They're not dumb, but it's also not in the Code. I have to find the Health Department's regulations.
My point is, what is the difference between filling out 48, filling out a traffic ticket, or filling out a Code enforcement? It's different boxes.
I'm with you. I also have to go through my bureaucratic hurdles which I don't have the authority to tell you I can do right now. 63 10/07/04 - LICENSES - BILL 040432
But in the meantime, what happens is they go back to the same house time after time after time, responding to the same complaints. The neighbors aren't getting any satisfaction. The tension rises because the guy can't sleep because the dog's barking all day. And I just think issuing that fine, that citation, is going to have a direct effect on that person's attitude and behavior. And if not, those fines will just build up to a point where they have negative effect on their credit rating, a negative effect when they want to get a credit card or buy a car.
I apologize. I don't mean to be exasperated with ou, but it's tough because these things are common sense issues that we can address in a common sense way without all this stuff.
When you have a fireman or policeman or anyone that works all night and they come home they have 64 10/07/04 - LICENSES - BILL 040432 to go to bed and they have this dog right across from the driveway that's constantly barking and barking because the owner left for work -- I mean, it's right in back of me, in fact. I mean, people are constantly complaining about it.
As Councilman Kenney has stated, give them a incident report or whatever. It makes sense. But anyway, I don't want to beat a dead horse.
They just authorized the School District police to write parking tickets. I think do something similar to that.
Councilman, I think Officer Healey hears us. He has to go back and talk to his boss. And hopefully before we do this again, we have an answer. That will be it for the bill. We're 65 10/07/04 - LICENSES - BILL 040698 going to move to the next bill. These witnesses are dismissed.
Bill 040698, amending Section 9-605 of the Philadelphia Code entitled "Towing" by providing that no license to engage in the business of towing vehicles shall be issued to a towing company whose business is located in any political subdivision or state that will not as a matter of practice or policy enter into contracts or towing services with any Philadelphia-based towing company, all under certain terms and conditions.
Thank you. The first panel will be William Gamble, Procurement Department and Otis Haigler from L&I if they're present. COMMISSIONER GAMBLE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My name is William Gamble, Procurement Commissioner. At this time, sir, I do not have written testimony. I'm here to 66 10/07/04 - LICENSES - BILL 040698 support L&I because they're the ones who are actually responsible for this ordinance.
Okay. So we'll let Otis do all the talking. Mr. Haigler.
Good day, Councilman Mariano and Members of the Committee. I am Otis Haigler, Jr., Director of Legislative Affairs for the Department of Licenses and Inspections. I had submitted testimony to the be given today on the record and I have written testimony prepared. But I was given information this morning from the Law Department, and I believe I've distributed copies to you, that raise certain legal issues.
Those pesky lawyers got involved and they're going to knock down the good Councilman's bill, right, is that what you're saying?
That's correct, sir. I really would need the advice of their counsel to really proceed further with this testimony. Just suffice it to say that the 67 10/07/04 - LICENSES - BILL 040698 Department offers no opinion on the practice of the contracts themselves and we offer no 4 opinion on subdivisions giving contracts to towers. The only thing we would do is we would enforce the requirements of the law if the Council were to pass it.
You won't enforce anything we pass if the Law Department doesn't deem is illegal, right?
And the Mayor would sign it into law, if it's not considered otherwise.
I think I get it. Councilman Kenney, you have a statement?
