Now, these court clerks transform the judges' order into actuality. So my court clerks are now coding all results in realtime. Prior to this new computer system, I can assign one clerk to two courtrooms. I can't do that any longer. We don't have enough court clerks. We need 12 more court clerks. With the new system in place, we now collect more money in the fines in courts and bail. The Administration is cutting my budget by two and a half percent, which means four jobs. They are taking me from one eighteen to one 14. That's unreal. 82 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC. While we need new clerks and I'm asking, I'm asking, we need $430,260, I think that's a small amount due to the fact that if we do not staff these courtrooms properly, then what will happen, the City will get suits, because people are being incarcerated longer than their time because we are not doing the proper paperwork. So I'm asking this Council, please help me to obtain new 12 clerks. I believe we have a folder that each of you have which gives you a breakdown and gives you a chart of just what's going on, and as you can see, the reality of it is this is what each clerk do on a given day. So if you can imagine if one clerk is out, two clerks are out, maybe vacation, sick time, this work needs to be done, and if it's not done in realtime, the person will stay longer, and that will cause a suit to the City and I'm sure it will exceed more than $430,000. 83 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC. Thank you very much, and I'll entertain any questions.
Thank you. Ms. Miller, the budget detail that you have sent us reflects an increase of $346,329, not the 430,000 as you mentioned in your testimony. Which is the correct figure?
We're asking for $430,260, and that's for, of course -- that would be personnel services, materials, supplies, as well as 12 new clerks.
But if you look at your budget detail, you have 346,329.
Good morning. My name is Tom Christmann, Budget Officer for the Office of the Clerk of Quarter Sessions. The figure that you're 84 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC. referring to, Councilwoman Verna -- or President Verna, is the figure that when we take the amount that we would need in personal services for Fiscal 2008 and compare it to the estimated obligations for Fiscal 2007, that's where the difference lies. In terms of the reduction that we've been asked to accept for next year and place it together with what our needs are, we really are in need in the Class 100 area of $430,260.
Tell us what amount do you need in Class 100 you're asking for.
I think you'd better look at what you submitted.
I'm sorry for the confusion. The 346,329 that you see, that takes into account what we reasonably expect to happen each year in terms of turnover reduction and delays in filling positions. The 430,260 is the legitimate figure for the court clerks 12 that we are in need of. If we were to not expect any delays in filling positions or turnover reduction, then we would be talking a different figure than that, but we built into this figure for our request what we consider a reasonable amount for those two categories. And that's reflected on our budget in the later portion of the forms.
And with the additional funding that City Council suggested last year for the Clerk of Quarter Sessions, were you able to use any of that money? 86 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC.
We are presently staffed at the full level of 118 employees right now. We just had that accomplished within the last three to four weeks, but --
We've had significant delays throughout the course of this fiscal year from July to the present, and that's typically what happens in the course of a year and that's what was built into our --
So that we fully understand, Finance eliminated the increase that Council gave you last year, for the most part?
-- 87 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC. gave last year; is that correct?
So you were able to spend only -- how much of the $150,000?
The year isn't finished, but we're intending to spend as much as we can with 118 employees that we have. I don't have the figures.
You're not answering my questions, but I'm going to proceed. I just want to make the record eminently clear. Are you asking for an additional $346,000?
That would be for 12 additional court clerks, taking into account what we consider reasonable figures for the two categories that I mentioned earlier.
Ms. Miller, did you request this 88 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC. additional funding from Finance?
That was the package that was submitted. I believe it was late. And this is for the new 6 employees. I believe it was late coming 7 in. 8 Is that correct, Robin? 9
Oh, that helps, Vivian. Ms. Reed, would you approach the table, please. Ms. Reed, I see that the Finance Department not only eliminated Council increases for '07 but they also gave them a reduction of the 2.5. Can you explain how you arrived at the $4,721,000 amount the Administration proposed for the Clerk of Quarter Sessions for FY08? 89 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC.
Dianne Reed, Budget Director. Yes, ma'am. The budget includes the four percent raise, which adds $188.8 thousand to the budget. We also restored 50,000 that was taken out of Class 100 at the Clerk of Quarter Sessions' request and put into equipment so that they could purchase computers. We put that money back. We took the two and a half percent reduction in Class 100 of 122.7 thousand and we eliminated the $150,000 Council increase. So that the Class 100 budget is 4 million 635 and the Class 200 is 28,700 -- sorry. I am having trouble reading. I did call the Public Property Commissioner about replacing light bulbs today, because there's about 20 out. I'll keep going here. And then Class 300/400 is 57,300. And so that adds up to the 4,721,362.
90 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC. Ms. Reed, is it the opinion of the Administration that the Clerk of Quarter Sessions does not need any additional employees to accomplish its mandated, mandated duties, and if so, I'd like to know how you arrived at that conclusion.
We don't have budget detail from the Clerk of Quarter Sessions, so I can't quite tell you anything based on knowing that, nor did we receive, as the Clerk reported, a justification request. So other than what is stated in the testimony, I don't have any knowledge about what the human resource requirement would be of the office based on their duties with CPCMS. We could -- there is an opportunity to check with some other officials within City government to see if they have an assessment from a third party's opinion additional positions are needed. I cannot say that at this time, but so far, based on the history of the office and the number of people they manage to keep 91 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC. on staff and they do have high turnover, we did not think that putting these reductions in place was unreasonable.
Well, they must have a high turnover if you can't take a sick day off if you're sick because the courtroom is not going to be manned. People can't go on vacation. I mean, if that's a daily workload and if they don't have enough help, who is going to do that work?
Well, one of the things that's true is that they do have the new case management system in place, which will relieve them a lot of the clerical obligations that were being done manually in the past. A lot more is automated, and as is the case every place --
But how about the new courtrooms and the new judges that are coming on board?
