COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA PUBLIC HEARING - COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - - - Room 400, City Hall Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Wednesday, April 28, 2004, 10:30 a.m. BILL 040255 - An Ordinance adopting the Operating Budget for Fiscal Year 2005. PRESENT: COUNCIL PRESIDENT ANNA C. VERNA COUNCILMAN DAVID COHEN COUNCILMAN JUAN F. RAMOS COUNCILMAN FRANK RIZZO COUNCILMAN FRANK DI CICCO COUNCILWOMAN JANNIE L. BLACKWELL COUNCILMAN MICHAEL A. NUTTER COUNCILMAN DARRELL L. CLARKE COUNCILMAN RICHARD T. MARIANO COUNCILWOMAN MARIAN B. TASCO - - - V A R A L L O Incorporated Litigation Support Services 1835 Market Street, Suite 600 Philadelphia, PA 19103 215.561.2220 215.567.2670 2 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455
Good morning, everyone. This is the continued public hearing of the Committee of the Whole regarding Bill No. 040255. The first department to testify today will be L&I. Good morning.
Kindly identify yourself for the record and proceed with your testimony.
My name is Robert Solvibile, the Acting Commissioner of License and Inspections, and I have with me today to my far left Mr. Prospero, who is the ASD of the department; Deputy Commissioner Perri; and to my right, Deputy Commissioner Verdi. And we thank you for allowing us to present our department to you today. If you want, Council President, we'll forego reading the budget, because you have a copy, and let you ask questions.
Yes. 3 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 And it will be given to the stenographer. She'll transcribe it in whole, and perhaps you can abbreviate your testimony.
Sure. Our budget request for this fiscal year is $88,343,953, of which $21,450,159 is in the City's General Fund, 65 million is in the Grants Revenue Fund and $1,028,000 is in the Community Development Fund. This budget supports 398 general fund positions. Our major accomplishments: We're working as a department to improve our efficiency by computerization. We, as a team, have a computer consultant and a program manager go through each unit in the department and redefine it. We create an as-is, a to-be, and then we meet as a management team and decide what the future will be and how we'll manage our department. Basically the future will be that the complaint received will go directly to the inspector in the field, who will make the inspection and it be transmitted either through a hand-held computer or via computer 4 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 that they'll have at their home or at their desk right to the -- the violation to be issued. That will cut several days of the process, several days of waiting for a clerk to type it in. We also will have Fast Form permits in our districts where a person in the district offices, our five district offices, can come instead of coming to Center City and get about percent of the permits we issue 12 in the district office. We feel that's a 13 great service to the public. 14
We have been in 17 the north -- in our districts, we've been 18 doing it for the last -- 19
-- at least five years, and when we go live with our system when it's all done, we'll have announcements to the public that it's live. We have made announcements to the 5 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 community who would use us, to the contractors. They all know they can go to the district office and apply for their permit. And it's a well-received program and it works well for us. Now, not every permit, obviously, Council President, but percent 8 of our permits. 9
About 20 12 percent of our permits are doable in the 13 district office. Also, via the Internet, 14 they'll be able to lodge complaints. 15 Now, until this system is completely 16 done, that system will not work perfectly, in 17 that it still will have a human being. 18 Although they lodged a complaint via the 19 Internet, it will still have to have a human 20 being take it off. Whereas, in the future, it will go directly to the inspector. It will be checked through the system to make sure there's no complaint already covering it. And the person making the complaint will get an e-mail back that we've received it. We see 6 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 that as a great improvement. Also, forms and applications that people need to apply for different licenses in the department will be downloadable. And our demolition/encapsulations: Using the Neighborhood Transformation Initiative Funds, the department has supported this initiative by performing 495 emergency curbside demolitions from July 2003 to date. Now, what's happening now with that, Council President and Council people, we are handling anything that's an emergency. Collapsing now is handled by the department.
Curbside bids. And the plan process is worked with NTI, L&I staff and Council and community staff who pick what buildings will be demolished as far as the plan demolition using NTI funds. We see this as a real improvement, in that it let's us deal with the emergencies and the plan and how the community will evolve in the hands of the community and the Council 7 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 person that represents the community. We've increased our code enforcement violation notices, where during fiscal year '01 to '03, almost 10,000 tickets were issued for violations ranging from illegal tobacco sales to minors; 3,199 tickets in 32 percent of the total -- which is 32 percent of the total. To quality of life issues, such as high weeds, exterior premises not being kept clean, we're increasing this where we will issue a violation and a ticket to people. So it's a more forceful way of getting the point across that we want our neighborhoods clean instead of just letting reinspection after reinspection happen and not a lot that they see happening.
