COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC PROPERTY AND PUBLIC WORKS Room 400, City Hall Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Tuesday, May 25, 2010 1:45 p.m. PRESENT: COUNCILMAN DARRELL CLARKE, CHAIR COUNCILMAN FRANK DiCICCO COUNCILMAN JAMES KENNEY COUNCILWOMAN DONNA REED MILLER COUNCILWOMAN MARIA D. QUINONES-SANCHEZ BILLS 100187, 100249, 100289, 100336, 100337, 100338, 100339 and 100340 - - - 2
Good afternoon. This is the Committee on Public Property and Public Works. We have established a quorum. Councilwoman Sanchez has been appointed to the Committee on a temporary basis. To my right, we have Councilman Kenney, Councilman Frank DiCicco. Mr. Carter, please call the title of the first bill.
Bill No. 100338, an ordinance authorizing the Commissioner of Public Property on behalf of the City to convey 944 South 5th Street, 2544 South 5th Street, 1439 South Beulah Street, 148 Brown Street, 1121 Catharine Street, 624 Cantrell Street, 505 Dickinson Street, 507 Dickinson Street, 1103 North Galloway Street, 2424 East Indiana Avenue, 629 Porter Street, 414 Tasker Street, 3075 Tilton Street, 2206 Trenton Avenue, and 1326 Webster Street, for fair market value, under certain terms and conditions. 3 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc.
Thank you. Commissioner. (Witnesses approached witness table.) COMMISSIONER SCHLOTTERBECK: Good afternoon, Chairman Clarke and members of the Committee on Public Property and Public Works. My name is Joan Schlotterbeck. I'm the Commissioner of Public Property. I'm here today to testify in support of Bill No. 100338, an ordinance authorizing me as the Commissioner on behalf of the City to convey 944 South 5th Street, 2544 South 5th, 1439 South Beulah Street, 148 Brown Street, 1121 Catharine Street, 624 Cantrell Street, 505 Dickinson Street, 507 Dickinson Street, 1103 North Galloway Street, 2424 East Indiana Avenue, 629 Porter, 414 Tasker Street, 3075 Tilton Street, 2206 Trenton Avenue, and 1326 Webster Street, for fair market value, under certain terms and conditions. The properties will be marketed 4 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. and sold through a sealed bid process to the highest bidder. The sale of these scattered parcels will generate revenue for the General Fund and increase property tax revenue. This is part of a pilot program the Department of Public Property hopes to expand in the coming year. The Department of Public Property supports this measure and, accordingly, I respectfully ask that City Council approve Bill No. 100338. I am requesting a suspension of the rules so as to allow for the first reading at the next session of Council. Thank you. I'm joined here today by Deputy Commissioner for Real Estate, John Herzins. We're happy to answer any questions you may have.
Thank you, Commissioner. Let the record reflect that Councilwoman Donna Reed Miller has joined the Committee meeting. 5 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. Commissioner, real briefly, this is a part of a pilot program in terms of conveyance? COMMISSIONER SCHLOTTERBECK: Correct.
And the properties that are being sold are being sold directly or through a broker? Just real briefly, exactly how are you doing this? DEPUTY COMMISSIONER HERZINS: Councilman, John Herzins, Deputy Commissioner. These are being sold directly by the Department and the Law Department, and we are authorized to do that by the City Charter in a sealed bid process.
Okay. I'm not going to get into this. This might be a little lengthy, but I got to get into it. Properties that are City-owned properties that go through the Vacant Property Review Committee, those 6 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. properties, for whatever reason, go to the Redevelopment Authority or can they be sold directly? DEPUTY COMMISSIONER HERZINS: No. Those deeds go to the Redevelopment Authority.
Is there a reason why this particular case that you can sell them directly versus the property that goes through VPRC to go to the RDA? DEPUTY COMMISSIONER HERZINS: Because the VPRC is not a competitive bidding process.
All right. Good. That answers that question. Councilman DiCicco. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm not sure if we had this conversation with you all or with someone else. Is there a beginning bid? Did we have that conversation? COMMISSIONER SCHLOTTERBECK: 7 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. You had asked, and we do not put -- COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: So it's just out there and whatever the bid -- DEPUTY COMMISSIONER HERZINS: We have the reservation not to sell if we feel we're not getting fair market value. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Do we have an appraisal of what we think it should be or are we going to wait until the bids come in and then make that decision? DEPUTY COMMISSIONER HERZINS: We're not getting appraisals on the property. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Partly on Councilman Clarke's question, why do some go to VPRC or the Redevelopment Authority and why do they go there? Why don't you just do them all competitively bid? COMMISSIONER SCHLOTTERBECK: 8 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. There's several different ways to sell property in the City. VPRC is one of them, and I don't believe there's a will to change or eliminate that, but this is another way, by going --
Why is one beneficial more so than the other? COMMISSIONER SCHLOTTERBECK: I don't think one is more beneficial. They both get the means to the end where we're transferring property to someone. Sometimes they're for nominal. Sometimes they're for redevelopment.
But this seems quicker, doesn't it? COMMISSIONER SCHLOTTERBECK: Yes. Well, it is, and it's --
So why wouldn't we want to use the quicker method all the time? COMMISSIONER SCHLOTTERBECK: Well, I can't answer on policy matters. This is a recommendation we made. It was accepted, and it's a pilot. So far, so 9 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. good.
Do we have any determination as to whether the individuals bidding on these properties are City residents and will live in them? COMMISSIONER SCHLOTTERBECK: I do not -- no, we do not know that answer.
So potentially I could have some guy from New York or Florida bid on this and rent it out? COMMISSIONER SCHLOTTERBECK: I guess that's a real possibility.
But hasn't that been a problem that we've had in the City when we have these absentee landlords who have no connection to the property and are difficult to find when there is a problem tenant or -- COMMISSIONER SCHLOTTERBECK: Councilman, these are vacant lots in the middle of rows.
So none of them are houses? 10 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. COMMISSIONER SCHLOTTERBECK: No, sir.
So they all have to be built? COMMISSIONER SCHLOTTERBECK: Correct.
All right. Because I do think -- relative to a house being built I think is different than having existing property that could be rented. COMMISSIONER SCHLOTTERBECK: Yes.
But the absentee landlord problem is a major problem in many parts of the City, and I just don't want to add to it, but you don't believe that that's going to be the case with these? COMMISSIONER SCHLOTTERBECK: We believe these will be developed. They'll be built into row homes.
