COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA COMMITTEE ON STREETS AND SERVICES - - - Room 400, City Hall Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Wednesday, January 25, 2006 10:25 a.m. - - - PRESENT: COUNCILMAN FRANK DiCICCO, CHAIRMAN COUNCILMAN JUAN RAMOS, VICE-CHAIRMAN COUNCILMAN DARRELL L. CLARKE COUNCILWOMAN DONNA REED MILLER COUNCILMAN MICHAEL A. NUTTER COUNCILMAN FRANK RIZZO BILLS 051140, 051201, 051202, 051234, 051145, 051106 and 051107 - - - V A R A L L O Incorporated Litigation Support Services Eleven Penn Center 1835 Market Street, Suite 600 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103 215.561.2220 215.567.2670 2 COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Good morning, everyone. I apologize for the delay. This is the Committee on Streets and Services. My name is Frank DiCicco. I'm the Chair of this Committee. The other members attending today are, to my left, Councilman Frank Rizzo, to my right is Councilman Darrell Clarke, to his right is Councilwoman Donna Reed Miller, and standing up doing an interview is Councilman Nutter, Michael Nutter. We do have a quorum. This is the public hearing on the Committee of Streets and Services, so we will now proceed and I will ask the Clerk to read the title of the first bill.
Bill No. 051140, an ordinance authorizing and directing the revision of lines and grades on a portion of City Plan Nos. 356 and 378 by striking from the City Plan the Industrial Highway from the Philadelphia-Delaware County 3 1/25/06 - STREETS - BILL 051140, ETC. Line to Island Avenue, and by reserving and placing on the City Plan a certain right-of-way within the bed of the Industrial Highway for drainage purposes, water main purposes, gas main purposes and public utility purposes, if needed, under certain terms and conditions. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Good morning. Please identify yourself for the record and proceed with your testimony.
Good morning, Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee. My name is Frank Morelli, Survey Bureau Manager of the Department of Streets, and the Department of Streets would like to offer the following testimony on Bill No. 051140. This is an administrative ordinance requested by Mr. Charles Isdell, Director of Aviation, Philadelphia International Airport, Terminal E, Philadelphia, PA 19153. The purpose of this ordinance 4 1/25/06 - STREETS - BILL 051140, ETC. is to strike Industrial Highway from the Philadelphia-Delaware County Line to Island Avenue from the City Plan for the Airport's Runway 17-35 Extension Project. This ordinance is supported by the Department of Streets and is recommended to your Committee for favorable action.
Good morning, Mr. Chairman, members of the Streets and Services Committee. My name is Martin Soffer. I'm the Director of the Development Planning Division and I'm here to testify on behalf of the City Planning Commission. The purpose of this ordinance 18 is to strike from the City Plan the Industrial Highway, also known as State Route 291, to facilitate an expansion of an existing Runway 17-35 at the Philadelphia International Airport. This proposed project would assure maximum public safety. Also, all of the environmental impacts under the National 5 1/25/06 - STREETS - BILL 051140, ETC. Environmental Policy Act have been addressed. The Planning Commission has reviewed and approved this action on August 18, 2005. Therefore, the Planning Commission recommends that Bill No. 8 051140 be approved. Thank you. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Thank you. Thank you for your testimony. Any questions for these witnesses from the Committee? The Chair recognizes Councilmember Clarke.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Real briefly, 291, is that the road that runs parallel to I-95?
It's kind of an access road when you want to return to the Airport?
You would 6 1/25/06 - STREETS - BILL 051140, ETC. be striking what portion of that?
From the Delaware County line to Island Avenue, and the existing traffic flow would then be diverted to Bartram Avenue and then they would come out onto Island Avenue at that point.
So it would not affect the portion adjacent to the actual Airport, the parking garage along that route? You know where the return road is?
Yes. That section of Industrial Highway, or 291, that's the section that we're speaking of that would be stricken from the City Plan.
Bartram Avenue. And there would be improvements done to Bartram Avenue to handle the traffic.
Would that 7 1/25/06 - STREETS - BILL 051140, ETC. have any effect on any commercial or residential properties in terms of the increased traffic?