Yes. I just want to give you a little background for the Committee and for the record. Back in 1995 as a result of complaints relative to wreck chasing and some of the other problems that were going on that were very, very well publicized, we came up with a licensing ordinance that the tow 68 10/07/04 - LICENSES - BILL 040698 industry in Philadelphia agreed to, providing for certain levels of equipment, certain sizes, annual inspections, certain safety equipment. There was a whole litany of things that we worked out with the towing industry that I think in the end has made the towing industry in Philadelphia better than it was back before9. One of the provisions in of that bill said that if outside towing companies from outside the City wanted to do business in the city, they certainly were welcome and we would license those trucks as long as they met those standards. But as is commonplace in the suburbs, many suburban townships and municipalities preclude, refuse to allow Philadelphia tow trucks to operate in their jurisdictions. They originally would not license them and they would actually chase them out of the community or out of the area if in fact they were not a local tower. So we passed a provision saying that if we had this similar -- if the township or municipality had this trade restriction, so to speak, on our 69 10/07/04 - LICENSES - BILL 040698 people that they could not get a license here in Philadelphia, and that was put into effect. Some of townships and municipalities got around that by saying that they would in fact license our tow trucks in their area but they wouldn't contract with them. So if there was a contract in the municipality or township, its contract required that the contractor be a local towing company, which in effect still precluded our people from getting any contracts in the suburbs. That's why we're back here with this. Plymouth Township and Conshohocken are two areas for example that will license a tow truck from Philadelphia but will not allow a contract to be entered into with a towing company from Philadelphia. And similar what we have a situation here in Philadelphia where we have a tow company that just entered into, as you know, Commissioner, a one-year contract with three one-year options who comes from -- that company comes from an area that prohibits our people from doing business in that township, but we gave them a contract anyway. 70 10/07/04 - LICENSES - BILL 040698 So what we want to do is try to close that loophole on the contracting side so that people -- we're looking for fair trade. We don't want to be exclusionists. We don't want to be people who don't want to deal with the suburbs. But it's hard enough to stay in business in Philadelphia as it is with the tax structure and all the other fees and issues you have to deal with. It's hard enough to stay in business Philadelphia with the insurance rates the way they are. There's no 13 reason in the world we should be giving contracts to suburban companies that keep our people or prohibit our people from doing business in their township. And that's what this is all about. As a result of that, there's a couple questions I'd like to ask the Procurement Department as a result of the letting of this contract to JaneWay to do City towing. Last year in 2003, the voters of the City of Philadelphia approved a Charter change amendment which would give preference to 71 10/07/04 - LICENSES - BILL 040698 Philadelphia firms in contracting. Was that preference considered when it came to this particular contract? COMMISSIONER GAMBLE: Councilman Kenney, that preference really didn't go into effect -- we didn't start enforcing it until July 1st of this year.
But we passed it. COMMISSIONER GAMBLE: It was passed but we didn't put it into effect until July 1st.
Is there a reason for that? What was the contract with JaneWay given? COMMISSIONER GAMBLE: For point of classification, that contract is not for four years; it's a one-year contract with no 20 options to renew.
Well, that's good. I'm glad to hear that because it was 72 10/07/04 - LICENSES - BILL 040698 our understanding, as is many contracts with City government, it's a way to get around us. COMMISSIONER GAMBLE: It's one-year contract, Councilman.
Well, that's good to know. COMMISSIONER GAMBLE: But in order for us to put the LBE Program into effect, it took us some time getting the Law Department to give us some guidance, so as of July 1, the LBE Program is in effect. But this contract at the time it was out was not a part of the LBE Program.
And why did not the City Government or the Procurement Department follow the sprit of the 1995 legislation to determined whether or not this company and where it's located prohibits our people from doing business there? COMMISSIONER GAMBLE: Well, Councilman, first of all, we don't issue the license, Procurement doesn't. So we have no 24 way of knowing if a company or a jurisdiction is not allowing our bidders to bid or not. So 73 10/07/04 - LICENSES - BILL 040698 we have no way of knowing that unless L&I tells us so.
Did you ask them? COMMISSIONER GAMBLE: Well, they have a license. I was not aware that there was a loophole until recently that cities were not allowing us to get the bid even though we may be the low bidder but preventing us from doing it because we were the City of Philadelphia.
I'm happy it's a one-year contract with no extensions. That will be helpful on the next go-around. Again, I want the record to be clear that we have nothing against JaneWay, we have nothing against Plymouth Township, we have nothing against Conshohocken. I would love for our people to be able to do legitimate business in those areas, but until and unless they allow us in reality to do it, we need to plug this hole to put some pressure on them out there to lighten up and allow us free trade. 74 10/07/04 - LICENSES - BILL 040698 Thank you.