11 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. Commissioner, in earlier conversations, I think I asked about the properties. Aren't they all zoned residential? COMMISSIONER SCHLOTTERBECK: Yes. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER HERZINS: The majority are zoned residential.
The majority. Like 90 percent -- DEPUTY COMMISSIONER HERZINS: Yes.
-- 95? So if there was something else other than a residential development, it would have to get zoning -- COMMISSIONER SCHLOTTERBECK: Every protection in every -- yes. They have to go back to Zoning if they want to change. I mean, this does not eliminate any process.
Is there a particular zoning classification as it relates to residential or single family? DEPUTY COMMISSIONER HERZINS: 12 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. They're all zoned, most of them, R-10.
Okay. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER HERZINS: Councilman, I just wanted to add one clarification on Councilman Kenney's question. The majority are lots. There are a few standing structures, but they're basically teardowns.
Thank you. Is there a redevelopment agreement with this? COMMISSIONER SCHLOTTERBECK: No. 18
So potentially what Councilman Kenney asked could happen, that someone is buying a lot to squat, to kind of sit on it for 13 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. redevelopment? We have no hammer to force them to develop it within a certain period of time? DEPUTY COMMISSIONER HERZINS: There is no redevelopment agreement, but the bids that have come in so far on this pilot, the prices coming in are very high, so it would be a very high speculation cost for the developer if they're not planning to develop it.
Not the way we value land in the City in some of these areas, looking -- not to point him out, in my neighborhood and Councilman Clarke's, when you look at like the 1400 of Front Street, which is a TOD zone, someone could potentially sit on that for a little bit. So I guess my question is how -- I understand this is a pilot. Is there anything that limits us from putting in a clause for redevelopment? DEPUTY COMMISSIONER HERZINS: Not limit us, but we were trying to 14 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. market or trying in the pilot to mirror the private real estate market where you want to get value for your property, you market it and you get the money you want and the sale progresses. I mean, there are 10,000 lots publicly owned throughout the City, and this is a pilot of 50. It would be interesting -- we are going to track how they are developed and the timeline and everything, and hopefully it will be very successful, we can move forward on adding more properties to this. COMMISSIONER SCHLOTTERBECK: And this process does not in any way, shape or form interfere or interrupt or circumvent any OHCD or RDA process. It's just another way.
No. 21 COMMISSIONER SCHLOTTERBECK: Another method of sale.
I agree with Councilman Kenney that this is faster. I'm just concerned in 15 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. neighborhoods that potentially are being gentrified that folks buy these parcels and then sit on them, because even if they're no longer in the City-owned parcel, they're still a vacant lot and for your average resident, it's still a blighted lot. So they don't see it any different in terms of who owns it. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER HERZINS: Councilwoman, I just want to make note on the first set of properties that we just closed on, the winning bids for the five properties brought in -- will bring in nearly $800,000. So I find it hard to believe that they would speculate, pay that kind of money and sit on them.
I hope you're correct, but I'm just cautioning us that short-term gains without a long-term strategy, we can still end up with lots and people sitting on them. Thank you.
Thank you, Councilwoman. 16 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. Councilman DiCicco. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Thank you. Just briefly, what's the mechanism -- is this being done by way of advertising? How is word going to get out about this? DEPUTY COMMISSIONER HERZINS: We have done e-mail notification to all the major developers in the City, we have signs up on all the properties, and we also are advertising on Craigslist. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Thank you.
Real briefly, based on my earlier conversation, there were a couple of issues with respect to this program, and primarily it was generating revenue. I mean, it's okay to say that in here. COMMISSIONER SCHLOTTERBECK: I'm sorry. What?
It was generating revenue. COMMISSIONER SCHLOTTERBECK: It will. We're also hoping that the row 17 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. will be developed and that one lot in the middle of a row then is a new home and then the new homes, there's taxes being paid and it's --
I mean, it's okay to say it. COMMISSIONER SCHLOTTERBECK: It is. It also does raise cash.
At the end of the day, I know at least in the past years, Public Property was given the charge of generating revenue based on the sales of publicly owned property that were surplus; am I correct? COMMISSIONER SCHLOTTERBECK: Well, when I first became Commissioner, we took -- we targeted some that we knew had the highest value and we recommended at the time under the Street Administration that perhaps we want to look at selling these.
Right. COMMISSIONER SCHLOTTERBECK: And at the time, the Public Property 18 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. Department really hadn't done -- even though the Commissioner was always capable of sales, it wasn't something that was done. So it was a new initiative, and this is another new initiative under this Administration in the same vein, yes.
Well, let me ask you this in a different way. In terms of the budget, was there a number plugged in the budget, to your knowledge, as it related to revenue generated as a result of property sales? COMMISSIONER SCHLOTTERBECK: For this pilot program?
Just generally. COMMISSIONER SCHLOTTERBECK: Oh, yeah, we have a number. We put a number in.
And what's that? DEPUTY COMMISSIONER HERZINS: I think for this current fiscal year, I 19 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. believe it's million. 3
Five 4 million. And those numbers are based on 5 the assumption of certain -- COMMISSIONER SCHLOTTERBECK: There's other parcels moving forward separate from this.
So would you say that based on the early potential sales, that you're above the projected amount? DEPUTY COMMISSIONER HERZINS: Well, these will go to settlement in the next fiscal year. We're hoping for the 50 lots, if we're successful, to bring in $4 to $5 million just on this part of the sale, separate from everything we move.
You guys are nice. COMMISSIONER SCHLOTTERBECK: So the answer is --
This is not an adversarial conversation. I'm kind of leading you -- 20 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. COMMISSIONER SCHLOTTERBECK: No, no. The answer is, yes, we have a $5 million projection, and we're hoping to generate additional money.
More than 5 million? COMMISSIONER SCHLOTTERBECK: More than 5 million, yes. That's exactly where we're heading.
That's what I was trying to get at. Based on a conversation, it was a level of surprise when you got your first -- the first numbers back from your earlier proposals in. COMMISSIONER SCHLOTTERBECK: That's correct.
So my assumption is that this might be better than we anticipated. There may be more revenue generated than we anticipated based on the budget projection. COMMISSIONER SCHLOTTERBECK: That's correct. I always hesitate to go 21 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. higher. It's not always good if you don't come through with the bucks.
Okay. Thank you. Any other questions on this particular bill by members of the Committee? (No response.)
There being none, Mr. Carter, please read the title of the next bill.