Along Bartram? Okay. All right. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Any other questions? (No response.) COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Let the record reflect that the Vice-Chair of the Streets and Services Committee, Councilmember Juan Ramos, is in attendance as well. I would ask the Clerk to read the title of the next bill. I'm sorry. I apologize. Anyone else here who wishes to testify for or against this bill? Gentlemen, I apologize. Good morning. Please identify yourself for 8 1/25/06 - STREETS - BILL 051140, ETC. the record and proceed with your testimony.
Yes. Good morning, Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee for Streets and Services. I'm Calvin Davenger, Deputy Director of Aviation for the City of Philadelphia, responsible for planning and environmental stewardship at the Airport, and I am pleased to submit this testimony in support of Bill No. 051140. The Division of Aviation has updated its Master Plan to analyze and study needs relative to operations and increases in passenger demand at the Philadelphia International Airport. The main goal of the Master Plan was to determine what was causing aircraft delays at the Airport. In 2004, the Airport was ranked the fourth most delayed airport in the nation. Since then, operations have been increasing and aircraft types being utilized are evolving. These factors 9 1/25/06 - STREETS - BILL 051140, ETC. continue to aggravate the problem with delays. The Master Plan looked at existing passenger and aircraft operation levels as well as forecasts for future use, and measured both against the existing capacity of the facilities to handle these activities. This information was reviewed and formally approved by the Federal Aviation Administration, or the FAA, in February 2004. The analysis indicated that by 2010 delays would increase from 10 minutes per operation to almost 19 minutes. The FAA considers an airport with annualized average delays of more than five minutes to be congested. As part of its analysis, the FAA identified PHL as an airport that contributes to delays throughout the national air space system. The delays at PHL are aggravated by the inadequacies of the existing airfield configuration, which hamper the efficient flow of 10 1/25/06 - STREETS - BILL 051140, ETC. aircraft operations in all weather conditions. The FAA determined that the project proposed by the City to remedy these problems would require the Airport to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement, or EIS, under the National Environmental Policy Act, NEPA. The EIS reviewed the impact of the Runway 17-35 Extension Project on all effected resources. The FAA issued its record of decision under NEPA for the Runway 17-35 Extension Project in April 2005 in favor of the extension. This extension is intended to reduce the aforementioned aircraft operational delay in the short term. The Airport expects construction of the extension to Runway 17-35 to be completed by December 2007. Bill No. 051140 is essential to completion of the 640-foot northern extension of Runway 17. The project would require relocation of the runway safety areas, connecting taxiways, 11 1/25/06 - STREETS - BILL 051140, ETC. navigational aids and lights, as well as associated utility services to the land occupied by State Route 291. Partial demolition of State Route 291 at the Runway extension work area would 7 require vehicular traffic to be 8 redirected onto Bartram Avenue between 9 Industrial Highway and Island Avenue. 10 This segment shall be reassigned as State 11 Route 291 and will experience nominal 12 increases in traffic as vehicles are 13 diverted from existing State Route 291. 14 The FAA's EIS document contains letters 15 from PennDOT District 6 and the City of 16 Philadelphia Street's Department in 17 support of the action. The Division of Aviation held extensive meetings with the Eastwick community, which may be impacted by the closure of State Route 291 contemplated herein. I am pleased to advise that the Eastwick Project Area Committee issued a letter of support of Bill No. 051140 on December 22, 2005. 12 1/25/06 - STREETS - BILL 051140, ETC. The Runway 17-35 Extension Project will benefit the region through delay savings to travelers of $38 million per year, creation of 1,200 project-related jobs and airline delay reductions equating to 12,000 hours per year and $24 million per year upon completion.
The Eastwick community will benefit from improvements to key Bartram Avenue intersections, reductions in vehicle emissions and the possible growth in Airport employment of local residents. In order to reduce delays at the Airport and maintain the tight construction schedule for the runway extension, I urge the Committee to approve the partial closure of State Route 291. I greatly appreciate the opportunity to speak with you today in support of Bill No. 051140. I will be happy to answer any questions you may have. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Thank you. 13 1/25/06 - STREETS - BILL 051140, ETC. Thank you for your testimony. Any questions for this witness from the Committee? ) COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Is there anyone else here who wishes to testify for or against this bill? ) COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Thank you, gentlemen. And seeing none, I would ask the Clerk to read the title of the next bill.
