For clarification. My understanding is that when first requested, you did not respond. DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: Not true.
Is this the time when the Jewish holiday prevented your responding? DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: No. What happened was, as I mentioned a minute ago, somebody from his office called my office and said, "The Senator is having hearings on Friday on the confirmation of Massiah-Jackson," and asked my secretary was I available. She said no. 16 And she, I believe, asked, "Why did you wait so long to call. She is on her way out the door. It is a Jewish holiday tomorrow. She won't be in, and Friday her schedule is full." That's the way we left it. I wrote him a letter and said, I'm sorry I couldn't come.
So that's why you didn't come to the hearing? DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: I had no 2537 BILL 980003 notice of the hearing, didn't know anything about it.
I thought that explanation you just gave was the reason you didn't go to the hearing. DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: I didn't go because I didn't know anything about it until the last minute because and couldn't come.
You didn't come to the hearing because of the short notice. DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: No, I didn't come because I didn't know about it until the last minute, and couldn't make myself available with last-minute notice and no preparation, and I was busy.
Are we saying the same thing? You couldn't come because you had short notice. DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: Well, short notice or no notice, whatever. Yes, okay.
Well, you had some notice because you said, "I can't come." So short notice that prevented your coming the first time you were given an opportunity to have a public 2538 BILL 980003 opinion as to whether Frederica Massiah-Jackson is suitable for the federal bench. Short notice prevented that? DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: The first time I was asked to take a position was when Arlen Specter called me up on the 9th of December and asked me about my position with regard to Frederica Massiah-Jackson.
Okay. Stop. At that point did you feel inclined to write a letter? DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: No. 13
Did you feel inclined to do an in-depth investigation of her sentencing record? DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: Already had done it.
Oh, the sentencing investigation and analysis was available in -- DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: Not the sentencing. There was already in the information in the office that was well-known to people in the office about Judge Massiah-Jackson, predating my 2539 BILL 980003 being there.
Is this information available on every Common Pleas Court judge? DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: Sentencing information? Sure. It is on record at the court.
In a report? Or does it have to be -- DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: I believe the court keeps statistics on sentencing of judges.
The data, Madam D.A., is it in a form such as you could pull it together in a report without a good deal of manipulation? Did you do anything to the data? DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: To answer your question, I believe the Court Administrator of Philadelphia and the court system keeps tabs on every judge, their sentencing.
Is that where you got your data? DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: That's where I got my data. 2540 BILL 980003
You didn't do any independent investigation of her record? DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: What do you mean "independent investigation"? First of all, I really don't want to get too much into --
Other than. Wait. Just hold it a minute. Other than that which the Court Administrator had already conveniently provided. DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: No, I am not going to -- I think I didn't answer that question that way. What I said previously is what I am going to say now. Hold on a second. I don't really want to get too much into the Massiah-Jackson matter because there is going to be a hearing on that issue next week.
We are having a hearing on the D.A. and what is an appropriate use of D.A. time and resources today. Now, "I don't want to answer it," is an answer, but I would caution against it. Of course, you are free to accept some, all, or none of 2541 BILL 980003 my advice. I would say that that is not a good answer. DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: Well, as I said before, there was information provided to the Senate Judiciary Committee, which they asked for and we provided to them. Senator Specter asked for information subsequent to our meeting, which we provided to him. And when somebody calls up, who has an appropriate law enforcement background, who asks us for information, we provide it. The specifics of what we did and when we did it and how we did it, I am going to save for another time.
You could give it today, but you choose to give it at another time? DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: I believe as I mentioned previously to Councilman Nutter, there is going to be a hearing.
I don't want you to give me any of those Nutter answers. DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: They are 2542 BILL 980003 the same answers I would give to anybody. The hearing on Judge Massiah-Jackson's confirmation is going to be, I think, next week, and --
The Senate hearing; is that the hearing you speak of? DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: That's what I am given to understand.
That's a forum that we don't control. DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: That's right.
We will be lucky if we are invited to come and watch that. But we have a more than passing interest in what happens to a local Common Pleas Court judge; isn't that true? DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: Well, I wouldn't comment on what you have a passing interest in, but...
But you would not be surprised to learn that we had a more than passing interest in what happens to a local Common Pleas Court judge, now would you? 2543 BILL 980003 Would you be surprised? DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: No, I wouldn't be surprised.