I have no knowledge 92 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC. of six new judges coming on board.
Ms. Reed, I am strongly urging you to get together with Ms. Miller. We go through this every year. Get together with Ms. Miller, go over her budget with a fine-tooth comb and then come back to us before the budget hearings are over.
When Ms. Reed was testifying, I saw Ms. Jones certainly shaking her head on those 93 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC. facts. Even with the computer enhancements, improvements, I assume there's still a lot of manual paperwork you have to do. How much has changed by the computer, would you say?
With our new case management system for our clerks, it has changed tremendously. We were able to put two clerks in a room. We could have one clerk man two courtrooms at one time. But now we have the case management system, that means at the end of the day, at the close of every file after she finishes writing it out, she has to enter that information into the computer system before the close of the day. So you can't have two people -- one person manning two rooms at that particular time. One person has to do that. So their day has grown. They were able to get out at 5:00. Most of our clerks are working overtime until 7, 8 o'clock at night to complete that, because you're working with -- everybody 94 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC. is working on the system. The server is slow, so it has just increased the volume. It has increased the time that it would take to complete each one of these particular files. So it hasn't decreased it. It's definitely increased it.
So in your opinion, the computer system, it just in some ways gives people a little more work?
A lot more work. What happens is, we've had to rearrange our entire department and take -- because what's happening is, they're actually entering in the cost and fines, which is going to help the state receive their money at a quicker time, and we've had to create a quality control. So we've had to use employees in multi different ways in order to do that. So, yes.
And, Ms. Miller, I know you said that there was certainly the fear that if you don't 95 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC. get these additional people, there will be people kept longer in jail. Has that happened yet? I mean, have you experienced that yet or --
Well, not with the new system so far it hasn't. But with new judges being elected -- I believe I gave you the numbers.
And I gave you the amount of clerks, and there's no way it matches at all. And, in fact, we did a questionnaire, and all of the judges -- I mean, just to try to get a sense of what's going on with the new system and their feel, and each and every one asked, Please get me a clerk in my room.
And I would certainly echo what the Council President says. Working this out, in the end it saves money probably.
If your prognosis is correct, which it sounds 96 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC. like it certainly could be, the City will lose more money in legal problems than they're saving right now. So I keep repeating I'm not a numbers person, but that seems to just make sense to me. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Madam President.
Thank you, Madam President. I certainly want to associate myself with your comments. We do go through this every year, and we really -- it's very, very unfair that people remain incarcerated because their paperwork can't be processed. And we do want our Clerk of Quarter Sessions funded at the appropriate amount, and so I agree with your comments and certainly urge Ms. Reed and whomever else is concerned to try to get this issue worked out.
All right. Ms. Reed, I suggest that before the end of the day you meet with the 97 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC. Clerk of Quarter Sessions and get back to us, please. Are you there?
Dianne Reed, Budget Director. Council President, I'll see if we can get that meeting set up today.
Please do. Our next department to testify -- thank you, Ms. Miller. I'm sorry. Are there any other questions from members of the Committee of Ms. Miller? Yes, there is. Councilwoman Miller.
Thank you, Madam President. I have one quick question. Would a laptop help in the courtrooms? That way, you wouldn't have to manually write it and then go back.
They have the computers in the courtroom, and if you remember in my testimony, I said they are 98 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC. doing coding directly into the system. What happens is the system goes down. And any time people work with computers, they know what happens. And quite naturally, work still has to go on. So, therefore, they're doing the data. They're doing it manually. But the problem is, it's not enough -- it's not so much the computer. It's not enough people to go around to all the courtrooms.
Well, I understand that. I was just referring to Robin's testimony, that you have to manually write and then go back to the office and put it in and that's what's causing overtime.
They actually do it in the courtroom. They don't take it back. They have to stay in that courtroom and process it within that courtroom. So I don't think the laptops 99 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC. is an issue. The computer part is not an issue.
Any other questions or comments of Ms. Miller? (No response.)
And Ms. Reed will be in touch with you, Ms. Miller. Please make sure that you meet with her so that we could try to be of assistance, and get back to us as soon as possible.
We will now hear from the Register of Wills. 100 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC. Good morning. Welcome.
Is it afternoon? Time goes by when you're having fun. Mr. Donatucci, may I ask that you abbreviate your testimony. We will give the stenographer your testimony and it will be transcribed in full.
Fine. Thank you for your help in our request. I'll see you next year. Very brief, and thank you. First of all, I would like to make a statement. I want to thank all my City colleagues, especially the incumbent City Councilpeople, for their help in helping us make our computerization -- the start of the computerization of our office a true fact, and I thank you. And I see some of my colleagues sitting here. And especially Bill. He was very helpful a couple meetings I had, and I'd like to acknowledge especially Jannie and -- 101 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC. well, everybody, Juan. I don't want to get in trouble. 8 million. The Administration -- basically the difference is $366,486 of what our request is. The only thing that we're in agreement is, Council President, is the amount that we owe in Class 800 that we have to pay back. It's the only figure that we agree on. I'm not here today asking for any additional employees. Many of you in this room know since I've been coming here that my budget personnel-wise has not grown in this area of Class 100. It's basically that we're being mandated more and more by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court and the Orphans Court to do additional duties. And as earlier testimony from my colleague, Vivian Miller, you do have additional work, believe it or not, when you do have 102 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC. computerization. One of the things we implemented -- and we are ready. By the end of this fiscal year, we'll bring in over $100,000 in additional fees to the City just in one area alone, which we're charging an access fee for every estate that's raised in our office, but we're also improving our turnaround time. A year ago it would take approximately a little bit over a week to a week and a half from when you came in to get the actual final product, what we will call a short certificate or letters of administration. Now we're boasting and very proud -- I don't think there's any other office across the Commonwealth that would turn -- our turnaround now is three days. The Bar is elated. The public is elated. Everything is being done by computerization. But you're only as good as the people putting the information in. So we're not asking for any additional monies in the sense of our 103 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC. Class 100. As you know, all City employees will be enjoying a four percent raise, which is approximately 120-some thousand dollars of that difference, and I guess the Administration is cutting us in the Class 100 like they try every year, and my biggest argument is that we will operate once again in the black. 4. So we'll show a profit to the City of Philadelphia, while yet -- and I don't want to do a commercial. I believe this is probably the best user-friendly office in City Hall. We don't have voice mail. Everybody answers the phone by their first name. We believe that the public is entitled to that. I'm not condemning voice mail, but I think they want to hear a human being on the other end of the phone. And we do still have and 104 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC. maintain two offices in the City outside of City Hall. We maintain -- we send employees up to the Northeast and we send employees in North Philly to do estates. And we have a traveling probate service where if somebody is in the hospital, God forbid, dying, we don't even charge a fee to go to the hospital to probate or to do a marriage license application if they're on their death bed. There's so many different services that we provide that we haven't cut back on trying to service the public. If you can help us once again maintain the level of service of the Register of Wills operation and also the Marriage License Bureau. Believe it or not, the number of marriage licenses has increased last year.