Bill No. 100339, an ordinance authorizing the Commissioner of Public Property and the Director of Commerce, acting on behalf of the City of Philadelphia, to sell to Biagio DeSimone fee simple title to a certain parcel of real estate with any improvements situated thereon, known as 11295 Roosevelt Boulevard, under certain terms and conditions. 22 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. COMMISSIONER SCHLOTTERBECK: Good afternoon, Chairman Clarke, members of the Public Property and Public Works Committee. My name is Joan Schlotterbeck, Commissioner of Public Property. I'm here to testify in support of Bill No. 100339, an ordinance 9 authorizing me as the Commissioner and the Director of Commerce, acting on behalf of the City of Philadelphia, to sell to Biagio DeSimone fee simple title to a certain parcel of real estate with any improvements situated thereon, known as 11295 Roosevelt Boulevard, under certain terms and conditions. This parcel is unusable for airport expansion due to its inaccessibility to the airfield as well as its separation from the Airport by a rail line. The proceeds of the sale will be deposited into the Aviation Fund. The Department supports this measure and, accordingly, I respectfully ask that Council approve Bill No. 100339. 23 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. I am also requesting a suspension of the rules so as to allow for first reading at the next session of Council. Thank you. I'm joined here today by members of the Philadelphia Airport and also the future owner. We're here to answer any questions you may have. I believe you have testimony?
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee on Public Property and Public Works. My name is James Tyrrell, Deputy Director of Aviation for the City's airport. I am here to support the passage of Bill No. 19 100339. The bill will authorize the City of Philadelphia, through the Department of Commerce, Division of Aviation and Department of Public Property, to sell approximately three and a half acres of real property at the 24 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. corner of Red Lion and Roosevelt Boulevard, commonly known as 11295 Roosevelt Boulevard, together with the improvements located thereon, to Mr. Biagio DeSimone. The Agreement of Sale, an executed copy of which is attached to the bill, provides that the property will be sold for $2.3 million to Mr. DeSimone. The purchase price will be paid by Mr. DeSimone at one lump sum at closing. Prior to executing the Agreement of Sale, the Division of Aviation and the Department of Public Property issued a Request for Proposals in order to identify potential purchasers of the property who are interested in buying the premises. Mr. DeSimone was the only timely respondent to the City's RFP. Mr. DeSimone is the current tenant of the premises under a long-term lease with the City, which expires on October 31st, 2024 and, in addition to that, has two options to extend until October 31st, 25 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. 2033. In addition to the approval by this Honorable Council, the sale of the property is subject to the approval of the Federal Aviation Administration. In accordance with the requirements of the FAA, all proceeds will go to the City of Philadelphia's Aviation Fund. The proceeds of the sale will be used to fund the Division of Aviation operations in Fiscal Year 2011. This parcel was identified as not usable for airport expansion based upon the property not being immediately accessible to the airfield and separated from the Airport by a rail line. For these reasons, the Division believes that the Federal Aviation Administration will approve the sale of the property. I greatly appreciate the opportunity to speak to you today in support of Bill No. 100339 and respectfully request that the rules be suspended and allow for the second 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. reading to be made at the next meeting of City Council. And I can answer any questions that you may have. Thank you.
Thank you. Any questions by members of the Committee of these witnesses? (No response.)
There being none, thank you very much. Mr. Carter, please read the title of the next bill.
Bill No. 100340, an ordinance authorizing the Commissioner of Public Property on behalf of the City to convey 1202 North 24th Street, 1607 Brown Street, 1236 Crease Street, 1238 Crease Street, 1643 Francis Street, 1423 North Front Street, 1545 North Front Street, 860 North Leithgow Street, 862 North Leithgow Street, 864 North Leithgow 27 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. Street, 866 North Leithgow Street, 821 Leland Street, 1411 Marlborough Street, 1928 Parrish Street, and 2014 Parrish Street, for fair market value, under certain terms and conditions. COMMISSIONER SCHLOTTERBECK: Chairman Clarke and members of the Committee on Public Property and Public Works, my name is Joan Schlotterbeck. I'm the Commissioner of Public Property. I'm here today to testify in support of Bill No. 100340, an ordinance authorizing me as the Commissioner on behalf of the City to convey 1202 North 24th Street, 1607 Brown Street, 1236 Crease Street, 1238 Crease Street, 1643 Francis Street, 1423 North Front Street, 1545 North Front Street, 860 North Leithgow Street, 862 North Leithgow Street, 864 North Leithgow Street, 866 North Leithgow Street, 821 Leland Street, 1411 Marlborough Street, 1928 Parrish Street, and 2014 Parrish Street, for fair market value, under certain terms and conditions. 28 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. The properties will be marketed and sold through a sealed bid process to the highest bidder. The sale of these scattered parcels will generate revenue for the General Fund and increase property tax revenue. This is part of our pilot program, and the Department hopes to expand this in the upcoming year. Public Property supports this measure and, accordingly, I respectfully ask that Council approve Bill No. 100340. I am requesting suspension of the rules so as to allow for the first reading at the next Council session. Once again, thank you. John Herzins and I are prepared to answer any questions you may have.
Thank you, Commissioner. Commissioner, there are two properties on the list that I had asked my staff person to go look at after getting the list from you. COMMISSIONER SCHLOTTERBECK: 29 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. Okay.
It's 1236 and 1238 Crease Street, is actually a veterans memorial garden. COMMISSIONER SCHLOTTERBECK: Okay.
So I probably should -- COMMISSIONER SCHLOTTERBECK: I don't think that's a good idea.
Yeah. Should we do that now in the Committee or you want to do it administratively? DEPUTY COMMISSIONER HERZINS: Do they have an Urban Garden Agreement? Because we were told they didn't have any agreement.
I don't know what they have, but it's a veterans memorial garden. It apparently has significant work on it, so if there's something that they need to do to become legal, but at the end of the day, I'm just not comfortable authorizing the 30 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. conveyance at this point in time. COMMISSIONER SCHLOTTERBECK: Okay. So is it okay then for me to administratively remove -- I don't really know --
That's fine. I don't know what the circumstance is. We just did a cursory review of it, and I probably don't want to -- COMMISSIONER SCHLOTTERBECK: So --
-- rescind the title. So you have to do it administratively. COMMISSIONER SCHLOTTERBECK: So what I just say, administratively I'd like to remove from Bill No. 100340 property 1236 Crease Street and 1238 Crease Street.
Correct. COMMISSIONER SCHLOTTERBECK: We will work directly with your staff to get the appropriate paperwork in order for the use as -- the current use, whatever 31 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. that may be.