I didn't think so. DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: I wouldn't be surprised. I would kind of be surprised on every case, but I am not surprised.
You wouldn't be surprised that we who live, work, and have our being in the same locality would be interested in knowing what her fate would be? That couldn't surprise you. Let's at least be believable to each other. That couldn't surprise you. DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: Well, it might or it might not, but in this case it doesn't.
Did it surprise you? DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: Look, Councilwoman.
Come on, Lynne, did that surprise you? That's a straight question. 2544 BILL 980003 DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: Well, since I saw your picture in the paper in support of her, no, it didn't surprise me. So, there. So, I mean, there you are.
But do you know what surprised me? That you were opposed to her; that surprised me. Because she has said to me -- and you know we are in a couple of organizations, we are in the same sorority, we are in the same chapter -- she said, "Lynne said she expects to see me at my confirmation party." DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: Never said that.
You mean she made it up? DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: I'm not saying that. I am saying I never said that to her.
Am I the only person who heard that? Goodness gracious. Is that fiction? DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: I can't say that. All I can say is, I never said that to her. 2545 BILL 980003
You never said to her -- DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: Never said it to her.
Can I ask you something? Why don't you want her to be a judge, a Federal District judge? DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: I think, Councilwoman, I have stated at my news conference she has --
Tell me. DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: Well, I am telling you. She has an improper judicial temperament, she treats police officers with disdain and beyond incredulity, bias and prejudice. She treats prosecutors improperly and demeans and degrades them. She --
Can I stop you at that point? DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: No. No. 24 I don't want to hold my point. Let me finish this.
Hold your point, 2546 BILL 980003 because I want to talk on that point. Has there ever been a period since you have been D.A. when one of your ADAs came before Massiah-Jackson? DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: I don't believe so, since I have been there.
Right. So you don't have any firsthand knowledge of ADAs being treated in a disdainful matter, do you? DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: From the record I do, yes. It is right on the record.
Firsthand knowledge. DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: Firsthand hearing with my own ears, no. 17
Having anybody who works directly for you, yes or no? DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: Well, Councilwoman --
Well, now, that's a yes or no question. DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: Now, wait a second.
No. Yes or no, 2547 BILL 980003 and then you can explain. DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: I am not going to answer that question, is my answer.
No, Madam Chair. So in light of all that's been stated, in all the activities and reports back and forth, do you think that Judge Jackson should even continue her service on the Common Pleas Court in Philadelphia? DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: What I have said on the record, Councilman Nutter, is that I don't believe that she is deserving of an appointment to the Federal District Court bench.
Let me say it again. In light of all that has been said, and even your response to Councilwoman Clark, I mean, is there some particular demeanor or behavior that is different that a judge should demonstrate on the Common Pleas Court, as opposed to the federal 2548 BILL 980003 bench? I mean, logically it seems that if a person is just so bad to be on one court, that maybe they shouldn't be on any court. I mean, it seems to me that she would have a much greater impact directly on either the citizens of Philadelphia, victims in Philadelphia, prosecutors in Philadelphia, police officers in Philadelphia at the Common Pleas level, than she will ever have or would ever have at the Federal District Court. I mean, how many of your folks are at Federal District Court? How many police officers go to Federal District Court? How many people in my neighborhood ever had a case prosecuted in Federal District Court? DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: More than you would imagine. But to answer your question specifically --
What does that mean? DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: She is in Civil Court right now. So your answer to the 2549 BILL 980003 question is, she is not handling criminal cases, at least she hasn't since 1991.
'91, right. So you haven't answered the question. DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: How many cases have we referred to Federal Criminal Court?
No. Do you believe she is qualified to continue to serve in the Common Pleas Court of Philadelphia, given all that has been laid out on this record and other records? DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: I am not getting into anything other than the question I was asked, which was asked of me by me my Senior United States Senator, and that is, what is my position.
I wasn't there with the Senior United States Senator. We are here in City Council, and I am asking you that question, it is yes, no, or I won't answer. DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: I am not getting into any other issue, other than what I was asked by my Senior Senator, and that's all I am prepared to answer.
If the senior 2550 BILL 980003 Senator asked you the question this afternoon, are you saying that you would answer him? DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: The answer to the question is, I was asked by my Senior Senator about my position on the confirmation.
That's not the question. If Senator Arlen Specter asked you whether or not Judge Frederica Massiah-Jackson should continue to serve on the Common Pleas Court of Philadelphia, are you saying that you would answer for him? DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: I am not saying that at all. I am not saying I wouldn't answer to him, either. I am not being asked that. She was returned to office by the voters, there she is.