So business is improving and we make a lot of money in the sense that after 9/11, you'd be 105 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC. surprised how there's an increased request when you go to get, say, a driver's license in another state now. They want a certified copy of your marriage license if you're a different name on your marriage, and we charge for that. We make a lot of money, but you need employees to process these requests. And a lot of times people's -- I'm traveling, I'm going abroad, can you give me a certified copy. They don't want to wait four, six weeks. They want a turnaround time within 72 hours. And we also have an expedited fee that we do it in hours. 17 So if you can see in your 18 kindness and in your business sense that 19 we're running it like a business and we 20 intend to increase some of our other fees 21 for next year, and we will do our share 22 to help the City meet its fiscal 23 obligations. 24
Thank you very much. I would just like to say 106 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC. I think that you and your office do an excellent job. They really do. And I think that you have been very creative in your ideas for revenue-generating schemes, and I don't know why you would be nickel and dimed every budget year. It doesn't make sense to me. However, based on your testimony, you're requesting $366,000 or more in additional funding; is that correct?
Yes. And, again, part of that is a mandated four percent raise, which my employees deserve. I just want to keep my present staffing level and I'm going to expand what we're doing. I'm not asking for any additional employees. And I would have brought some of the caseload to show you, but I couldn't get a hand truck for what each one of my employees do each day. There weren't any available.
Mr. Donatucci, did you make this request known to the Finance Department? 107 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC.
Well, in fairness to Dianne Reed, she's always been trying to be helpful, but I guess she has certain mandates in her position. And, no pun intended, sometimes we're looked on as the orphan child.
Ms. Reed, would you join us at the witness table, please. Ms. Reed, what was your justification for not funding the Register of Wills at their requested level?
Dianne Reed, Budget Director. This is not something anyone could feel good about. We have the budget constraint of the Five-Year Plan and, unfortunately, the Register of Wills was asked to take a reduction, along with everyone else. And just to let you know 108 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC. how bad it is, we have been talking with the Register's staff as well as other staffs about trying to make sure that we can get Productivity Bank loans in place this year and get ordinances over to you for the ones that are over the threshold, and we had to ask him, the staff member that we discussed this with, to see if they could raise any fees or were there any other cuts that they could take in order to put the pay back into the Five-Year Plan, because it's just so tight, and we are saying that to everyone. So we don't feel good about this.
Okay. Can you tell me how much money will the Register of Wills generate in FY08?
Let me just pull out my other source. 109 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC.
If I may, from October to June 30, we will have approximately 101,000 additional revenue, just the one category, which is our access fee, which we charge for every estate that's being raised, which is approximately 7,000.
But I'm looking at the detail book. It appears as though you would be generating $3,850,000.
Yes. And you're requesting a budget of 3,869,000, which is $19,625 more than you will generate in FY08. Why wouldn't you just give them, Ms. Reed, what they need in order for them to do their job?
I have to balance the Plan, ma'am, and we have accounted every single penny --
So 110 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC. they don't have --
I don't know. Either you're talking over me or I'm talking over you. Why wouldn't you give them money so that they can generate even more money for the General Fund?
We funded every initiative that was brought to us for '08 that involved revenue, every single one of them. The proposals that we got from the Register did not include a revenue projection offset.
Ms. Reed, what you did was reduce their budget by the 2.5 percent general reduction coverage, the four percent pay increase to arrive at the budget of $3.5 million, which would mean that their revenues would exceed their budget by approximately $350,000; is that correct?
I don't have all the 111 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC. revenue that you're talking about. I would have to check that out. It is quite possible that they are generating revenue in excess of their costs, but we would have to check that out.
It's in your Budget in Brief, if you have the book there. It's on . See, I just have a little problem in understanding why you would reduce a revenue-generating department by 2.5 percent without understanding the operational impact of such a cut.
We have to make the Plan balance. There are other solutions that are possible. We could cut other people's budgets. We could reduce the out-year tax cuts. Choices have to be made and we had to treat all General Fund departments the same, except for those that were held harmless, which included FJD, prisons and uniformed departments, uniformed employees. 112 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC.