I'm a little unclear on the position of L&I. In concept you agree with it, but you're waiting for the Law Department to say it's okay?
Well, Councilman, we have no opinion on the contract issue at all.
If concept if Council were to pass the bill and the Mayor were to sign it into law, we would enforce the provisions. But we had certain requirements that we were going to ask for. In particular, we were going to put the burden on the towing company to provide documentation to the department. We don't have the resources to go out and investigate and find out whether or not another political subdivision has a policy or restriction on towing contracts. So in that respect, we would have required that if there was a complaint being lodged that the 75 10/07/04 - LICENSES - BILL 040698 contractor would have to provide us with evidence and proof as to what the complaint was and what the issue was, and we would take that under consideration before we would act on a particular license.
That's generally how we enforce anyway. We enforce probably more on complaint than we do on proactive, and I understand the limitations of the Department.
But we would take it one step further. We would also require documentation of that, because, again, we're asked to deny a license or to revoke a license and, like I side, we don't have the resources to go out into other subdivision or municipalities to check every ordinance that some other subdivision may have.
We would not expect you to do that. But as far as your position unofficially, considering the Law Department opposition -- the Law Department's opposition, to me, is suspect. Basically their position is federal law trumps this. 76 10/07/04 - LICENSES - BILL 040698
Neither am I. I find the Law Department more times than I would like to finding excuses for us not to do something and then they do help us. We'll work with them. Again, if we pass this and the Mayor signs it, if someone wants to challenge this under federal law, that's their business to do, but it will be on their dime and their time. I believe we should protect our businesses here. Commissioner, is there some way we can get a commitment today that on the next go-around on the contract the Philadelphia preference will be taken into consideration? COMMISSIONER GAMBLE: Well, Councilman, all contracts now as July 1 has the LBE 5 percent preference, on all of them.
So on this one we'll do the same? COMMISSIONER GAMBLE: Yes.
All right. Thank you. 77 10/07/04 - LICENSES - BILL 040698
Anyone else have any question for these witnesses? (No response.)
Seeing none, the next panel will be Jack Logan, Richard Antanucci, Ed Alfano, and Joe Trent.
I think if you listen to their testimony, and I know you will, they will flush out some of the problems that they've been dealing with in actually staying in City. And as we know, it's difficult as it is to stay in the City without these other types of restrictions being put on them.
Thank you, Councilman. State your name for the record
Members of Council, Council Chairman. My name is Ed Alfano and I am the owner of Century Motors, a business based in Philadelphia for 30 years. I am a member and a spokesman for the Philadelphia Authorized Towers and Salvers Association. We're the association responsible for the 78 10/07/04 - LICENSES - BILL 040698 40,000 car initiated CK for the City of Philadelphia. I help coordinate that effort with the City of Philadelphia with the Managing Director Joe Martz and the Police Department. I also started the abandoned vehicle program in 1984. I'm the first salver for the City of Philadelphia, and I continue to do the same job. In 1999, I was co-author -- I helped to author the recover stolen program for the City of Philadelphia, which in the first year brought back a million dollars in revenue to the City. In the year 2000, with the President Judge Fred Perry from traffic court, I was fortunate to run the truck enforcement program, responsible for moving over 2600 trucks. In 1995 when Councilman Kenney proposed Ordinance 9-605 and Council approved it, I thought it would be a change in the way some of the things and contracts were awarded for our industry. But it's now 2004, going on 2005, and I'm sad to say nothing has changed. The Procurement Department either knowingly or unknowingly really has violated the spirit of 79 10/07/04 - LICENSES - BILL 040698 the law that was adopted, 9.605. I adamantly support an amendment to is that ordinance because this is the only way that Philadelphia-based businesses will have a fair and equal playing field. Reciprocity was a part of the original ordinance drafted by Councilman Kenney and approved by Council, but it was never adhered to. Thank you.