Did you speak about it then? Didn't you two run the same year, you ran for election, she ran for retention? DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: We campaigned I think at the same time.
Did you speak out 2551 BILL 980003 on her record at that time? DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: No. 4
It is the same record; right? DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: No. The answer is no, I did not.
In 1993, wasn't her record the same as the record you are now talking about, since she wasn't in Criminal Court in 1991, and she was running for retention in 1993? Wasn't it the same record that we would be talking about in '93 that you would be talking in '97 and '98? DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: I did not campaign for Judge Jackson. I campaigned for election.
Did you speak against her retention? DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: No. 21
Okay. Why? DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: I was running for election, Councilman, period. That's the end of my statement. And that has nothing to do with anything. 2552 BILL 980003 She wasn't up for --
So your running for election supersedes your concern about the administration of justice by a judge running for retention? DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: No, it doesn't.
So why didn't you speak out on her retention in 1993? In your view, she would have had the same egregious record in '93 that you now claim that she has in '97 and '98. DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: Councilman, we have gotten far afield from the budget. I campaigned for office --
Actually, we haven't. DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: I campaigned for office in 1993. She campaigned at the same time as I did. That issue was not before me, period.
I asked you a simple question. DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: I am not answering that question. 2553 BILL 980003
It doesn't matter, you already answered. DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: I am not going to answer that question. She ran, I ran. She was elected, I was elected.
Do you want to being recognized, Councilman? Councilman Ortiz is next. Do you mind? Councilman Ortiz.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I ask excuse for my lateness today. I was in Washington, D.C., this morning. I wasn't going to get into the Frederica Massiah-Jackson thing, but your statements really are disturbing. And I don't want an answer to this, but you make it sound like the only good judge is a judge that favors prosecutors. DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: I never said that. That's not true. As a matter of fact, the best judge in the whole world is a judge who calls it straight 2554 BILL 980003 down the middle.
In regards to the Public Nuisance Task Force, how many houses were closed in the East Division in 1997? DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: Let me get my figures. Just a second. I believe it is right in the presentation, in my notes. I think the exact figure is 258 in Fiscal Year 1996-1997.
How much? DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: 258. It says "Over 250" in the figure, in my statement. I think the exact number is 258.
Do you have that by blocks and addresses? DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: Did you say in East Division?
East Division. DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: I'm sorry. I didn't hear that. No, not in East Division. I don't know. 36 in the East Division.
Do you have that by blocks and so on, addresses and so on? And can 2555 BILL 980003 you make that available? DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: We would not make that available, Councilman, for a very important reason. We could give you selective information. But sometimes giving addresses of houses or locations that have been closed endangers the lives of people who have given us information. So we would not make that information generally public.
These houses are closed. DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: Yes, I understand that. They may be closed, but --
You are not going to give us the names of the informants. We are not asking for that. DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: We can try to give you whatever information we can give you safely, without endangering the lives of any of the people who might have given us information.
I don't want who gave you the information. DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: I know 2556 BILL 980003 that, but sometimes --
I just want to know the locations of areas where the Nuisance Task Force has been operating and where they have closed certain operations. DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: As much information as possible, I promise you we will give you, including the addresses. We can do that. Except where it may endanger the life of someone who may have given us secret information.
I don't have a problem with that. DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: Fine. We can give you the addresses; we have them.
And we can have it relatively soon? DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: Well, I will ask. How soon is "relatively soon"? I think Mr. Mosey has the list right now.
That's very good. DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: That's sooner than soon.
That's sooner than 2557 BILL 980003 soon. Do you have records of major drug dealers in the East Division, major drug dealers in the East Division, that have been brought to trial and prosecuted and convicted in the last three years -- DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: I believe --
We should probably clarify that often the cases that are prosecuted in Federal Court are prosecuted by cross-designated Assistant District Attorneys who are acting as United States Attorneys. And many of those cases came out of the Philadelphia D.A.'s Office.
Give me those, and give me those that were prosecuted in Common Pleas Court. DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: Well, wait a minute. Before you get into that, the major drug dealers -- first of all what's your definition of "a major drug dealer"?
I don't know. The 2558 BILL 980003 owner of a corner. DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: I don't know what that means. I mean, we won't be able to do that.