Okay. Thank you. COMMISSIONER SCHLOTTERBECK: You're welcome.
Bill No. 100187, an ordinance authorizing the Commissioner of Public Property on behalf of the City to convey to the Philadelphia Authority for Industrial Development a certain parcel of land with the buildings and improvements thereon situate on the northeasterly side of Cottman Avenue near Shelbourne Street, being a portion of Ryers Station parking lot, for further conveyance to the Southeastern 32 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. Pennsylvania Transportation Authority, under certain terms and conditions. COMMISSIONER SCHLOTTERBECK: Chairman Clarke and members of the Committee on Public Property and Public Works, my name is Joan Schlotterbeck. I'm the Commissioner of Public Property. I'm here today to testify in support of Bill No. 100187, an ordinance authorizing me as the Commissioner on behalf of the City to convey to the Philadelphia Authority for Industrial Development a certain parcel of land with the buildings and improvements thereon situated on the northeasterly side of Cottman Avenue near Shelbourne Street, being a portion of the Ryers Station parking lot, for further conveyance to the Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority, or SEPTA, under certain terms and conditions. The parcel is currently used as a parking lot for SEPTA Ryers Station. This will allow SEPTA to assume the 33 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. responsibilities for maintenance as well as for all capital improvements to the parcel. This bill will also remove all City liability with regards to this lot. The $441,500 proceeds of the sale will be deposited into the General Fund. The Department supports this measure and, accordingly, I respectfully ask that Council approve Bill No. 100187. Again, I am requesting suspension of the rules so as to allow for the first reading at the next session of Council. Thank you. We're here to answer any questions you may have.
Thank you. Any questions of these witnesses by members of the Committee? (No response.)
There being none, thank you very much. 34 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. Mr. Carter, please read the title of the next bill. (No response.)
I guess I will take that responsibility. The next bill is Bill No. 100249, an ordinance 8 authorizing the Commissioner of Public Property, on behalf of the City of Philadelphia, as lessee, to enter into a ground lease agreement with the City of Philadelphia Board of Directors of City Trusts, as lessor, for a parcel of land located at the northeast corner of South 20th and Shunk Streets, for continued use of the parcel for a branch library of the Free Library of Philadelphia, all under certain terms and conditions. COMMISSIONER SCHLOTTERBECK: Chairman Clarke and other members of the Committee on Public Property and Public Works, my name is Joan Schlotterbeck. I'm the Commissioner of Public Property. I'm here today representing the Department of Public Property to testify 35 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. in support of Bill No. 100249, an ordinance authorizing me as the Commissioner, on behalf of the City, as lessee, to enter into a ground lease agreement with the City of Philadelphia Board of Directors of City Trusts, as lessor, for a parcel of land located at the northeast corner of South 20th and Shunk Streets, for continued use of the parcel for a branch library of the Free Library of Philadelphia, all under certain terms and conditions. This bill will permit the City to continue to lease the premises for an additional 50-year term and shall comply with the provisions of Section 8-200(3) of the Home Rule Charter. The City will be responsible for the payment of all maintenance of the property. The Department of Public Property supports this measure and, accordingly, I respectfully ask that Council approve Bill No. 100249. I am also requesting a 36 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. suspension of the rules so as to allow for the first reading at the next session of Council. Thanks again. We're here to answer any questions you may have.
There being none, thank you very much. Ordinance 100337, an ordinance 16 authorizing the Commissioner of Public Property on behalf of the City to convey 1902 Christian Street, 2038 Pemberton Street, and 2255 Montrose Street, for fair market value, under certain terms and conditions. COMMISSIONER SCHLOTTERBECK: Chairman Clarke and members of the Committee on Public Property and Public Works, my name is Joan Schlotterbeck. 37 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. I'm the Commissioner of Public Property. I'm here today to testify in support of Bill No. 100337, an ordinance authorizing me as the Commissioner on behalf of the City to convey 1902 Christian, 2038 Pemberton and 2255 Montrose, for fair market value, under certain terms and conditions. The properties will be marketed and sold through a sealed bid process to the highest bidder. The sale of these scattered parcels will generate revenue for the General Fund and increase property value -- I mean, increase property tax revenue. This is part of our pilot program the Department hopes to expand in the upcoming year. The Department supports this measure and, accordingly, I respectfully ask that Council approve Bill No. 100337. I'm also requesting a suspension of the rules so as to allow for the first reading at the next session of Council. 38 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. Thanks. We're here to answer any questions you may have.
There being none, we'll move to the next bill. Mr. Carter.
Bill 100336, an ordinance approving a Lease Amendment between Philadelphia Gas Works by Philadelphia Facilities Management Corporation, solely in its capacity as operator and manager of the City-owned Philadelphia Gas Works, and Girard Square A New York LP for certain premises located at 1137 Chestnut Street. (Witnesses approached witness table.)
Please proceed. 39 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc.
Good afternoon, Chairman Clarke, members of the Committee. My name is Janet Parrish. I'm the Executive Director of the Philadelphia Gas Commission. We have submitted written testimony in this matter, and also seated to my left is Douglas Moser, M-O-S-E-R, Senior Vice-President of the Philadelphia Gas Works, who also has submitted written testimony. If I may summarize briefly, the bill before you represents the recommendations of the Philadelphia Gas Commission which were adopted at a meeting held on April 26th, and attached to my written testimony on behalf of the Gas Commissioners is a copy of the Order and Resolution in this matter which resulted. And the bottom line is that the Gas Commission has approved this real estate transaction and also recommended that Council approve it likewise. As you may know, under the management agreement 40 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. ordinance between the City of Philadelphia and the Philadelphia Facilities Management Corporation, both the Gas Commission and City Council must approve real estate transactions affecting Philadelphia Gas Works. In short, this bill would provide for approval of a lease renewal, an extension, for PGW's Center City district office or customer service center, which is located at 1137 Chestnut Street. It does provide some flexibility to PGW to terminate the lease annually, should it so choose, and not to be locked into a four-year period of time. The rentals have been reviewed by Cushman and Wakefield, who found that they were in fact comparable to what's out there in the market and were within the acceptable range. And the long and the short of it is that we recommend that Council approve this lease amendment. We ask for a suspension of the rules so the bill may 41 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. be read at the next session of Council. I'd be happy to answer any questions you may have.
Councilman DiCicco. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Good afternoon.
Good afternoon. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: You mentioned the -- is it a year-to-year lease? Is that what it is?