Mr. Donatucci, do you foresee not being able to generate as much revenue in '08 as you did in '07 simply because we cannot understand that the 2.5 percent --
It's not even an issue. I'll tell you why. Once you go and advertise -- and we're on the Internet -- and you're charging every person that walks in or personal representative an additional $25 for Internet access and the fact -- and we're bragging -- that the turnaround time and accessibility. You'll never justify getting any additional fees -- there will be an uproar -- if you're not going to provide the service. I'm not going to advertise and increase the fee, say, for a short certificate if you can't provide the short certificate within a reasonable amount of time. There's going to be a mutiny. They'll have me before whatever and I'll have opposition in four years. I don't have at this time, because I 113 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC. think I run a good office and I don't have any controversies, but I'm not looking for any opponents.
Wait a minute. I think I run a good office, but I have opposition.
Believe me, I don't consider it opposition, but that's my opinion.
It truly doesn't make sense to me that you could really be generating more money if you did not have the 2.5 percent reduction.
There's other fees that we wanted to implement. It was only until our system -- I believe it's approximately maybe 60 or 90 days now running really smooth. Now that we're running smooth and all the glitches have been taken out, access, we have problems 114 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC. with MOIS where -- not MOIS's problem. The server in the middle of the night when lawyers were going online at 5 o'clock at night to get information, it 6 was shutting down. 7 Now that the system is fairly 8 working well, we are comfortable enough 9 to maybe raise some additional fees 10 related to A, B and C with the Internet, but you can't raise fees from get-go. But now that we're starting to feel comfortable, I will assure City Council and Dianne that we will do everything possible. If you look at our track record, we've always raised our fees commensurate with other counties. And we're studying the other four counties right now to see if our fees are within inflation, whatever. And whatever we could raise that the public can afford, we will do if they get the product. You can't keep on raising fees if you don't have a product to offer. Any business. 115 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC. Forget City Hall.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Ms. Reed, did I hear you say that there is a process in the budget where when it's obvious that you've got a department that can generate funds, that if you identify the fact that they can add, like President said, funds to the General Fund, then it's a wise, prudent thing to even increase the numbers in their budget, because a 50 cent increase could turn into a dollar increase. So tell me how you could overlook the fact that you've got a department that is generating funds to help support some of the other departments and no one recognizes that.
Councilman, there are many departments that generate more 116 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC. revenue than their Operating Budget costs. Just, for example, Fairmount Park. And we are always in conversations with departments about keeping their revenue, for example, but in the budget call for '08, we said we have to cut the Class 100 by two and a half, because it's staffing that we can control, but if you have proposals to reduce that cut, tell us what the revenue source is or how you're going to offset that addition, because we cannot add -- we got $96 million in budget increase requests from departments for '08, and the only ones that we granted were either supported by revenue, of which there were very few, or were unavoidable, like Prison, Health and departments like that.
Well, I hear what you're saying, but I don't necessarily agree that some departments should be protected. Obviously the Police Department, the Fire Department, the Prison Systems, I think they should 117 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC. be scrutinized also, because there's a lot of money in the budget and right in this Council you can identify where millions of dollars were written off. So I don't think they should be relieved of scrutiny and just say we're not going to touch the operating or the uniform forces. I think that they need, especially in the business side of what they do, to be looked at as hard as you look at these operating departments, because I think it's shortsighted to cut a budget that has the potential to assist in restoring programs in other operating departments since their revenue goes to the General Fund. So, again, I think that that policy of not looking at uniform forces, no disrespect to Police and Fire, I know they knock themselves out to try to make us a safe city, but I can tell you this, that some of the business practices that we identified here left a lot to be desired. 118 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC. Thank you, Madam President.
You're welcome. Councilman Greenlee, are you finished, or did you start?
That was Councilman Rizzo. I know we look alike. Just very quickly, I just want to echo what the Council President said. It seems that when a department is doing it right and bringing in money, it just makes sense to keep them or let them keep doing what they're doing. And just generally, I just want to thank you and all the folks -- I can run through a whole list of names. It would take a while -- that have been real helpful to our office over the years, and you certainly are one of the most customer-friendly places down there. I hear it not just from people who come to us and then we come to you, but from people generally who say they go down -- they don't have to come to us because you 119 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC. take care of them . So it's --
It is. It doesn't happen all the time in other places, but it certainly -- so I just wanted to get that on the record.
Especially when they're bereaved and they come into the office, they just lost their mother, they don't need a clerk to say, Oh, I'm sorry, you don't the forms, you don't have the death certificate, come back next week. We give them a self-addressed envelope. Mail it to us and we'll help you. That's what we're there for. The public should be entitled to that.
As I said in my opening statement, I think you and your office do a fabulous job and you're to be commended for it.
The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Blackwell. 120 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC.
Thank you, Madam President. I, for one, always associate myself with your comments and do agree. It just doesn't make sense that if you raise the money, you can't spend it. It just doesn't make common sense. Thank you. And also to thank Mr. Donatucci and his department for all that they do for all of us. Thank you very much.
Madam President, I just want to concur with you and my colleagues with the statements that you have made here at this hearing concerning the good work of the office of Register of Wills. I have had the experience as being in City Council that I get people that are visiting certain departments and for one reason or the other, they cannot take care of them because they do not speak English 121 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC. fluently, and the one place where I don't have that problem is in your office. And I've gotten people that are looking for, like you just stated, death certificates of a loved one. They've traveled particularly from Puerto Rico and they come here and they had no problems when they go down to your office in getting the service that they need, because you have personnel that attends to them. So keep up the good work, and this City Council stands with you.
One of my top deputies, as you know, is of a Puerto Rican descent, and she's excellent. And she makes sure that we give access to every possible Hispanic group or whatever, and we're proud of that.
Thank you. Are there any other questions or comments for the Register of Wills? (No response.) 122 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC.
You do a great job. And, Ms. Reed, you will get together also with Mr. Donatucci, and hopefully we will hear from you and Mr. Donatucci --
You do the same. MR. McPHERSON: The next department is the Sheriff's Office.