Bill No. 051201, an ordinance authorizing and directing the revision of lines and grades on a portion of City Plan No. 298 by extending Almatt Place approximately 105 feet, placing the extension of Almatt Place and a new cul-de-sac at the resultant dead-end turnaround, and striking and vacating those portions of the former cul-de-sac of Almatt Place lying outside the lines of the newly extended Almatt Place, under certain terms and conditions, including 14 1/25/06 - STREETS - BILL 051140, ETC. the dedication to the City, free and clear of all encumbrances, of the bed of Almatt Place extended.
Good morning, Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee. My name is Frank Morelli, Survey Bureau Manager of the Department of Streets, and the Department of Streets would like to offer the following testimony on Bill No. 051201. This is not an administrative ordinance, but an ordinance requested by Mr. Jothy Varughese, TJ Grace Enterprises, 108 Almatt Place, Philadelphia, PA 19115. The purpose of this ordinance 18 is to extend the existing Almatt Place to subdivide the lot at 108 Almatt Place for the construction of four detached single-family dwellings. This ordinance is supported by the Department of Streets and is recommended to your Committee for favorable action. 15 1/25/06 - STREETS - BILL 051140, ETC. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Good morning again.
Good morning, Mr. Chairman, members of the Streets and Services Committee. My name is Martin Soffer, Director, Development Planning Division, and I'm here to testify on behalf of the City Planning Commission. The purpose of this ordinance 11 is to extend Almatt Place to allow for the construction of four new single-family detached dwellings. The Planning Commission has reviewed and approved a subdivision plat for this development on August the 18th, 2005. Therefore, the Planning Commission recommends that Bill No. 051201 be approved. Thank you. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Thank you. Any questions for these witnesses from the Committee? (No response.) COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Is there 16 1/25/06 - STREETS - BILL 051140, ETC. anyone else here who wishes to testify for or against this bill? (No response.) COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Seeing none, I will ask the Clerk to read the title of the next bill.
Bill No. 051202, an ordinance authorizing the paving of the extension of Almatt Place, under certain terms and conditions.
Good morning, Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee. My name is Frank Morelli, Survey Bureau Manager of the Department of Streets, and the Department of Streets would like to offer the following testimony on Bill No. 18 051202. This is not an administrative ordinance, but an ordinance requested by Ms. Jothy Varughese, TJ Grace Enterprises, 108 Almatt Place, Philadelphia, PA 19115. The purpose of this ordinance 25 is to pave the extension of Almatt Place 17 1/25/06 - STREETS - BILL 051140, ETC. to subdivide the lot at 108 Almatt Place for the construction of four single-family dwellings. This ordinance is supported by the Department of Streets and is recommended to your Committee for favorable action. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Thank you. Any questions for this witness from the Committee? (No response.) COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Anyone else here who wishes to testify for or against this bill? (No response.) COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Seeing none, I will ask the Clerk to read the title of the next bill.
Bill No. 051234, an ordinance authorizing the revision of lines and grades on a portion of City Plan No. 266 by striking from the City Plan and vacating Jefferson Street and Heston Street, each from 52nd Street to 18 1/25/06 - STREETS - BILL 051140, ETC. Paxon Street; by striking from the City Plan and vacating Paxon Street from Jefferson Street to Columbia Avenue; and by reserving and placing on the City Plan rights-of-way for gas main purposes, water main purposes and drainage purposes within the beds of the streets being stricken by this ordinance, if necessary, all under certain terms and conditions.
Good morning, Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee. My name is Frank Morelli, Survey Bureau Manager of the Department of Streets, and the Department of Streets would like to offer the following testimony on Bill No. 051234. This is not an administrative ordinance, but an ordinance requested by Mr. Brian Conlon, Project Manager, Langan Engineering and Environmental Services, 30 South 17th Street, Suite 1500, Philadelphia, PA 19103, who represents Gold West Limited Partnership. The purpose of this ordinance 19 1/25/06 - STREETS - BILL 051140, ETC. is to strike and vacate these streets from the City Plan for the construction of a retail shopping center. This ordinance is supported by the Department of Streets and is recommended to your Committee for favorable action. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Thank you.