Right. It would be an annual, with an annual right to terminate by PGW, and I believe there's one opportunity for the landlord to terminate. Other than that, it would continue for the four years. By the way, PGW has been in that location with basically four-year periods of time since 1994. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: My only concern was from time to time with different owners of this property, there 42 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. have been plans for development, none of which have come to fruition, but there's always talk about the next possibility of a development plan for this location, which is all part of the Girard Square property. So I wanted to make sure that we are not locked in either way.
No. And really, frankly, from the other side of the coin, PGW also has been considering, in conjunction with its Board and with the City Administration and the Gas Commission, are there other alternatives that might be preferable from a customer service point of view, from an operating expense point of view, and so also not to be locked in in terms of considering those options as well. COUNCILMAN DiCICCO: Sounds good. Thank you.
Thank you, 43 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. Councilman. Ms. Parrish, I'm going to revisit the North Philadelphia office. When was the North Philadelphia customer service office closed?
Now, I wouldn't want to misstate the year, but I think you and I probably both recollect it's been several years ago that PGW closed that office and still maintains the office at Broad and Erie, of course, and I think you may also recall that some of the customer service centers went on a little bit of -- I don't want to call it a rotating schedule, but certain offices are open certain days of the week while others are open other days of the week, and the Center City office is the one that is open on Saturday mornings during this time of year when shutoff activity can occur.
So from Broad and Erie to the Center City office is there an office open? 44 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc.
No. I mean, there's -- there are six district offices around the City. Do you want me to try to name them? South Philadelphia, Center City, there's Chelten Avenue, there's an office in Germantown. There's -- I said Broad and Erie. I lost count here. West Philadelphia, 52nd and Chestnut, and Frankford Avenue is the other. Three are owned; three are leased.
I'm not going to continue the line of questioning, because it's really not your responsibility to -- I'm sure the other individuals who are more responsible for the closure, because I haven't forgotten and I really had some concerns about the closure of that office and not putting an office within reasonable distance from that location. I think, frankly speaking, from Broad and Erie to Chestnut 45 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. Street is quite a distance not to have a customer service office, but I'll save this for other people.
I'm sure they'd be happy to discuss it with you, because -- and there's a larger issue of access through telephones, through the web. I mean, there are various -- which I understand that doesn't work for --
The senior citizens -- and you know how they are, because those are, from my perspective, the most cherished people. They want to go in a facility. They want to look at the person. They want to have a conversation with that person. And they don't do the web, they don't really like talking on the phone unless they know who it is. So there's just a category of individuals out there who prefer the old-style customer service, customer friendly. It's as if these three Councilmembers here decided to tell our people who we provide customer service 46 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. to, You know what, you want to talk to me, go on the web or maybe I'll talk to you on the phone. I don't think they would feel comfortable with that. But, again, that's not your issue.
And I'll deal at the appropriate time with the appropriate people. Thank you. Any other questions on this bill? (No response.)
Bill No. 100289, an ordinance authorizing the Division of Technology to enter into an agreement with Network Acquisition Company, LLC for 47 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. the purchase of certain equipment and other assets comprising a wireless communications network, and authorizing the Chief Technology Officer and the Commissioner of Public Property to enter into an agreement with the Philadelphia Authority for Industrial Development pursuant to which PAID will, at the City's direction, assume on the City's behalf certain long term leases and licenses of sites on which are located facilities necessary for the wireless network and sublease or sublicense such facilities to the City, as well as, at the City's option, certain agreements for the provision of fiberoptic communications circuits and/or support services for the wireless network; all under certain terms and conditions. (Witnesses approached witness table.)
Thank you, Mr. Carter. Good afternoon, gentlemen. 48 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. Just briefly, I just want to say it's a pleasure to see you here today to talk about what we believe to be some good things, and this is something -- hopefully something that I know, from my perspective and the other Councilmembers here, is near and dear to our heart in terms of the potential applications for this particular transaction. In our conversations the other day, it was very interesting to hear that we're now talking about the possibility of actually doing some things that we talked about five years ago when we took that trip to Baltimore and Newark and some of the other locations to look at the applications of our surveillance camera program, and to have that conversation with you today to talk about the possible realization of some of those potential applications was quite encouraging. So I just want to say it's a pleasure to have you here today and to talk about the possibilities. 49 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. So please proceed.
Good afternoon, Councilman Clarke and members of the Committee on Public Property and Public Works. Let me also just say how delighted I am here to actually have this conversation about the opportunity around the purchase of a network, which we'll talk about. I'm also here with Deputy Mayor Gillison, who will be prepared, along with me, to answer any questions you might have. And it's a delight to have you here, Deputy Mayor. I am Allan Frank, the Chief Technology Officer for the City of Philadelphia, and I am pleased to provide this testimony regarding the Division of Technology's request to acquire existing wireless network assets from Network Acquisition Company, LLC, heretofore labeled NAC. The City seeks to acquire this network to provide a wireless extension 50 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. of the City's communications infrastructure, principally to support public safety applications, including the City's video surveillance camera network and data communications for first responders. The network will also enable remote wireless data communications by other field employees of the City departments, from the Streets Department to Licenses and Inspections to Human Services. The wireless network was first installed by EarthLink, Inc. between 2006 and 2008 and was purchased by NAC in June of 2008. This wireless network consists of two integrated components. First, a wireless "backbone," in quotes, comprised of deployed microwave towers -- 20 they're the kinds of things you see on 21 the top of buildings frequently -- that 22 contain antennas, microwave radios, 23 mounting racks and equipment, and they're located mainly on privately owned rooftops across the City and they're 51 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. supported by fiberoptic communication circuits. And the network also includes approximately 4,300 WiFi access point antennas, or nodes, that are mounted on streetlights across the City, and it's these devices that deliver signals to the individual WiFi devices and link to the microwave backbone and ultimately to the Internet. In addition to these two integrated network components, the Philadelphia Authority for Industrial Development, or PAID, will assume from NAC and sublease to the City long-term leases to sites for the deployed 17 microwave towers and a 24th lease for a 18 site not yet deployed. The City will 19 have the option of acquiring rights to 20 the existing fiber circuits or providing 21 its own fiber circuits to support the 22 microwave backbone. 23 In the bill before the Committee, we seek Council approval of agreements between the City and NAC, and 52 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. between the City and PAID for acquisition of these wireless network assets. The first, which is Exhibit A to Bill No. 5 100289, is the proposed asset purchase agreement governing City acquisition of the equipment and assets comprising the wireless network. Under the second agreement, which is Exhibit B to Bill No. 10 100289, PAID will assume and sublease to the City 24 long-term leases for microwave tower sites and, at the City's option, a long-term agreement for fiber communication circuits supporting the microwave backbone. Under the sublease, the City will pay rents and fees for tower sites and will manage the sites and leases under authority from PAID and will retain all operational responsibility for the network. 5 million will be paid from federal grant funds. In addition, the City assumes the following liabilities: 53 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. First, final payments owed by NAC for cost related to network operations up to a maximum of $370,000; second, unpaid streetlight use fees of $100,694 through May 2010; and a settlement with PECO of claims alleging arrears on network electric charges of 525,000.