123 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC. Sheriff, please come up to the witness table, identify yourself for the record. We have a copy of your testimony. I would ask you to abbreviate it, and we will give it to the stenographer and it will be transcribed in full. SHERIFF GREEN: Thank you very much, Madam President. My name is John Green. I'm Sheriff for the City and County of Philadelphia. With me this morning, to my left is Tyrone Bynum, who is the Finance Director for the Sheriff's Office, and Inspector Mark Stipa. I'm going to be very brief by simply saying that the Philadelphia Sheriff's Office is requesting for Fiscal Year 2008 14 million 9 hundred 19 thousand -- I'm sorry; $14,920,827 in 20 expenditures. Thank you very much.
You're welcome. Sheriff, by your testimony, you are satisfied with the proposed 124 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC. Administration budget for your department? SHERIFF GREEN: That's correct. Beginning in August of 2006, as a result of litigation against the Philadelphia Prison System, we started working with the Finance Department to ensure that our personnel level reflected what we need to service the court system. At this time, we are still working and we're satisfied in the progress that we're making in staffing our office.
Sheriff, on of your testimony, you mention that you have shared information with the Office of Housing and Community Development that has helped homeowners avoid sheriff's sale. SHERIFF GREEN: That's correct.
For the record, would you please explain how you help people avoid sheriff's sale? SHERIFF GREEN: In 2004, the Sheriff's Office noticed a spike in the 125 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC. number of properties that were going to foreclosure and eventually to sheriff's sale, and as a result of noticing that increase, we did a couple of things. One, we had a moratorium for a month on the sale of properties. Second, we started an education program that informed people on how they can save their properties. As a result of that program, we've been able to decrease by 30 percent the number of properties that eventually go to sheriff's sale. I have with me a map that is broken up into wards that reflect the actual percentages of work-out agreements. Work-out agreements mean that people are able to work out their mortgage problem before the property goes to sheriff's sale. And I can submit that as part of my testimony. And the map reflects that, for example, in the 66th Ward, 80 percent of the properties that are foreclosed on are worked out before they come to sheriff's sale, meaning that 126 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC. 80 percent of the properties that are scheduled for sheriff's sale in the 66th Ward are able to avoid sheriff's sale through our program. There are other wards. For example, in the 23rd Ward, 60 percent of the properties that go to sheriff's sale -- or go to foreclosure before they come to sheriff's sale are able to work out an agreement. So we consider this to be a success. We've been able to work with the housing counseling agencies, as you mentioned, the various City agencies that are affected by this, and that is just part of the work that we've been doing.
How about the 36th Ward? SHERIFF GREEN: The 36th Ward? I know the ward well.
I think you do. SHERIFF GREEN: Fifty-nine percent. Fifty-nine percent of those 127 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC. properties that are foreclosed on are actually worked out, the agreements are worked out to avoid sheriff's sale.
Your testimony has been very refreshing today. You're not asking for more money, and I can tell you very publicly that I think you're doing an excellent job. Councilman Rizzo, you want to be recognized?
Thank you, Madam President, and I agree with what you just said. Sheriff, I got an e-mail from a constituent that moved from Florida to Philadelphia, and there is a difference in the way the Sheriff Department operates here versus in some of the -- I even assume in some of the Pennsylvania counties, and the question that I had to respond to in the e-mail was if the 128 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC. Sheriff had a bigger budget, if the Sheriff had more funds, could we replicate or do some of the things that Sheriff Departments do in like Broward County, Florida where you actually see them as the law enforcement in the community? What's the difference between our Sheriff's Department and this constituent's observation of the difference between Philadelphia and other municipalities throughout the United States, and could you do more or are you limited because of some statute or City Charter? SHERIFF GREEN: Well, by statute and by custom, the Sheriff's Office is the law enforcement arm of the court system, meaning that everything that we do must be initiated by the court system, as opposed to police officers, who can respond to site infractions. They can actually investigate matters that are not in the court system. 129 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC. Now, quite frankly, as you know, when the Pennsylvania State Police came into Philadelphia and started patrolling the state highways, those portions of the state highways that are in the City limits, the Fraternal Order of Police, Lodge 5 complained. They said that based on past practices, police officers should patrol these sections of the highway and that instead of using the State Police, why not adjust the budget to reflect being able to provide more police officers to do that. That would be a labor issue, number one. Number two, it would require us to be able to say that we have fulfilled our obligation to the court system. As we sit here today, we transport 90,000 people per year to and from court. We do not have, quite frankly -- we could use more people, and right now we have 20 openings and we're in the process of hiring people. We could use more people just to fill that 130 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC. obligation. And as I mentioned before, we're working with the Finance Director to do that. It would require hiring a lot more people.
Sure. SHERIFF GREEN: And it would require looking at the labor issues and it would require looking at the statute and common practices throughout the Commonwealth.
Obviously I think I said that you'd need more money and you'd need more people, but the constituent that e-mailed me was wondering, because they are a new resident of Philadelphia, that what they're accustomed to when they call 9-1-1 in certain places, that the Sheriff shows. In Montgomery County, I believe that -- I'm not sure they operate differently than you, but I think the crux of it was the issue with the schools, with security in our schools, that maybe the Sheriff's Department, if 131 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC. given the money, given the personnel, given the authority, could really do similar chores that the Police Department does. I think you know where I'm coming from here. Am I correct to say that in certain municipalities, the Sheriff does have more than just doing what you described about supporting the courts? SHERIFF GREEN: Oh, yeah. In other jurisdictions, the Sheriff's Office, it's more of a full-service Sheriff's Office in terms of law enforcement. And in addition to that, there are other jurisdictions where in addition to doing law enforcement, the Sheriff's Office is responsible for the county detention centers. The Philadelphia Sheriff's Office, as long as I'm there, will respond to any statute obligation that we have. Any obligation that's given to us by government we will fulfill. And if it is the will of the legislative bodies; 132 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC. that is, the state's legislative body and this legislative body, to give us more responsibility, along with more dollars, we'll gladly accept that responsibility and do our best to fulfill it.