Good morning, Mr. Chairman and members of the Streets and Services Committee. My name is Martin Soffer, Director of Development Planning Division, and I'm here to testify on behalf of the City Planning Commission. The purpose of this ordinance 17 is to strike from the City Plan three streets in the West Parkside neighborhood to allow for the consolidation of parcels for the construction of a 300,000-square-foot shopping center; namely, the Park West Town Center. The Planning Commission has reviewed and approved the redevelopment area plan for the proposed shopping 20 1/25/06 - STREETS - BILL 051140, ETC. center on March 10, 2005. Therefore, the Planning Commission recommends that Bill 4 No. 051234 be approved. Thank you. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman Nutter.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. First, I certainly want to thank the City departments who have been involved in this, and while it may not sound like the most riveting bill that's come before the Streets and Services Committee, it is essential to what is one of the most exciting developments to take place in the West Philadelphia area, and without this kind of ordinance, the proposed shopping center and retail complex in West Parkside would not be possible. So first I want to say thank you for your work both at the Survey Bureau and at the Planning Commission, as 21 1/25/06 - STREETS - BILL 051140, ETC. well as recognize the efforts of the Goldenberg Group, the West Philadelphia Financial Services Institution and PIDC, all of whom are represented here today. They are helping to make history in West Philadelphia, and I appreciate all of the efforts of everyone involved. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Thank you. Any other questions for these witnesses from the Committee? (No response.) COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Is there anyone else here who wishes to testify for or against this bill? (No response.) COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Seeing none, I will ask the Clerk to read the title of the next bill.
Bill No. 051145, an ordinance regulating the movement of traffic on Chestnut Street; in particular, authorizing right turns to be 22 1/25/06 - STREETS - BILL 051140, ETC. made from Chestnut Street at certain intersections in Center City Philadelphia.
Good morning, Chairman and Committee members. My name is Mark Washington, and I'm the District 2 Traffic Engineer. I'm here to testify on Bill No. 051145. The Streets Department has no 11 objections to removing the No Right Turn prohibitions currently posted at 15th and Chestnut Streets and at 17th and Chestnut Streets. Work orders have been issued and we expect the restrictions to be removed by February 8, 2006. Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today. I will be happy to answer any questions you may have at this time. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilmember Clarke.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 23 1/25/06 - STREETS - BILL 051140, ETC. One brief question. As it relates to this portion of Chestnut Street being converted to right turns, how are we going to handle the bus lanes on this section of Chestnut Street that is a dedicated bus lane? Will there be a merge into that lane to allow right turns?
Well, normally if you have a street that has a dedicated bus lane, an example would be Walnut Street, you wouldn't be allowed to -- if you're a passenger car or a non-bus vehicle, you'll be allowed to use the bus lane if you're going to make the right turn at the next intersection.
So is it throughout the particular block you can merge into the right lane and make that right turn?
As long as you're making the right turn. All right. 24 1/25/06 - STREETS - BILL 051140, ETC. I know earlier there were some concerns about federal money that was allocated for this particular project, the Chestnut Street relocation. There were some concerns about us not adhering to the federal regs as it related to having a dedicated lane; therefore, no right turns. Have we gotten beyond that hurdle?
I was told by my boss yesterday, Charles Denny, that we had lost fundings from the Federal Transit because we're lifting the ban. So we have already lost --
All right. Thank you. 25 1/25/06 - STREETS - BILL 051140, ETC. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Councilwoman Miller.
Well, part of my question was just answered in your answer. I was just wondering why we all the sudden restricted right turns on Chestnut Street. But it was due to federal funding?
The original scope of the Chestnut Street Transit Project that was conducted in the mid '90s was to, yes, bring vehicles back to Chestnut Street but to make it more pedestrian friendly for folks who are walking along Chestnut Street.
