're welcome. (Proceedings end at 11:48 a.m.) * * * 146 C E R T I F I C A T E I HEREBY CERTIFY that the proceedings of the City of Philadelphia Council Committee on Licenses and Inspections are contained fully and accurately in the stenographic notes taken by me on Wednesday, June 9, 2010, and that this is a true and correct statement of same. __________________________________ JOSEPHINE CARDILLO Registered Professional Reporter (The foregoing certification of this transcript does not apply to any reproduction of the same by any means, unless under the direct control and/or supervision of the certifying reporter.)