The owner of a corner. Corners in the East Divisions are owned. You know that, I know that, the D.A. knows that, the U.S. Attorney knows that. DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: We can give you the names of the cases that we have tried in Federal Court, who are so-called major or king pin drug users. We can get that information for you. But not every time in a Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas do we have a person who you call owns the corner designated as a king pin. They may just be arrested for possession with intent to deliver. So I wouldn't have any real way of knowing who owns a corner through that.
Give me your record of all the drug cases that you have prosecuted in the East Division. DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: I don't 2559 BILL 980003 know if we can do that by name and case. Can we, George?
The one that I asked you months ago, and I received yesterday?
Yes. I am sort of acting as a contortionist here. I apologize. The problem is that we would have to be able to separate the cases by D.C. number. And that's pretty difficult to do. To the extent that we can, we will try to provide it. We can give you an estimation, but not the complete figure.
You cannot get the records of the cases that you have prosecuted in the East Division? DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: Councilman, just remember one thing. A police 2560 BILL 980003 officer --
There is a file; right? DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: No, it is not filed that way. It is filed by Commonwealth versus the name of the person. But it doesn't necessarily mean East Division. But it doesn't necessarily mean East Division. So, for example, if a person who is an East Division person is arrested in the West Division, is that an East Division person according to you or a West Division? We couldn't tell you that. What we have to do -- and I am not going to allow George to do this -- is to go thousands of files to find out on the initial Complaint filled out by the police, the District Complaint No. 25. We can't do that. We have cases by name. We have cases by court term and number. We don't have cases by D.C. number.
You know, it is disturbing to me that when we ask for some data, so that we can have a relative clear picture of what 2561 BILL 980003 efforts the D.A. is conducting in the biggest drug area in the city, in terms of the cases that it is pursuing, the cases that it has pursued in Common Pleas Court or Federal Court, that you say that that data is very difficult to receive. And when I ask you how many of those cases have been taken to a conviction, and I ask for those cases, and the period of time on that, you tell me that that date is very hard to come by. DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: The way you are asking it, it is very hard to come by. Let me explain this again.
Do you know what bothers me about that? DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: Madam Chair, may I finish my answer?
Come on, now. It is now ten of 4:00. We have two other departments to hear, and we have had some members of the community waiting since o'clock to testify. Now, I think we can conclude this very quickly, if you will simply answer the 2562 BILL 980003 question. DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: We don't keep cases by district. The case is listed by court term and number or defendant's name. We don't have a computer system that lists cases by D.C. number; only by court term and number or by a defendant's name. So we can't go back and dig out all those cases and give you that information, except by going to thousands and thousands and thousands of cases and looking them up. Do you want to give me a name, we will get that for you. If you want to know what cases we have sent down to Federal Court, we have that, but not every case that's arrested in the East Division, which is the 24th, the 25th, and I think the 26th District. We don't have that capacity.
Give us, then, all of the cases across the city, a listing of all of the cases that you have prosecuted and taken to conviction, those that have been lost or those that have been -- well, just break it across. Give us the data for the '97 period, only one year. Can you do that? 2563 BILL 980003 DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: I think we can ask the court if they keep that statistic.
Even those that were plea bargained. DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: Whatever the disposition is, the court keeps a record of all the dispositions. We think we can get that from the court system.
Can you make that available to us? DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: If it is a public record from the court system? Of course.
They cannot do it. They find it impossible to do it. They don't have the personnel to be able to give us very specific data so that we can make a judgment as to what is happening in an area or in a neighborhood or in a district. But it seems that they can do other things and have people analyze cases. I would like to have a clear picture 2564 BILL 980003 of what is going on from the D.A.'s Office in several neighborhoods in the city. Just like we asked the Police Department how they are doing in several neighborhoods and how they are fighting drugs in several neighborhoods, I would like to have a very clear picture of what the D.A.'s Office is doing in the East Division and in other divisions across the city, and in terms of disposition of drug cases as they take. But, obviously, we can't do that analysis. DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: I will tell you how we can do it. You give me the L.I.N.E. program. Every case is divided by district. The city, the court system, and the Police Department don't compartmentalize or geographically fix cases; they send them to whatever court is available. So there is no tracking by district, that I am aware of. There is no tracking by district. So you want a list of all the 12 or 13 thousand cases that we tried? You want a computer list of every case; is that what you want?