Now I know how to answer the e-mail. Well, thank you, and, again, I concur with President Verna about the great job that you and your staff does for the City of Philadelphia. Thank you. SHERIFF GREEN: Thank you very much.
You're welcome. Are there any other questions or comments of Sheriff Green? (No response.)
Seeing none, I thank you very much. SHERIFF GREEN: Thank you very much. 133 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC. MR. McPHERSON: The next department is the City Controller's Office.
Good afternoon. CONTROLLER BUTKOVITZ: Good afternoon.
Please identify yourself for the record and proceed with your testimony. CONTROLLER BUTKOVITZ: I am City Controller Alan Butkovitz and I'm accompanied by First Deputy Controller Harvey Rice; our Administrative Director, Andrea Rose; and Deputy Controller, John Thomas.
May I ask you to please abbreviate your testimony. We have a copy of it. It will be given to the stenographer and it will be transcribed in full. CONTROLLER BUTKOVITZ: Okay. Thank you, Madam President. The Mayor's proposed 2008 134 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC. budget includes a General Fund appropriation of $8,254,796 to our office, which is earmarked for 140 budgeted positions. That reflects a 2.5 percent reduction in personnel costs that the Mayor has requested of all City departments and which our department is living within, without objection. Last year, we issued 28 departmental audit and financial opinion reports and ten performance audit and special reports. Those included 132 recommendations, which, if implemented, would realize a $71 million financial benefit to the City. We are putting additional emphasis in performance audits as we go. In the past year, we have had a number of significant audits, including the Police facilities audit, which was dovetailed very well with City Council's own agenda. The findings that we had about crumbling and decrepit Police stations co-existed almost perfectly with Council's appropriation of a $30 million 135 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC. capital appropriation for improvement of Police facilities and other facilities. In addition, we made similar findings with respect to school facilities and Licenses and Inspections. We also very aggressively worked to penetrate both the physical conditions of the Philadelphia School District and budget issues, which were contended to be beyond the scope of our post audit authority but which we believe that events and history have indicated the approach taken by our office and where we believe that continued aggressive action on our part will be useful in a joint city/state effort to try to minimize the headaches that are going to emanate from the very large School District deficit. I would like to take this opportunity to thank Councilwoman Blackwell and the rest of Council for the work that we did jointly this year in getting the Philadelphia Pension Fund, to 136 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC. get Philadelphia to be the largest city in America to take a position of a divestment of pension assets in Sudan, one of the few tools that is having an impact in opposing and stopping the genocide over there. We look forward to hopefully a good relationship with this Council, and I'm available for whatever probing or questions.
Thank you very much. On of your testimony, you mention that your audit of L&I's Assessment of Housing Inspection and Enforcement Process found that L&I met the mandatory 24-hour response time for imminently dangerous conditions only 30 percent of the time. I just want to let you know that yesterday we had the L&I Commissioner before us at a hearing, at which time the Commissioner stated that he did not need any additional 137 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC. inspectors. Are you surprised at his statement? CONTROLLER BUTKOVITZ: Yes. The Commissioner needs more inspectors, but I believe it's the Administration line that he needs to deal with what's --
I'm sorry? CONTROLLER BUTKOVITZ: I think it's the official Administration line that he needs to deal with what they've allotted. But I forget the number of employees that we felt -- something like an additional 30 inspectors, according to our audit. I mean, we found backlogs in some of these cases of as long as five or six months. And it's not because L&I is not trying. Our people calculated the workloads and the follow-up times and what the model times were and what they're capable of doing with their staff. I believe they have 58 inspectors and we believe they need 88 or 89.
You 138 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC. also mentioned that your review of the School District has uncovered financial inefficiencies, misleading and non-transparent budget projections and information concerning fiscal issues. In your opinion, has the School District corrected these deficiencies? CONTROLLER BUTKOVITZ: No, not at all. I mean, the biggest problem is the School District's unwillingness to just be frank and open with the people of Philadelphia about the real facts. As I'm sure you will remember, when Mayor Rendell took office in 1992, at least there was a common experience among Philadelphians that there was a fiscal issue that was on the table and that there were certain painful remedies that had to be taken as a result of that. And I believe that we are on the verge of the same types of painful choices with respect to the School District. And you can't fix something that everybody doesn't acknowledge what the true 139 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC. condition of it is. I was in the Legislature at the time the state takeover legislation was adopted, and it was understood that there was a cumulative deficit that was projected at the time to get near half a billion dollars, and a number of remedies were adopted, including authorization of $300 million in deficit bonds. Now, what that was supposed to do is give the School District five-year breathing room in a non-crisis atmosphere to make adjustments to expenses and to make recommendations for any revenue enhancements that were necessary. The problem is that that five-year breathing spell was squandered as part of a public relations strategy. Every year we climb the wall because the Chief Executive, Mr. Vallas, would issue a press release bragging that he had for four or five consecutive years had a balanced operating budget, and the truth was he didn't have a balanced 140 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC. operating budget in any of those years. He was using bits and pieces of the $300 million every year to get by. So one of the things that we noted, that that money was run out in the 2007 budget year. We also saw that there were fund balances that remained identical from year to year and that there were adjustments in the way the School District was reporting their budget, things like a $96 million, what was it called, a negative appropriation in the Chief Executive's Office. Well, it was just an adjustment figure. They figured out how short they were and they added that figure to the other side of the ledger so that they could issue a press release and say, We're doing a great job, and really what they were doing was deferring a deficit. Now it looks like we're talking about a deficit in the range of $188 million. And I know that this Council will struggle very hard to help, without 141 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC. killing the taxpayers of Philadelphia, but the schools only really have two revenue sources, state subsidies and real estate taxes. Now, this City's annual take from real estate taxes is a billion dollars a year, and if you send in a message and say, We need another $200 million because of the schools, that in itself would be a percent increase in 11 real estate taxes. 12 So more information sooner 13 rather than later is better, a commitment 14 to non-gimmickry and a commitment to full 15 disclosure to independent entities. The 16 habit of the School District is to come 17 into this Council with a onesummary, not a line item summary of their 19 expenditures. And there has been a lot 20 of investment of good faith in that process, which I think you're justified in running out your patience when you find out that, by the way, please send us $188 million.