NAC will pay half of the settlement amount, with its payment of $262,500, which is reflected in a reduced purchase price, which was originally $2 million and went down to $1,737,500. So under this agreement, the City has a tremendous opportunity to acquire one of the largest deployed wireless mesh networks in the world and develop a state-of-the-art public safety communications infrastructure. The benefits of this proposed acquisition are numerous and include the following: First, and most importantly, a foundation for critical public safety infrastructure. Acquiring existing assets provides a deployed platform, 54 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. which today covers nearly 80 percent of the geographical area of the City, permitting rapid and cost-effective deployment of a high-speed, citywide public safety wireless network. This capability will support critical needs for video surveillance, wireless transmission of tactical field information, and redundancy to back up emergency radio communication. Second, deployment of video surveillance cameras. The wireless network's microwave towers are strategically located throughout the City, permitting rapid and cost-effective deployment of cameras to areas currently without video surveillance capabilities. By using the microwave backbone for transmission, the City can deploy cameras without the cost and time required to add fiber circuits throughout the City's 135,000 square miles. Value investment: As a point of comparison, the City's cost to 55 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. replicate just the existing network of microwave towers is estimated to be as much as $1 million per tower, or about 5 million for all deployed towers. The 6 purchase price includes pre-negotiated 7 leases for tower sites so that the City 8 will not be required to expend the time 9 and transaction costs to negotiate 23 10 tower site leases. The City's cost to 11 replace the existing WiFi mesh would be 12 millions of dollars more. 13 Next point, reduces the City's 14 data communication costs. With 15 appropriate upgrades to existing 16 networks, the City can use the wireless 17 network to realize substantial savings in 18 its current data communication costs by 19 significantly reducing the number of 20 wireless data accounts and fiber circuits 21 provided by third-party vendors that are 22 in use across the City. In addition to 23 these cost savings, police officers and firefighters will no longer be dependent on third-party networks that the City 56 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. cannot control, as to security or availability, to ensure data communications with officers in the field during an emergency. Leverages the existing City communication infrastructure: By acquiring the wireless network, the City responsibly leverages its existing communications network to establish a solid foundation from which to build a public safety wireless network. Without the ability to utilize these assets, the City would be forced to fund construction from scratch of a new wireless infrastructure and a complete rebuild of its existing wireless capabilities, a process that would likely cost in excess of $40 million and take years to complete. Additionally, the City greatly accelerates its time for completing a public safety data network, as well as its ongoing deployment of video surveillance cameras, because the base wireless infrastructure already exists. 57 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. So the City's acquisition of the wireless network makes unnecessary the streetlight use agreement between PAID and NAC entered into on behalf of the City, the corresponding agreement between the City and PAID, and the management and service agreement between the City and Wireless Philadelphia, which is now doing business as Digital Impact Group, under which that entity was made responsible for managing the construction and operation of the original wireless network.
Accordingly, the City intends that all of these agreements and, at the request of DIG, the City's current relationship with DIG be terminated effective upon the closing of the network acquisition. I respectfully request that the rules of Council be suspended to allow for first reading of Bill No. 100289 at the next session of Council. This concludes my testimony. Deputy Mayor Gillison and I would be glad 58 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. to answer any further questions you may have at this time. Thank you for consideration of this matter.
Thank you. A couple of quick questions. You reference the third-party vendors, the City currently being dependent on third-party vendors.
An example would be wireless cards that would be attached to the back of laptops that are currently sitting in City police cars, as an example. Those are relatively low-cost cards. I don't have the figure in front of me, but we spend probably over a 59 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. million dollars just on those cards throughout City agencies. The PCs themselves, just like many that we buy at home, already have WiFi built in them. So that would be an example of being able to eliminate the use of those and instead using our wireless network. That would be a good example.
Okay. The question with respect to probably the portion that may get the public's interest, particularly in some neighborhoods as relates to the ability to deploy more cameras, can you kind of walk me through how that will be done or how we will be able to enhance our existing system in terms of additional cameras and cameras that are operating in a much more favorable way.
And actually to a degree -- I know this is a little ways down the line -- the possibility of actually having police 60 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. officers have mobile systems to allow access to -- because I know we have -- do we not want to talk about that?
I'll let him talk about that and I'll talk about the mobiles.
Yeah. Because I think all your questions are very germane and, in fact, I think between Deputy Mayor Gillison and I can give you a good picture. But relative to video surveillance cameras, a good example would be a situation where we find the need to be able to light up cameras because of a particular situation. So, for instance, just a month or two ago when we had the South Street incidents, our ability to be able to put up cameras 61 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. almost immediately would be enhanced. And what really occurs is that, in effect, we have antennas that are nearby those cameras, and these high sites or these backbone microwave towers that we're talking about are physically high above the City, so effectively what we're doing is beaming a high-speed microwave signal to those antennas, and because of the coverage throughout the City with those antennas, that's where we say we 13 effectively have coverage over 80 percent 14 of the City. So effectively what we're 15 able to do is, in effect, deploy the 16 equivalent of little antennas either on 17 top of light poles or, for that matter, 18 we can do the same thing with rec centers 19 or any other facility that doesn't really 20 require high-speed bandwidth. And really 21 what it is is an antenna and creating its 22 own network connecting to the camera in 23 this case. I think Deputy Mayor Gillison ought to talk to you about how this 62 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. network would link in with the MIRVs and the other communications that we're talking about, including what you brought up, which is the ability to directly send video signals to our police officers and emergency professionals in the field.
Thank you very much. Thank you, Councilman, for not only the ability to talk about this, but to do it in a public way.