Give us that. 2565 BILL 980003 DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: We will call the up the court system and see if they will send it to us.
And for the record, one question that I asked the other day, you have 265 attorneys. And I would like to find out how many of those 265 are Latinos, and when was the last one hired, and what is the recruiting process that takes place. DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: With all due respect, Councilman, you were out of the room 13 when George Mosey spoke to that issue with Councilman Nutter. And we have, let's see, I think we have nine Hispanic Assistant District Attorneys, Latinos, Hispanic District Attorneys.
When was the last one hired? DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: A couple of months ago. 2566 BILL 980003
You have nine assistant D.A.'s? DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: Correct.
Were there any interns that were Latinos in the last class? DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: A lot.
A lot? DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: Yes. When I say, "a lot," I mean, not thousands.
How many? DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: Probably four, five, or six.
In the last class of interns that you had? DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: When you say, "interns," you mean could like people coming into the summer program, volunteering?
You have interns 2567 BILL 980003 from which you hire later on, second-year students that go on, third year and so on? DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: No; we are talking about two different programs. To me the summer intern program is college, high school, and law school. Second-year law students, I don't remember how many there were in our second-year intern, but I know we had at least a few.
I would like to find out. Can you find out how many? DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: I will try.
Okay. Thank you Madam Chair that's it. DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: Remember, Councilman. I just want to tell you one thing. We do not ask questions of our attorneys about their ethnicity. So I won't be able to answer perhaps even carefully or correctly how many people believe themselves to be Latinos. It is a very difficult guessing game, and I won't want to guess. So I may not be able to answer your question. 2568 BILL 980003
Thank you very much. Any other questions or comments? Thank you. DISTRICT ATTORNEY ABRAHAM: Thank you. The City Commissioner's Office will be next.
Good afternoon, Commissioner. Please identify yourself.
Good afternoon, Madam Chair. I would like to thank you for this opportunity to present our Fiscal 19989 Operating Budget. Our total budget request is $8,004,956 will be allocated as follows: Class 100, personal services, $4,241,009; Class 200, purchase of services, $3,111,035; Class 300, materials and supplies, $640,657; Class 400, equipment, $12,255. 2569 BILL 980003 In November 1998, we will be conducting the election of the are for the offices of United States Senator, United States Representative, Governor, Lieutenant Governor, State Senators, State Representatives, and State Committee Members. In the 1999 Primary, we will be nominating candidates for the Mayor, for the Office of Mayor; ten members of City Council; seven Councilmen-At-Large; three City Commissioners; State Supreme Court Justices; Judges of the Commonwealth Court, Common Pleas Court and Traffic Court; Clerk Of Quarter Sessions; Register of Wills; and Sheriff. The first priority of this department is to assure the citizens of Philadelphia their constitutional right to vote. We have made every effort to reduce our expenditure wherever possible. We will continue to implement cost-savings, while striving to produce the optimum level of service to the citizens of Philadelphia.
Thank you. I know that my colleague is engaged 2570 BILL 980003 in conversation, but I know that he would probably want to ask this question: What is the status of the possibility of getting new voting machines?
I guess that's up to Council. We are now in the process of looking into various sorts of mechanical and -- I'm sorry, computerized electronic voting machines, in the attempt of having an issue presented on the ballot, hopefully in November of 1998. By that time we will have made a definitive -- we will have a definitive idea of the type of machine that we are looking for. And hopefully by that time we will be able to present a lot of those machines to the public to see what the public finds out is best for them in terms of voting, and things like that. We know what we need, and we want to make it as simple as possible and make it look and almost appear as if it is the machines that we have now, but, of course, more modernized and computerized.
Thank you. Are there any questions of the 2571 BILL 980003 Commissioner?
Thank you. The next department to be heard is the Office of Housing and Community Development. I was also asked to make an announcement that the briefing scheduled for 8:30 tomorrow morning has been cancelled. Mr. Kromer, did you think we were ignoring you?