So that the ability to make a right turn was eliminated because of pedestrian --
Yes. Pretty much what happened was, I believe the Federal Transit Administration and the Federal Highway Administration, they wanted us to make the street a pedestrian-friendly street, and most of 1/25/06 - STREETS - BILL 051140, ETC. the cost of the project came from federal monies, and as a condition of being able to have the federal pay a chunk for this project, we had to make the street pedestrian friendly.
I just don't understand the difference, but I don't need you to explain it.
Yes. If you're a driver, you're on the left-hand side, so you have a better low-bed visibility if you turn from the left. Where the right, you kind of have -- it's 27 1/25/06 - STREETS - BILL 051140, ETC. not much as far as visibility difference, but I think their argument was, the driver is on the left-hand side of the car, so you're able to easily make a left turn versus making a right turn.
I was on Chestnut Street one day needing to make a right turn and I could not believe that I couldn't make a right turn. I had to just keep driving down. But where there's a will, there's a way, and that's all I'll say about that one. But thank you.
Okay. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Thank you. Any other questions for this witness from the Committee? (No response.) COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Is there anyone else here who wishes to testify for or against the bill? (No response.) COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Seeing none, I will ask the Clerk to read the 28 1/25/06 - STREETS - BILL 051140, ETC. title of the next bill.
Bill No. 051106, an ordinance amending Title of The 5 Philadelphia Code, entitled "Traffic 6 Code," to provide for conditions on 7 enforcement of prohibitions on parking a 8 vehicle if the vehicle is not registered 9 or not displaying a valid registration 10 plate; all under certain terms and 11 conditions. 12 COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: There are no witnesses, I understand, from the Parking Authority.
Yes. There's no need. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: So I will ask Councilman Rizzo if he has any comments.
I was distracted. This is the red light camera or the parking sticker?
Okay. And the Parking Authority, as we all know, 29 1/25/06 - STREETS - BILL 051140, ETC. has agreed on a moratorium, and I'll read it so it's clear. "This bill is only to remove the presumption that a vehicle lacking a registration sticker is not validly registered. The ticketing agency must verify that the vehicle is not validly registered before a ticket can be issued. Any unregistered vehicles parked on the City streets will be cited under the current legislation." You recollect that many of our constituents were being given tickets because they were not applying the sticker to the license plate and they were keeping it in the vehicle. The Parking Authority decided to start enforcing that and they were giving the hundred-dollar ticket to a person that the vehicle was actually registered but not displaying the sticker. So the Parking Authority agreed that that was not a good situation, because they did not have the technology like the Police Department to be able to 30 1/25/06 - STREETS - BILL 051140, ETC. verify that that vehicle was unregistered. So all we're taking away is the presumption because it's not being displayed that the vehicle is not registered. If the Parking Authority some day has the ability to verify like a police officer can, then they would be able to enforce that, but the point is, that many people were being given tickets that did not display the ticket but their vehicle was registered, and this is just to take that presumption away. And the Parking Authority has agreed to stop writing that ticket but asked me please to take that presumption away so they have a clear understanding of the regulation. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Councilman Clarke.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Is the Parking Authority seeking the ability to verify 31 1/25/06 - STREETS - BILL 051140, ETC. registration?
They have not indicated that they want to get into that business. I think that they agreed with the criticisms that this was a police authority, but who knows if some day they would pursue and get the ability to physically run the license plate and verify whether or not it is registered or unregistered. At this moment, it does not appear that they're pursuing that, but who knows what could happen in the future.
Is it your understanding that if in fact they determine that they needed to have the ability to do that, they would have to go through City Council or could they just do it through the state?
Being a state agency, I would assume that if they wanted to do that, they could at the state level. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: I'm not 32 1/25/06 - STREETS - BILL 051140, ETC. clear on that either. I don't think they can do it just because the state gave them the authority. I think we would need to enact the legislation. What they would need is the authority to be able to ticket at that level. I think we would still be part of that process. I'm not clear on that.
The information that I have is that they could if they pursued it. I don't believe that they would have to come to Council, because, again, the ability for them to do that. But I can tell you this: I had that conversation with the Executive Director and I don't really think they want to be in that business, but, again, who knows. They could eventually want to get back at it. And I think that if they had to come to Council, that would be a good thing, but I'm not sure that they would have to.