I'm sorry. Everett Gillison, Deputy Mayor for Public Safety. Yes. We have currently taken delivery of current two MIRV vehicles -- they're Mobile Incident Response Vehicles -- that are fully decked out to receive and also be what is, in essence, an access point and to be able to have surrounding cars be able to tie into, and it is our plan to be able to use this new 63 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. network encrypted, number one, so it is public safety encrypted, but to be able to push data not only out to these Mobile Incident Response Vehicles, but also pushing the data back. In addition, to your point, we want to be able to use this for our wireless video enhancement. So you'll be able to have officers in the MDT, using the MDTs in their vehicles, literally hooking into the wireless cameras that are in their district and to be able to sit in their district and literally watch the cameras from the areas where they are. That is currently available in other cities, as you're well aware, and by us having this network and its primary focus being public safety and encrypted, we will be able to use data both from the district out to the cars and then vice versa, from the cars back to the district. You also should be made aware of -- I'm sure you've heard me talk about it and others -- about our Realtime Crime 64 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. Center that we are dealing with. This will enable the Police Commissioner and also the entire command staff with their Realtime Crime Center going up, they can tap into cameras all over, much like we currently do at the Office of Emergency Management and also at the Police Administration Building, but we'll be able to actually push this to the various commanders' desks and to be able to have it interactive with people out in the street. So if there's a question, we can actually have interactive data going back and forth to the analysts that are at the Police Administration Building or elsewhere. Because it is my hope we'll have them in the districts, not just in the Police Administration Building. This is the backbone network that provides us the ability to do that. Now, yes, we have to get additional dollars, and we'll deal with that as we go forward, but this is the first step that we need to do in order to 65 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. go forward.
If I could also just add to Deputy Mayor Gillison, I think he spoke on the police side. I'd like just to make an anecdotal point around fire that I think might be really interesting to the Committee, and it really relates to a personal experience that I've had since I've moved into the City in Overbrook Farms and an intended use for this network that actually came out of a conversation. I live several blocks from the 63rd and Lancaster Fire Station, which I believe was built, I don't know, 1907, and one of the questions -- I walked in just to get a tour -- was a simple question like, How do you know where my fire hydrant is, and I'm three blocks away. And I saw an antiquated map that looked like it was probably created during the time of the American Revolution sitting on the wall that 66 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. obviously is a picture of the neighborhoods. Coming from that conversation and also understanding truly the amount of data we have in the City, if only we could provide it to the fire professionals in the field, I went back, talked to both the Fire Commissioner and Deputy Mayor Gillison around what we want to do in fire. So let me tell you how it's going to go going forward. There will be ultimately terminals, similar to what's in the police cars today, in the cabs of our fire trucks. The next time there's a fire, God forbid it's in my house, the alarm goes off, the screen should say, You're going to 6368 Drexel. By the way, here's the shortest route. It is a residential three-story home, no known HAZMAT materials -- making this up -- but there's a big oil refinery next door, and by the way, the fire hydrant is exactly two doors down. I don't know how you put a 67 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. price on that. And the beauty of this I think, as you mentioned, Councilman, that this opportunity for us to -- I think you saw a dream early on around video surveillance. To be able to ultimately just start with this as a building block will greatly accelerate our ability, I think, to really raise the bar from a national perspective around what it really means to leverage a network like this. And I think it's a fitting end to a story, if you will, where the City already was viewed as kind of a national leader at a time when just this wireless thing started in municipal use, and we're coming full circle to really see it being used in the way it should be intended.
Thank you very much. And I'm not complaining about the price, because I think the price is relatively reasonable considering all the 68 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. savings. I'm just interested as to why it is so low compared to your testimony relative to the towers, the $23 5 million, $40 million in savings 6 otherwise. I mean, I'm not suggesting 7 that the price should be higher, but why 8 is it -- why does it seem to be the fixed 9 cost for us to do it ourselves is so much 10 higher than what we're paying for it? 11 Are you a good negotiator? 12
Well, yeah, I'm a 13 great negotiator, but I can't take full 14 credit for the fact that this was an 15 opportunistic situation that honestly 16 fell in our laps starting last spring 17 when we were notified of the impending 18 financial situation of NAC and, at the 19 same time, I was working with the Deputy 20 Mayor on infrastructure, wireless, and 21 then we were even broadly talking about 22 broadband stimulus and everything else. 23 So I have to tell you, it really gets down to the original investors. This NAC, they're the ones who got the deal 69 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. from EarthLink, and that deal was passed on to us effectively.
Hi. Good 15 afternoon. I have just a couple 16 questions. What 20 percent of the City 17 is not covered with the tower and where 18 would the 24th tower go? 19
That's 70 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. what I thought, and that's my district. DEPUTY
Part of the plan over the next five years is to effectively deploy and expand that network. We're not anticipating on doing it this year. And, again, as Deputy Mayor Gillison pointed out, we have to ultimately acquire funds from the feds and other sources, but it's a part of a longer term, let's call it, three- to five-year plan. If, knock on wood, we're given a present from the federal government, we will accelerate that, because clearly the big hole here is that 20 percent.
I want to make one point. We are able to leverage the 71 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. network as it exists today in the other 80 percent and will be usable.
So just in regards to the video surveillance cameras, I remember getting a call to ask me if I thought that, when EarthLink was here, if I thought we could put whatever it is you put on buildings. I'm not real technical, so I'm just trying to explain this the best I can.
They wanted to know if I could get -- well, originally I got a request of what was City owned in a particular area, and then they wanted to know if they could put whatever it is they put or use a building on the corner of Germantown and Chelten so that they could erect video surveillance. So that is no longer going to be necessary; is that what we're saying here today? DEPUTY
Councilwoman, if I understand, it may 72 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. have been that the question was would Germantown and Chelten serve as a high spot for the microwave tower, and then would we then be able to utilize the cameras in an area by beaming from the high site down to the towers. I'm not aware of where the current tower is. I don't know whether Germantown and Chelten is one of the units, but if that is the question, that's exactly how it works. We get a high tower in an area. Germantown and Chelten I am aware of. The building there is one of the highest points in Germantown. So if there was a microwave tower there, we would be able to have a high area. We would be able to put in additional cameras without having to actually run fiber to each of the cameras, which is the integrated network model we are currently using. So I guess that's a long way to say, if that's there and if that's part of the tower framework, we would be able 73 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. to deploy that way. I just would have to look and see exactly where the towers are and how the deployment pattern would be before I would be able to fully answer your question.
Okay. I do know that it's my understanding that fiber was not -- when the City did fiber years ago, it was not put into that part of the City in the Northwest. So that's why some places you just can't have a camera yet, but more and more -- DEPUTY
This would be an example, exactly, if we can't get fiber, it's an important corner, that's exactly the reason we'd want to do this. And the other point I want to make around fiber, I mean, we will continue to lay fiber opportunistically as the streets are opened up, and we already have agreements, for instance, any time a state road is opened up and so 74 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. forth, we just supply the spool that gets put in. So over a period of time, obviously we'll be able to solve all areas of the City, but this gives us the best of both worlds.