Good afternoon. I am John Kromer, Director of the Office of Housing and Community Development. I have submitted written testimony. But just to summarize briefly, the proposed Operating Budget under the Community Development Fund and Grant Revenue Fund will be presented in April to the Finance Committee in its Council bill 2572 BILL 980003 on the consolidated plan authorizing the Community Development Block Grant and other housing programs for the coming Fiscal Year. And I will look forward to a hearing of the Finance Committee on that subject. The proposed operating subject for OHCD is 150.4 million in Fiscal '99. Of that amount, 86.9 million will be in the Grants Revenue Fund, 59.4 million in the Community Development Fund, and 4.1 million in the General Fund. Our Class 100 request of $4 million reflects an increase of $125,832, compared to last year. This increase is due to the wage increase budgeted consistent with the city's current collective bargaining agreements. Included in the Grants Revenue Fund is authorization for up to 13.6 million from the Federal Home Investment Partnership Program, as well as million from the Federal Housing Opportunities For Persons with AIDS Grant, and million from the state. Authority is requested to provide funding for emergency shelter grants in the amount of 2.7 million, Section 108 loans in the amount of 2573 BILL 980003 33 million, and million for interim construction 3 assistance in the Bridge Loan Programs. 4 The latter two sources may not be available, but OHCD is requesting authority so that we will be able to administer the funds if they are available. OHCD is also requesting appropriations in the General Fund. These funds will be used to continue to support activities that had been previously administered by the former OSHA, and had been transferred over to OHCD. There are three such programs. One is the Tenants Rental Assistance Corporation, Transitional Housing Program, which provides rental assistance to people leaving the shelter system. Under that program, a total of 322 households were assisted as of December 31, 1997. And the goal for the coming Fiscal Year is to assist at least 292 households. The second activity is the Office of Mental Health and Mental Retardation Short-Term Placement Housing Assistance Program. And under that program, for which $100,000 is proposed, a total of 106 clients were 2574 BILL 980003 assisted as of December 31, and the fiscal goal is at least 100 clients. And, finally, the third such activity is the Homelessness Prevention Program administered by the Energy Coordinating Agency and the Tenants Action Group. The dollar amount proposed in Fiscal '99 is $2 million. As of December 31, 538 households were assisted through these programs. And the Fiscal '99 goal is to assist at least 923 households. While the housing in the city continues, need in the city continues to grow, the Community Development Block Grant, which is our primary funding source, continues to be reduced by the federal government. In the coming Fiscal Year, the reduction for Philadelphia is 2.39 percent. That amounts to approximately $1.671 million. It is not an overwhelming decrease, but it is the third cut that the program has been subjected to in the past three years and results in a net loss for Philadelphia. OHCD, as well as other departments that receive CDBG funds, will be making an effort to 2575 BILL 980003 reduce nonprogram costs, so that the impact of these cuts will be minimized in terms of the effect on Philadelphia residents and neighborhoods. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Kromer. Are you at liberty to give us the status of your negotiations with Local 1971?
We are continuing to negotiate with Local 1971. We have agreed with the economic terms that are identical to those in the D.C. 33 contract. But the contract language of our contract with Local 1971 differs from the D.C. 33 terms, and we are trying to reconcile the two. A state-appointed mediator was brought in toward the end of last year. And we have worked with the mediator for several months, and have twice submitted modifications of our position in an attempt to reach a compromise. As of last Friday, the union had not responded to our proposals, and so we are awaiting their response and any offer of compromise that the union may have. 2576 BILL 980003
Thank you. Mr. Kromer, I note that there is a $17 million increase in allocations for 108 loans from FY '98 to FY '99. Can you identify the projects that will be included with these funds?
As in prior years, the Section 108 funding consists of funding for economic development activity, which will be repaid by the developer, the private developers, receiving the financing, as well as some financing for affordable housing development activity, and special activities such as the acquisition and relocation in the Logan triangle area. Those affordable housing activities and those special activities such as Logan are repaid through the proceeds of the Community Development Block Grant Program, and the debt service is deducted from future years, Community Development Block Grants. The prospect of reducing future Block Grant funding available to Philadelphia is a serious one. But the fact is that 108 repayments amount to roughly 4 percent of the entire Block Grant year. 2577 BILL 980003 And in exchange for that, we have an opportunity to organize a lot of funding to put into targeted areas, such as the Cecil B. Moore area, where we leveraged a multi-million dollar federal award as a result of our ability to use our Section 7 108 to seek the award.
I note that two grants for Bethesda in the amount of $1.4 million are being discontinued. What will happen to the Bethesda housing programs in South Philadelphia?
I can provide you with more information. But I believe it is the case that Bethesda was making a change and was seeking funding to make a change from, I believe, an emergency service program to a transitional program, and that our funding has supported that change.
I believe that's the case, but simply maintain the location as transitional housing.