I'm just a little concerned about the Parking 33 1/25/06 - STREETS - BILL 051140, ETC. Authority's ever-increasing powers. If in fact they're interested in doing this, this is now taking away powers that are currently given to the Philadelphia Police Department, and I'm a little concerned about that.
Councilman Clarke, this issue here is to try to fix a problem that exists right now. I think I learned from you --
And I appreciate the fact that you jumped on that one.
I think you used a line on me a few weeks ago, This is the issue that's in front of me today. I don't know about the future.
Right. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Thank you, gentlemen. Any other questions for these witnesses? 34 1/25/06 - STREETS - BILL 051140, ETC. (No response.) COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Is there anyone else here who wishes to testify for or against the bill? (No response.) COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Seeing none, I will ask the Clerk to read the title of the next bill.
Bill No. 051107, an ordinance amending Chapter 12-3000 of The Philadelphia Code, entitled "Use of an Automated Red Light Enforcement System to Prevent Red Light Violations," by amending limitations on the use of information collected under the red light enforcement system, all under certain terms and conditions.
Thank you. Mr. Chairman, can I speak on this? COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Councilman Rizzo.
One of the issues that has arisen and, again, the state legislature is presently working on 35 1/25/06 - STREETS - BILL 051140, ETC. legislation and we were asked by the Parking Authority to try to be consistent with the state legislation, and this particular bill is before us today and I'll read exactly what the situation is. "In light of concerns previously expressed over the tension between public safety and personal privacy, it is important to be able to review the red light camera data." What we were trying to do here, the Parking Authority could not legally release data on the performance of the red light camera program, so the state legislature is right now working on legislation, and this is basically paralleling the state legislature, where if there is a request from a Councilmember that has a red light camera in their district to see how many tickets are written, to see how many accidents occur, that the Parking Authority right now is not legally allowed to release that information. 36 1/25/06 - STREETS - BILL 051140, ETC. So what this will do when the state legislation -- this alone will not allow that information to be released. It isn't about who or what. It is about crashes. It is about the number of violations. And what basically motivated this is that the media asked for how many red light runners there were at a particular location and the Parking Authority wasn't able legally to do that. And I could understand, and I asked why, and they said because the law presently as it's written does not allow them to release that information. So again the Parking Authority came to me and said, since this red light camera issue was something that I was involved with, asked me if I can work with the state legislature and get this legislation adopted that would eventually allow them if a member of Council asked or the media asked about the number of violations, et cetera, crashes at a particular intersection. 37 1/25/06 - STREETS - BILL 051140, ETC.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Councilman, on this particular bill calling for the release of certain information, what level of specificity will that information be? Will it talk about the tag numbers of an individual or just simply give raw numbers?
Is that spelled out anywhere in the legislation or any regulatory process?
What I've been told, that ours is mirroring the state legislation. I'm not sure it specifically tells, but in conversations, it is strictly statistics. There is no 23 license plate information, there is no 24 who did the violation. It is that from December 1st to December 31st, 55 tickets 38 1/25/06 - STREETS - BILL 051140, ETC. were written going northbound on the Roosevelt Boulevard at Grant, east/west. No other information. What happened, I think Anthony Twyman from the Inquirer just wanted to get a feel for a story on what the effect of the traffic cameras had on that particular intersection and he simply asked a question how many tickets were written there, and they wouldn't release the information. As you can imagine, that caused a little bit of tension, because just how many tickets is --
I don't think I necessarily have a problem with the amount of tickets or the amount of violations. My concern is potentially if the tag numbers of individuals are given out, and I think that's getting a little --
Definitely part of the legislation says that that is not the case. I'll read this.
"The restrictions set forth in this paragraph are intended to protect the privacy of individuals and not refer to information relating to the specific driver and vehicle." So there will be none of that information released, and that's in the legislation.
Thanks for bringing that up. That's important. So all this is is to -- it's tough to have a program and to move forward if you don't know how it's performing, and they will not release the information until they're allowed to.