I 142 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC. know that the Administration and the state are reviewing the School District's finances. Is your office participating in that review? CONTROLLER BUTKOVITZ: No. We attended some of the early meetings, but I think all the parties know that our comments would not be controlled. We're not interested in a spin on the outcome. We have been absolutely willing to disclose whatever we find as we find it. And I believe that it's understood that people are sitting on a potential time bomb, and we're prepared to go in there and help, but it would be under the condition that things would be disclosed. So far, no one has been really eager to take us up on that.
That's a shame, because I think you could be very helpful. CONTROLLER BUTKOVITZ: Yes.
But I guess you're not supposed to be. 143 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC. CONTROLLER BUTKOVITZ: I'm not supposed to -- oh.
You mention in your testimony that you are opposed to the BRT's full valuation initiative. CONTROLLER BUTKOVITZ: Yes.
Do you believe that a reassessment of all properties within the City needs to be done even if we continue with our current assessment methodology? CONTROLLER BUTKOVITZ: I think the reassessments are going to continue no matter what, but what would happen under the full valuation process is that it would all happen all at once, in a hurry, constantly, pushed by the most recent sales data, and since there has been a tremendous inflation in property values in most places of Philadelphia, people would get hit with a shock. And most of my criticism has been on the policy basis, that certain initiatives 144 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC. taken by this Council, and specifically Councilman DiCicco's initiative on abatements, a lot of people crossed their fingers and hoped for the best when they did it, but didn't think it would really work. It turned out that that policy has now contributed to one of the strongest economic engines in the City. And the reason that we have been running surpluses in our budget for the last few years is because there is so much trafficking in real estate that we're making enough money on transfer taxes to balance our budget. Now -- and you can see the spill-over of the upgraded development in all sorts of neighborhoods now that people were expecting lower property values. So we've been down at 17th and Christian Street and we see properties that are going for a half a million dollars or more. Strawberry Mansion, they're building properties for $300,000. And my specific point is, if the policy 145 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC. of not cashing in on the tax ability of this is working to promote development and to create an economic diversity in the City, why should Philadelphia City government take an action to cut that off before it's maximized? Because if we are going to thrive, we need all kinds of people in the City. We need all kinds of incomes in the City, and it is helping us right now, combined with the fact that the real estate tax just works so unfairly. It's such a large part of our population who are seeing a paper increase in the value of their properties but no more income to pay those tax bills. People who constitute the whole backbone of a number of neighborhoods who would be driven out by -- our office, we did a -- we took what the Board of Revision of Taxes' estimate was a year ago. They said that the trade-off for doing a full value reassessment would be the probability of a lower tax rate, and as a hypothetical, Mr. Glancy said that 146 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC. 9 percent. So we did an exercise in our office, because one of the frustrating things to me is that they're talking about doing this dramatic new move without anybody having any idea what the final numbers would be. So we did the best that we could. 9 percent tax rate, and we couldn't find anybody whose taxes went down. It's supposed to be a revenue-neutral proposal and we saw in areas like Center City as much as a tripling of current taxes under that analysis. Even the statement that it's revenue neutral would only be a statement that its overall effect would be revenue neutral, but its effect on particular people could be overwhelming. So we've got all of this development. We still see cranes up in this vicinity. Imagine for a moment that 147 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC. all that just stopped dead in its tracks. What would that do to the value of the properties? What would that do to the momentum of the City? What does that do to our overall fiscal health? We're not robots. We're not on automatic pilot. We can exercise some control here. So there's no urgency to doing that step right now. What was cited as the authority for it was a 1953 state law that talks about uniformity in taxation.
And I may say, if there's got to be a conversation about the fairness of taxes, there are other things, such as the state Constitution's handcuffing us on the way we can handle tax -- the fact that 18 percent of the land in Philadelphia can't 19 be taxed because it's owned by hospitals 20 and universities, that ought to be part 21 of the conversation, not running some 22 senior citizen on a fixed income telling 23 them they got to pay triple the taxes on 24 their property. Since when did that 25 become the sum and substance of the 148 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC. fairness debate on taxes?
Thank you. Thank you very much. The Chair recognizes Councilman Rizzo.
Thank you, Madam President. Controller, how are you today? CONTROLLER BUTKOVITZ: Very well.
Controller, first I want to thank you for looking into something that certainly I had a lot of interest in and I know that you did also, and it is the project called Project Ocean. I know that we've spent a tremendous amount of money, $18 million, and I know some of that money is for licensing which would be required. I hear, though, at the end of the day we wound up buying a system that we needed off the shelf, after spending almost $20 million combined on this project. Could you comment on the 149 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC. settlement and your observations of what we call Project Ocean? CONTROLLER BUTKOVITZ: We're still in the process of reviewing with the Administration our draft report and their comments, and I think the City Administration's position would not be that it was off the shelf. I think they have a strong point of view that there was a custom-made unique type of system here, and that is something that our technical people and their technical people are debating about and analyzing, and we're hoping that we can actually have a report in about a month on that issue.