Could I have some information on that, please? 2578 BILL 980003
I realize that this is not a full-blown CDBG hearing, but I see something that gives me cause of great concern, and that is the reduction of neighborhood-based home ownership funding by $1.5 million. Is there a reason for that?
The emphasis that we are proposing for Year 24, the coming Fiscal Year, is on moderate rehabilitation through the Home Ownership Rehabilitation Program, which is all home ownership. Secondly, on extending the Home Start Program, which had previously been targeted, on a citywide basis, so that we can pay for rehabilitating more houses at lower costs. And then finally on sales housing development in the North Philadelphia target areas, west Poplar and Cecil B. Moore area. So although that line item is reduced, the overall home ownership effort, in fact, is increased. I think a discussion that is going to 2579 BILL 980003 be especially important when we do return for our Finance Committee hearing, which we can begin now, does relate to the Home Start Program, which PHDC has used to rehabilitate vacant houses. In the past, that program has targeted the houses in the worst condition, which require a lot of money to fix up. And the rationale has been, if we don't do it, nobody else will. And this is the way to treat some tough blocks. However, I return to City Council year after year and hear Councilmembers say, why can't you do something on the better blocks, where you have only one or two or three vacant, can't you help clean up those blocks? So this year we want to propose considering doing just that, with the Home Start funding. Not restricting it to target areas, but extending it on a citywide basis to treat those blocks that are in relatively good condition, where we can make a difference.
I note that 4-72 would give you budget authorization to apply for an additional $5 million in grant revenue throughout the year. 2580 BILL 980003 Why wouldn't you just come to Council for additional authorization when these grants come up, instead of asking for a blanket authorization?
The practice that we followed in past years is to try to obtain the authorizations as part of that single consolidated plan, and to let Council --
Yes. And to let Council know of opportunities that are on the horizon that may or may not be realized, and seek that authorization as part of that single plan. And I believe we are being consistent here. Could you please give me the reference again, so that I can verify that for you?
Our fiscal officer left, after waiting for several hours. So he is not here to clarify it, but I will be sure to follow up on that.
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman 2581 BILL 980003 Ortiz.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Mr. Kromer, it doesn't mean that you are not loved, right, just because the chamber is empty. On of your testimony, you indicate that the TRAC, transitional housing program, TRAC program, reduces projected '99 goal from 322 households in '97, to 292 households in '99. This means that there will be 30 households that will not be able to participate in that period. How does the program work? Are the support services provided, who is eligible to participate in the program? How long can a household participate in a program? And have the individuals who finished the TRAC program been followed to determine their success in full tenancy?
I don't have all the answers to all of those questions, Councilman. But we do have the information, and I would be glad to 2582 BILL 980003 provide you with a detailed report. Basically, the TRAC program, which has been in existence for several years now, under the administration of the Tenants Action Group, provides rental assistance over a short term. Frequently a year or less, sometimes as much as 8 months to 2 years. 9 But the rental assistance is combined 10 with counseling that is provided by the TAG staff 11 that is intended to help the individual or household 12 move up. So that when the rental assistance ends, 13 some degree of self-sufficiency is achieved and the 14 subsidy is no longer required, or the household has 15 received a Section 8 or some other form of 16 assistance that's hoped to be longer terms. 17
Could you forward 18 and answer, that is, a very detailed answer answering the questions that I just asked you?
At the Council hearings we had on Section 8, you and other folks mentioned that the TRAC program came up as a potential feeder into the Section 8 program. How man TRAC participants go on to 2583 BILL 980003 become Section 8 tenants?
I think in the past couple of years, at least, more than half have received Section 8. Again, we have a detailed breakdown, which I will be sure to provide you.
I would like that. And in light of the Administration's proposal to increase collaboration between city agencies to deal with the numbers of individuals who are in need of supportive services after leaving city shelters, and who are not ready to assume the responsibility of tenancy, why isn't the TRAC program being increased as a working example of such cooperation?
The TRAC program is proposed for funding at the same level. And the intent is to combine this with the Homelessness Prevention Program, funded at a level of $2 million, to prevent people from reaching the shelters in the first place and to build up the capability of the homelessness prevention effort, which will be operating for the 2584 BILL 980003 first full year starting in '99.
But in this hearing -- and I know the Chairperson said that this is not -- over here, in terms of the Homeless Prevention Program, you are reducing that program by close to 4 and a half percent. I am reading from your --
For homelessness prevention we are proposing a level budget of $2 million in Fiscal '99.