Mr. Chairman, my name is John DeVergillis CK. I represent the Philadelphia Authorized Towers and Salvers. And my clients have asked me to come here and support this ordinance amending 9-605 of the Code. Despite Councilman Kenney's best efforts in 1995, Section 9-605 was apparently not sufficient for the City. Certain companies located outside of Philadelphia were able to take advantage of 9-605 in its current form. For example, Councilman Kenney has reference a number of contracts, many of which 80 10/07/04 - LICENSES - BILL 040698 I have for the Committee in Plymouth Township which allow companies to operate in Plymouth Township only if they are based in that area. Each of the contracts lets towing and requires the practice and policy that requires a place of business in that particular township. The policy of 9-605 originally should have been sufficient preclude these companies in participating in Philadelphia. But what we've apparently seen is that the Committee must level the playing field for Philadelphia companies. It's just talking about fundamental fairness. There's a perception among by clients and it appears clear that it's not only Procurement but apparently, as Councilman Kenney has suggested, even the Law Department of the City is just not being fair with Philadelphia companies. And it strikes me that Procurement and the Law Department should be supporting the spirit of 9-605 and its amendment today. We, of course, are supporting that particular amendment as it is to help the Philadelphia businesses to level the playing field with 81 10/07/04 - LICENSES - BILL 040698 their suburban counterparts. Thank you.
Good afternoon. My name is Joseph Trent. I'm the President of the Southwest Auto Association. I represent 58 businesses in Philadelphia, with each business employing four to five employees. I am in strong support of the amendment to ordinance 11 9-605 because its's only fair to our members have the same opportunity to bid work outside our municipality when others can bid work in Philadelphia because without reciprocity we are at a total disadvantage. My members and business have suffered a tremendous loss because this original ordinance was never enforced. I thank all the members for the opportunity to come forward and express our concerns. Thank you.
My name is Richard Antanucci. I'm here from Philadelphia Towing and Transport. 82 10/07/04 - LICENSES - BILL 040698 I had been on certain contracts that directly are related to this and I'm also here to support the amendment to this bill to keep the work within the City of Philadelphia. If there are companies here that can handle the work, I think they should get the work, given a chance. There's been many things that, you know, change of equipment last minute, made it almost impossible to compete. So I'm here to support the amendment of the bill.
Thank you, Councilman. I'm Jack Logan, Jack Logan's Towing. I've been a tow operator in Philadelphia since 1970. I'm here to give my support to this bill because I feel the same way that these do. The contracts should be awarded to people sitting within the City. And basically, we're part of your tax base and we want to keep the money here. Thank you very much.
I don't think you'll get any argument out of this Committee. 83 10/07/04 - LICENSES - BILL 040698 Councilwoman Brown has a question.
Good afternoon, gentlemen. I was not here in 1995, but I think this is another example where Councilman Kenney has looked at a quality-of-life issue and then chose to deal with the inequity in it. Enlighten me and tell me from your perspective why you believe the ordinance has not been adhered to? Simply due to lack of enforcement with counties outside of Philadelphia or what?
Councilwoman, if I may. I think that 9-605 in its present state if it was enforced properly by Licenses and Inspections and Procurement, particularly as it relates to the spirit of that ordinance and that portion of the Code, that it should have been enforced. That if they took the opportunity to enforce the spirit of that particular ordinance that we wouldn't be here today. Unfortunately, that's not the case. Procurement has and, from what I hear today, apparently the Law Department too are taking 84 10/07/04 - LICENSES - BILL 040698 the opportunities not to help Philadelphia businesses, not to level the playing field for the Philadelphia businesses. And that's unfortunate. I think that Councilman Kenney's amendment to the bill clears up that one slight loophole as to practice and procedures, the contracts that I have that Plymouth Township has issued for the last several years all talk about --not about the ordinance but about the practice. So it's not an ordinance 13 that precludes it but it's their practice. And that's the unfortunate aspect of the previous bill. They got around that out in Plymouth Township. But it's my thought that if Procurement and law wanted to support the spirit of 9-605 as it currently exists, that we would not have a problem with suburban companies coming here where there's no 22 reciprocity.