Mr. Controller, how I understand it, that the process, since it took a couple years to resolve it, that the programs have developed along the way that became standard in the industry. So if they're trying to say it's a custom program, it may be, but after two or three years of 150 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC. development, the program that we were looking for pretty much became standard in the industry, if I'm communicating clearly to you. CONTROLLER BUTKOVITZ: Okay. I haven't received any information like that. If you have anything that you would like to provide us on that, we would appreciate it.
I'd love to. And what I would like you to do is just maybe if you could just take a few minutes to -- we have Mr. Phillis, the new IT person in here, telling us about the way the project was managed. It was a disaster -- I'm paraphrasing now -- disaster from the beginning because of the way the whole program, Project Ocean, was handled. Could you tell us what you can tell us at the moment from what you believe for the record happened with this project? I'd appreciate that because of my personal interest and this Council's 151 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC. personal interest in this. CONTROLLER BUTKOVITZ: The problem is that professionally we're committed to a process where the auditee has a chance to have a fair hearing with us.
But is this an audit? This is an investigation. This isn't really an audit. CONTROLLER BUTKOVITZ: Well, we're treating it as an audit. And believe me, you'll have a lot to read, and we will not pull our punches on it, but it just wouldn't be fair for me to comment before it's cooked.
I understand. But I'll tell you, those first few slices of the ham are pretty good before it's cooked. Okay. That's fair. But we did learn from when the IT people did testify that one of the issues -- and we'll hopefully get the notes of his testimony, which I would suggest your office do, 152 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC. where it was pretty much stated -- whether it was publicly or privately, I'm trying to recollect now -- that after many years of development, that the product pretty much developed outside of Project Ocean and then when they got to the point where they were willing or ready to make a decision on what to implement, that someone in the sales department said, Oh, yeah, you want this because this is what we already have now developed as of today, and it apparently met the needs. CONTROLLER BUTKOVITZ: What I would say is that there is general agreement that what went on for many years ended up to be not fruitful and not organized in a way with the appropriate thresholds and benchmarks and cooperation and that there was a lot of money spent before their act was really gotten together. It appears that with Mr. Phillis' appearance on the scene and with some of the actions on the part of 153 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC. the Administration in the last year, that there has been a lot of activity to salvage a situation that was going south and that they have been doing a better job on it more recently.
Well, I understand when the Controller's Office, when they knew that you were looking at it, it certainly got their attention also. So you motivated a lot of people to get that act together and get this project back on track. Is it fair to say -- and I think you can comment on this -- that we're talking a project close to $18 to $20 million? CONTROLLER BUTKOVITZ: You mean counting from the beginning?
Yes. CONTROLLER BUTKOVITZ: Oh, I think it's much more than that. It's much more than that. I think it was over $30 million already, and probably it will be, what, another -- I think it's 154 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC. projected to probably be another $6 million.
In your report, you'll also discuss the settlement aspects with Oracle? CONTROLLER BUTKOVITZ: Yes.
Okay. I didn't realize it got to that level at this point. Well, I'm glad you were involved in it. CONTROLLER BUTKOVITZ: Thank you.
Thank you. CONTROLLER BUTKOVITZ: I'm glad you were involved in it, Councilman.
Thank you very much. The Chair wanted to thank you and all of your staff in your department for the work that you do, especially with regard to Darfur. It didn't automatically happen. One doesn't get 155 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC. divestment without a lot of hard work, and we are very, very pleased about the partnership we had with that regard, as well as all the work we were jointly able to accomplish with regard to getting the issue of Iraq on the ballot and the issue of full tax valuation. CONTROLLER BUTKOVITZ: That's true.
It doesn't just happen that it goes there's an idea and without a lot of community work and a lot of collaboration. So we thank you and are grateful for the opportunity. CONTROLLER BUTKOVITZ: I think it is a very productive partnership. I was hoping that in much the same way that the General Accounting Office provides technical help to Congress that we would be able to provide that kind of teeth or additional help to the Council. This Council has been very vibrant and vigorous, and I thank you for your 156 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC. leadership on the tax assessment issue and on the Iraq issue. Council is doing a lot to really engage the people of Philadelphia in these major decisions these days.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Good afternoon, Controller. CONTROLLER BUTKOVITZ: Good afternoon.
The Council President asked you a couple of questions. I was not sure of your answers to either one. The first regarding School District finances. What do you believe the cumulative deficit to be over the next five years? CONTROLLER BUTKOVITZ: Well, I have no idea what it's going to be over the next five years, but last year when the School District initially indicated a 157 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC. $70 million deficit, there was a briefing for top City and state officials, and the people who were doing the finances were specifically asked whether we should multiply that by two for the subsequent fiscal year, and they said no. They said that these were one-time problems that were being capped. It turns out we turn around and we're in the new fiscal year that you can multiply it by more than two.
Controller, I think we're in complete agreement that Paul Vallas probably cooked the books before he got his new contract. CONTROLLER BUTKOVITZ: Right.
I'm talking about after he got his new contract, after it became revealed that there was a definite, are you in a position to project what that deficit is over the next five years? CONTROLLER BUTKOVITZ: No, because we have a major problem. I'll 158 4/18/07 - WHOLE - BILL 070114, ETC. give you an example. When we looked at the line item budget for the School District, the amount of money that is listed there every year that is supposed to be spent is $250,000. You know what they spent one year? $8 million. You know what they spent the next year? $3 million. Now, nobody in this Council, nobody doing budgeting would do a budget like that, right? Now, how can I take responsibility for what any of their numbers mean when I don't have free access -- we asked the School District to send people over to us so that they could agree on definitions about what belongs in what category. The School District changed some of their accounting definitions and put things in categories that only Paul Vallas knows what's in that category.