A reduction of 4 and a half percent. These are your numbers. I am not making them up.
Okay. If the reduction is not four and a half percent, you know, you have got to go back to your staff and tell them that they made a mistake.
Okay. The city General Funding is leveled at $2 million. I understand the question, and I will account for the 4 percent 2585 BILL 980003 reduction. The additional support, though, as I indicated in the hearing on Section 8, is proposed to come from the Housing Authority in the form of net income generated by the Section 8 program itself. This is a period, as I pointed out, in which we are undergoing our third federal budget cut. And so we are doing our best to keep programs such as this at a level, at the current level of funding, while cutting back in terms of overhead.
And on your testimony, you indicate that the Homeless Prevention program administered by the Energy Coordinating Agency and the Tenants' Action Group, is almost doubling the number of households it will assist in '99. At the same time, the projected funding is not increasing, or is remaining the same. How is it possible to assist 923 households with the same amount of money that 530 households were assisted with?
I know the story 2586 BILL 980003 of the wine and the bread and all of that.
I wish I could do that, but I cannot. However, the fact is that in the prior years, the Homelessness Prevention Program was not operating throughout the entire year, with both organizations, Energy Coordinating Agency and Tenants Action Group. This will be the first time.
You mean that before it wasn't a full-year operation, but now it is a full-year operation?
We will look into that. When you testified before in a Section 8 hearing, you indicated that there would be a project to eliminate the T01 preference in order to provide more slots to other eligible recipients in Tier 2. According to the Philadelphia Housing Authority, there are currently 1086 formerly 2587 BILL 980003 homeless individuals in Section 8 housing. If these individuals did not have Section 8 to go into, where would OHCD put them?
As I said in my testimony before that hearing, there is widespread support in Council and elsewhere for preventing homelessness, rather than funding the shelter system and funding programs that are designed to get people out of shelter. And so recently we put a lot more emphasis into prevention, to help people financially with rent payments and security deposits, and provide the services that they need to --
Where is that reflected in your budget? I don't see it.
In the three activities that are being funded through the General Fund, the Home Assistance Prevention Program and the Tenants Rental Assistance Program, as well as the --
Those programs will take over those individuals that would be taken off the Section 8?
No. 25 My point is that if we can reduce the 2588 BILL 980003 number of people entering the shelter system, then we won't have that large a Tier 1 --
We are talking about homeless. Not all of the homeless go into the shelters. And we are talking about, you know, preventing homeless. So I don't see that reflected in your budget.
To me, again, the Tier 2 population consists of people that are right on the borderline, that are a step away from homelessness. And broadening the Section 8 program to admit some people in this Tier 2 category will reduce the burden on the city's shelter system by preventing them from becoming homeless.
And submit it through the Chair. Because your budget doesn't reflect it. I don't know where the money is going to come from. So it is not reflecting in the materials that 2589 BILL 980003 we have. And I am very concerned. Thank you, Madam Chair.
You are welcome. The Chair recognizes Councilman Cohen.
Thank you, Madam Chair. A few questions, maybe quickly. There is a project that, I guess, I spoke to about a year ago on Value Through Labor, on Hansberry Street, if my memory is right.
How is that proceeding? I think all of the folks in City Council that you were interested in have now voiced their approval?
I just spoke with Greg Palmeri this week. And my understanding is that everyone is on board with the property transfer. And I have written to the Redevelopment Authority asking them to get all the parties together and expedite the donor/taker transfer of the property. 2590 BILL 980003
Yes. The situation looks very good. It seems a very clear-cut situation.
All right. Secondly, there is an organization I think called Raise of Hope. And I was hoping top the paper here to know whether "Raise" was spelled R-A-Y-S, which I believe, or is staff member of mine says it is R-A-I-S-E.
The last one is correct? I thought it made more sense the other way, but the staff member is right. Put one up for the staff. What can be done to assist them? I have met with them. They seem to be a very capable group. I can't remember the name of the woman in charge. 2591 BILL 980003
Yes, that's why I can't remember the name. Habeebah Ali. She and folks working with her both seem to both have a special competence and a special interest in this area. And I think what they were looking for was some assistance either in the way of funds to enable them to have a little staff to do the work that was necessary, or to have somebody maybe provide the services for them. I would very much appreciate it if you could kind of look at that and wake it up from your end.