So you're confident that the new language will clearly secure the loophole? Is that your sense, 85 10/07/04 - LICENSES - BILL 040698 gentlemen?
And one final question. The role of Procurement and/or L&I in this is what, to issue the fines? Help me out.
Well, actually you heard the Procurement Commissioner just testify that he has no resources to investigate. He just testified something similar to that. You heard the same thing I did. So who does? So if someone comes there and applies for a contract and there's no 15 investigative measures, who determines whether you're eligible or not? That's a big void.
The only thing we got going is the No. 2 guy on the list is one of you guys and you, for lack of better words, bring that to our attention.
Somebody else would have to bring it to their attention. But, Councilman Mariano, so many of these things slip through the cracks. And here's a typical example. The Procurement Commissioner just 86 10/07/04 - LICENSES - BILL 040698 testified that they have no investigative means to find out whether these things exist. Here we have contracts that went on since 2000, since the year 2000. It's 2004. When are you going to find out?
Would you be okay with what he said today, the Procurement Commissioner?
He basically said that since they passed this new thing where they check everything out on July 1st they'll start doing this contract that we're here about which is the one that --
They probably won't get automatically renewed, if I understood him right.
Well, I heard him say to Councilman Kenny that the contract was a one-year contract. And the contract that I looked at says it's a one-year with three additional one-year renewals.
Mr. Chairman, 87 10/07/04 - LICENSES - BILL 040698 that they originally did one year and three-year extensions but they decided they're not going to use that option now. Again, what I think this bill does is that not only is it L&I's responsibility to license but Procurement which does the bulk of the contracting for City, if not all of it, won't be able to contract unless they do some investigation or ask the question. Again, a lot of it, as we find, comes from complaint. The complaint is made, the investigation is done, they say, "Wait a minute, we can't sign this contract." But even as they knew the contract was being signed with this suburban company, even if they came to us this is the case and investigate it, there's no prohibition on the contracting with them. So this would now have an additional hurdle for people to try to get around. Not to interrupt Councilman Kelly on his questioning, just so we can get a general flavor. Of all your companies and associations that are located in Philadelphia, 88 10/07/04 - LICENSES - BILL 040698 can you give me a ballpark figure on the number of employees?
Well, just Joe's association, he just said it was 58 companies with approximately 5 employees each. Philadelphia Towers and Salvers are I'd say 17 with a lot more employees. And the other people that are in the industry that aren't members of our association. I'd say they're definitely in the hundreds, Councilman, definitely in the hundreds
My final comment on that is there's a sentiment amongst members of this legislative body, I being one of them, that first priority and consideration should always go to Philadelphia-based companies, employees, period. To be told that we can't find because we can't find, it's totally unacceptable. It's unacceptable. So my vote will reflect my position on this 89 10/07/04 - LICENSES - BILL 040698 issue.
Gentlemen, I think you have a legitimate grievance. And I admire Councilman Kenney for trying to level the playing field here. And that's what this is. I'm tired of seeing Philadelphia businesses, and I think Councilwoman just mentioned that, that we always seem to get the short end of stick. I think this is something we can do. I know that -- and I'm just hoping that Procurement people or Director or Commissioner doesn't wait until the Law Department comes along to make a decision. I think they have to act and they have to act as soon as a grievance is reported and to try to correct this. I just don't want to see this thing drag on and on and on as is usual the case sometimes with the Law Department. They try to get too technical and they wait and they look at federal guidelines, they look at everything in the world to try to prevent us from doing what we should be doing, and that 90 10/07/04 - LICENSES - BILL 040698 is giving the business people here a real opportunity to actually have contracts outside the City as well as within. And I think that's prerogative. And again, I commend you for coming in here and letting us know about this. And again, I commend Councilman Kenney for doing the right thing here. Thank you.