Thank you. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Any other questions for these two witnesses again? (No response.) COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Is there 40 1/25/06 - STREETS - BILL 051140, ETC. anyone else here who wishes to testify for or against the bill? (No response.) COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Seeing none, this concludes the public hearing on the Committee of Streets and Services. We will now go into the public meeting. I'll ask Councilman Ramos to please make a motion on the first bill.
I move that Bill 051140 be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation. I further move that the rules of Council be suspended to permit first reading of this bill at our next Council meeting. (Duly seconded.) COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: It has been properly moved and seconded that Bill No. 051140 be reported out of this Committee with a favorable recommendation and that the rules of Council be suspended so as to permit first reading at our next Council session. All those in favor? 41 1/25/06 - STREETS - BILL 051140, ETC. (Aye.) COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Those opposed? (No response.) COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: The ayes have it. The bill is approved. Councilman Ramos.
I move that Bill No. 051201 be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation. I further move that the rules of Council be suspended to permit first reading of this bill at our next Council meeting. (Duly seconded.) COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: It has been properly moved and seconded that Bill No. 051201 be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation and that the rules of Council be suspended so as to permit first reading at our next session. All those in favor signify by saying aye. 42 1/25/06 - STREETS - BILL 051140, ETC. (Aye.) COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Those opposed? (No response.) COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: The ayes have it. The bill is approved. Councilman Ramos.
I move that Bill No. 051202 be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended to permit first reading of this bill at our next Council meeting. (Duly seconded.) COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: It has been properly moved and seconded that Bill No. 051202 be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation and that the rules of Council be suspended so as to permit first reading at our next session. All those in favor signify by saying aye. 43 1/25/06 - STREETS - BILL 051140, ETC. (Aye.) COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Those opposed? (No response.) COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: The bill 7 is approved. Councilman Ramos.
I move that Bill No. 051234 be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council suspended to permit first reading of this bill at our next Council meeting. (Duly seconded.) COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: It has been properly moved and seconded that Bill No. 051234 be reported out of this Committee with a favorable recommendation and that the rules of Council be suspended. All those in favor signify by saying aye. (Aye.) COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Those 44 1/25/06 - STREETS - BILL 051140, ETC. opposed? (No response.) COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: The bill 5 is approved. Councilman Ramos.
I move that Bill No. 051145 be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended to permit first reading of this bill at our next Council meeting. (Duly seconded.) COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: It has been properly moved and seconded that Bill No. 051145 be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation and that the rules of Council be suspended. All those in favor signify by saying aye. (Aye.) COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Those opposed? 45 1/25/06 - STREETS - BILL 051140, ETC. (No response.) COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: The bill 4 is approved. Councilman Ramos.
I move that Bill No. 051106 be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation. I further move that the rules of Council be suspended to permit first reading of this bill at our next Council meeting. (Duly seconded.) COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: It has been properly moved and seconded that Bill No. 051106 be reported out of this Committee with a favorable recommendation and that the rules of Council be suspended. All those in favor signify by saying aye. (Aye.) COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Those opposed? (No response.) 46 1/25/06 - STREETS - BILL 051140, ETC. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: The bill 3 is approved. Councilman Ramos.
I move that Bill No. 051107 be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended to permit first reading of this bill at our next Council meeting. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: It has been properly moved and seconded that Bill No. 051107 be reported out of this Committee with a favorable recommendation and that the rules of Council be suspended. All those in favor signify by saying aye. (Aye.) COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Those opposed? (No response.) COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: The bill 25 is approved. 47 1/25/06 - STREETS - BILL 051140, ETC. This concludes the Committee on Streets and Services. I thank all Committee members and all those in attendance today. Thank you. (Committee on Streets and Services adjourned at 11:00 a.m.) - - - 48 CERTIFICATE I HEREBY CERTIFY that the proceedings, evidence and objections are contained fully and accurately in the stenographic notes taken by me upon the foregoing matter on January 25, 2006, and that this is a true and correct transcript of same. ______________________________ MICHELE L. MURPHY RPR-Notary Public (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.)