Okay. Good. When EarthLink first came to town, when we first started discussing these bills, one of the big selling points was to provide and deal with the digital divide. Now, it's my understanding you're purchasing the equipment, but you're also talking about those footballs in the police cars and monitors at police stations. So that kind of makes me think you're actually going to be doing more than just purchasing equipment, you're going to be doing programming, or whatever it is you call it. So will the public -- one of the promises before was that we would have public Internet access at low cost. 75 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. Will this still happen? DEPUTY
No. 4 The reason why it is is that this is going to be an encrypted public safety network. It is primarily going to be used for an encrypted public safety network. We are hoping to leverage and be able to build on that with the municipal part where we have L&I and we provide services for Fire and other agencies that will be using and will be able to use handhelds, but primarily what we are doing is making this an integrated public safety network. Whatever else -- we're not going to be in the business for dealing with that. There's other mechanisms we're looking at in order to make sure that that might be done in a different way, but we don't want to use at least this piece. Now, having said that, there is a double sided to this particular asset that we are buying, and maybe down the road we might revisit that question, but 76 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. I want to make sure that Council is aware that this is primarily for public safety.
Now, if I could also respond. Again, clearly public safety is really a critical number one need, but as we did indicate, there's a significant value for what I'm calling the municipal services side, and as Chief Technology Officer, I too am also very concerned about the digital divide, and I have a responsibility to also look at technology as it relates to all of the Mayor's goals. So in particular, when you look at the City's institutions and buildings, rec centers, libraries, places where our youth congregate, but within the context of, let's say, the City buildings and institutions, we do see that as we build out eventually the municipal side, that would also provide the ability, if you will, for what you're calling that free Internet, when you're in a rec center, when you're in the playground, when 77 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. you're in those areas that we collectively say are the boundaries effectively of the City institutions. So I don't want to really give the impression that our vision is simply for City workers themselves. And the issue of generally free Internet in the public spaces is really a matter for the marketplace and that the City really can't be, if you will, in that business, but we would, as I said, have the capability of creating these, call it, free zones in those areas that we really are close to the youth and our citizens and so forth. But we don't foresee the City bathed in what was Wireless Philadelphia. That's not the business that we're in.
Okay. Well, Wireless Philadelphia was going to cost a fee, but just not as much as some of the other Internet providers. It wasn't totally free. I mean, it was supposed to be free in places like Love 78 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. Park and once I got a call about if we were going to do it, what parks in my district would we like to see it installed, but it wasn't totally -- they were free, but if I as a resident wanted it, it was, I think, $9 or something like that.
We'll never be in that business of charging, but as it relates to the free spaces, whether it be a park or a City institution, that's really over time a policy issue of where we do it. I think the key thing to remember is that the fundamental original business model for EarthLink was flawed and, therefore, it went out of business. So what effectively we're able to do is create an infrastructure to support all the City services, including public safety, and as a by-product, we're now able to give focused free service in those areas it makes sense, but, again, it's within the boundaries, as we see it, of City buildings and institutions. 79 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc.
Well, that's good. What about the video surveillance cameras that are presently not operating or they have a bag over them? How will this help that? DEPUTY
Most of the bag stuff we are handling currently by trying to move as quickly as we can to provide the data backhaul back to -- and the amount of data that we have to compile and keep for about 30 days. We are trying to deal with that so we can take the bags off. I know the Commissioner has recently issued another request, and we are moving with DOT now to make sure that that happens. So we're hoping that that's going to be done within the next, I think it was, 60 days. The next 60 days we're going to be able to get to a lot of those particular matters. This, though, allows us to put up cameras that are wireless from the beginning, cameras that we could actually install and would be able to then pipe 80 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. them basically through the existing network. Once we encrypt it, we'll be able to do that, and it will be a lot more flexibility. So that's what this allows us to do and to plan for as we go forward.
One last request. I'd like to get a copy of -- I'd like to get a list of where the cameras are in my district. DEPUTY
Not a problem. We made that available, and I'll make sure you get another copy sent to you. I'll send it to the Chair or send it directly to you as Councilperson. Thank you.
Thank you, Councilwoman. Any other questions? (No response.)
Anyone else 81 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. to testify on this bill? (No response.)
There being none, this concludes the public hearing of Public Property and Public Works. We will now move into the public meeting. Councilman Kenney, please --
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I move that Bill No. 11 100187 be reported out of this Committee with a favorable recommendation and a request made for rules suspension to allow first reading at our next Council session. (Duly seconded.)
The ayes have it. Bill No. 100187 is reported out 82 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. of Committee with a favorable recommendation with rules suspension as to allow reading at the next session of Council.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I move that Bill No. 8 100249 be reported out of this Committee favorably and a request made for rules suspension to allow first reading at our next Council session. (Duly seconded.)
The ayes have it. Bill No. 100249 is reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation with rules suspension to allowing reading at the next session of Council. 83 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc.
Mr. Chairman, Councilman DiCicco, the Chairman of a very busy committee, tells me as long as there's no amendments to any of these bills, I can read them all and then suspend. It's up to you.
Who has held many more hearings than I have as the Committee Chair of the Streets Department.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I move that Bill Nos. 100289, 100336, 100337, 100338, 100339 and 100340 be reported out of this Committee with a favorable recommendation and a request made for rules suspension as to allow first reading at our next Council session. (Duly seconded.)
It's been 84 5/25/10 - PUBLIC PROPERTY - BILL 100187, etc. moved and seconded. Those in favor? (Aye.)
The ayes have it. Bill Nos. 100289, No. 100336, No. 100337, No. 100338, No. 100339 and 100340 have been moved and seconded and approved and they will be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation with a rules suspension as to allow reading at the next session of Council. This concludes the meeting on Public Property and Public Works. Thank you very much. (Committee on Public Property and Public Works concluded at 2:55 p.m.) - - - 85 CERTIFICATE I HEREBY CERTIFY that the proceedings, evidence and objections are contained fully and accurately in the stenographic notes taken by me upon the foregoing matter on May 25, 2010, and that this is a true and correct transcript of same. -------------------- MICHELE L. MURPHY RPR-Notary Public (The foregoing certification of this transcript does not apply to any reproduction of the same by any means, unless under the direct control and/or supervision of the certifying reporter.)