Mr. Chairman, just one. First of all I want to thank you for giving me the latitude you've given me today in this bill and the last bill actually. And this may sound more like a Republican statement, and I mean that with all due respect to both my colleagues, but I am not for trade restrictions. I want to make it clear I am not for restricting trade in any way when it comes to this. But if trade restrictions are imposed on us, we need to retaliate to keep it fair. I would like our people in the City of Philadelphia to be able to go anywhere, the towing industry especially, anywhere in the region to bid for work because I think that's 91 10/07/04 - LICENSES - BILL 040698 what capitalism is all about. But when people start putting on arbitrary restrictions on us, we need to do something to make it fair. And I appreciate all your consideration and questions.
Very good, Councilman. Anymore questions for these witnesses?
My comment is to Councilman Jim Kenney's comment is that your sentiments are shared by all of us. The issue is not to restrict free trade; the issue is equity and fairness in the process across the board.
And, hopefully, that all the departments of the City would support this bill once it's amended. That's going to be an important element important.
That probably would make too much sense. We can only ask for a little bit at a time here. Again, let me echo what Councilwoman Brown said, you have a true champion here. 92 10/07/04 - LICENSES - BILL 040698 Since '95 he's been banging away for you. It's good that he has the staying power to stay with this because this is definitely an issue. This has nothing to do with towing, but one of my first experiences as Councilman was someone brought somebody to me that was selling something to Fleet Management and this guy was in my district and he needed to be able to sell stuff to the City. And he sold the same thing that somebody from Jersey sold. Now, being new and naive, I thought, well, he should be able to at least get a step up on the list because he's a Philly -- not totally. If somebody has a cheaper price, but he should get something. And I found out through numerous hours of phone calls that it just doesn't work that way. It's been hard in the two terms that I've been here to try to change that around. This might be a step -- hopefully everybody's listen to this and hopefully the press covers this where it gets in the paper. I see one reporter over there. If we destroying somebody, there'd be 10 93 10/07/04 - LICENSES - BILL 040698 reporters here, but because we're trying to help you, we get -- he's a good a reporter, I guess. We thank you. And just keep up the good work and stay with Councilman Kenney. He seems to be truly in your corner. I know he does that out of the goodness of his heart because it's just something that we have to survive, you guys have got to survive. These people are eating your lunches, if I can use that phrase, and it's not fair you don't get a chance to at least bid on their contracts. It doesn't seem right. Thank you.
Any more witnesses? That closes the public hearing. - - - - 94 COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA PUBLIC MEETING COMMITTEE ON LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS - - - - Thursday, October 7, 2004 - - - - Public meeting conducted by the Committee on Licenses and Inspections, held in Room 400, City Hall, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, on the above date, to consider action on the following: BILLS. 040432, 040698. PRESENT: COUNCILMAN RICHARD MARIANO, Chair COUNCILMAN FRANK DICICCO COUNCILMAN JAMES KENNEY COUNCILWOMAN JOAN KRAJEWSKI COUNCILMAN FRANK RIZZO COUNCILMAN JACK KELLY COUNCILWOMAN BLONDELL REYNOLDS BROWN COUNCILMAN DARRELL CLARKE COUNCILMAN JUAN RAMOS 95 10/7/04 - LICENSES - PUBLIC MEETING
We will now enter into the public meeting. Councilman DiCicco's bill we're going to hold, so 040432 we're going to hold that in Committee. The Chair recognizes Councilman Kenney for a motion on Bill 040698.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move that Bill No 040698 be reported out of this Committee favorably, and a request will be made for a Rules suspension to allow for first reading at our next Council Session. (Duly seconded.)
Seeing none, Bill 040698 will be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation, and also we're going to suspend the Rules so it can be 96 10/7/04 - LICENSES - PUBLIC MEETING read at the next Council meeting. This concludes the public meeting of Licenses and Inspections. Thank you very much. (Council adjourned at 2:40 p.m.) - - - - 97 C E R T I F I C A T I O N. I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing proceedings of the Council of the City of Philadelphia of Thursday, October 7, 2004, were reported fully and accurately by me, and that this is a correct transcript of the same. RE: COMMITTEE ON LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS _________________________ Lisa C. Bradley, RPR