Inspections of the ballpark, I'm proud to say that the department had issued a temporary CO for the occupancy of Citizens Ballpark. One of the loves of my life is baseball, so I'm very 8 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 happy about that. And I'm also proud of the fact that the management team in South District, your district, oversaw that without a major problem at all. It went well, professionally, and it really is a pride that I have about that we were able to do that. New initiatives: We're going to expand our accelerated plan review. In the beginning of Bennett Levin's term as Commissioner, he created a person who wanted to pay the overtime for one of our plans engineers to have their permit reviewed and approved within three to five days -- or an answer, not necessarily approved but an answer. And the community that uses this really flock to that and they love the service, because as a whole, in their contract they have to start building by a certain date. This allows them to meet that goal and still have all the permit approvals that are required. We find that plan to be successful. Food license: We've asked for a fee increase in licenses with L&I and the Health Department. This hasn't been raised since 9 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 1993. And we're also initiating legislation requiring a second and supplement reinspection fee. As it is now, the department will write a violation and make the first reinspection and the work is not complied. We'd have to go again because we're sending them to court, and sometimes a third and fourth time. We're going to charge a fee for any reinspection past the first one. And I feel, again, that the goal is to get compliance with our violations, and if they don't want to comply, then we're going to charge them for that. And we also have enhanced L&I's services for non-English-speaking customers. L&I will be active in promoting a more customer-friendly environment at its Municipal Services Building intake area by providing translation services for non-English-speaking customers. The department will translate many of its widely requested forms and brochures into Spanish, Vietnamese, Russian, Korean and Chinese. 10 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 And also, we're going to enhance the homeowner access to L&I through creation of a single-family permit center. In fiscal year '05, the department will establish a permit center at a district office at Rising Sun and Benner. It's our easily accessed office with ease of parking and it's the most used office presently as far as customers coming in and making the permit process more accessible to homeowners. If this concept provides productive, the department will start duplicating it in other districts. These are, in addition to the 16 percent of the permits that we can issue Fast 17 Form, this will be permits that were plan 18 review. They will be issued out of that 19 district. And I think it will be a success, 20 and hopefully we'll be able to expand it to the rest of the City. Thank you, and we're here to answer your questions.
Thank you. 11 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 What is the number in job titles of the positions that you are eliminating as a result of the DROP-related work force rightsizing?
What are their job titles? When will they become effective?
Fiscal year '05. Six positions will be coming out -- Jerry Prospero. Fiscal year of '05, the department will be losing six positions to DROP. I can get you the names, if you --
It doesn't matter about the names, but if you would let us know what --
-- 12 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 the positions are.
If they're not handy, just send a letter to me and I'll circulate it. In your testimony, you mention that your department has awarded contracts to perform 318 encapsulations of vacant properties. How many contracts have you awarded and to whom?
The total contracts is roughly -- contractors -- we've awarded 300 and I believe in the testimony --
318. Different contractors, more than a half a dozen, and we could provide the names to you, Council President, to you and your staff. I don't have that with me today.
How 13 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 many employees do you have assigned to the CLIP program both in FY04 and also what do you have in FY05?
We have assigned presently two housing and fire inspectors and a building inspector, are presently assigned. And also there is some clean and seal people, approximately eight clean and seal people that are assigned to that. Roughly two crews, Council President. A crew consists of four people and a supervisor.
We have been told that the CLIP program will be expanded citywide in FY05. What resources have you been given to accomplish that task?
We have met with the Managing Director, myself and Deputy Commissioner Verdi, and we will support that by -- the expansion of CLIP will be coordinated between the Managing Director's Office and the department, and Deputy Commissioner Verdi will be meeting Thursday --
Friday to get more detail of what we'll need to support it. But we're going to keep -- the inspectors will work directly for our Housing Division, who will be doing the surveys. And as I testified when Council interviewed the Managing Director for his testimony, we will incorporate complaints that they've received -- that we receive and that they experience in the field and have the same inspectors doing this work. Which will be about two or three inspectors, Dominic?
And that will be citywide, Mr. Verdi? Why don't you expand on that, because there are now additional resources in the budget for it, so I'm just curious to understand how it would work citywide.
Dominic Verdi, Deputy Commissioner of License and Inspections. Council President, we're meeting on 15 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 Friday with the representatives from CLIP to better understand the expansion and how wide the expansion will be. Based on our meeting, we'll then decide how we're going to handle what resources. If further resources are needed, we'll notify the Managing Director. But in some cases, what we're going to do is, basically CLIP will be the lead in on that area, and the reason why we're doing it this way is, when a complaint comes in, as you know, a lot of these complaints are property maintenance complaints, and the meeting that we're going to have with the personnel from CLIP is to better incorporate the issues that may further the complaint that we see. As it stands now, CLIP handles property maintenance and property maintenance only, but the property maintenance problem may stem from an interior situation. So we're going to work out the details on Friday of how the expansion will take place and how we may expand the inspection further than just the property 16 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 maintenance inspection. If further resources are required after that meeting, we will notify Acting Commissioner Silvibile and the Managing Director's Office.
Also, Council President, presently the department would receive complaints on these property maintenance violations from the community. It will really be a more organized way of attacking the problem of answering these concerns in the community than -- we're presently just waiting for people to call us. We'll be a little bit more proactive.
However that works out, I think we would all appreciate knowing what's going to be done, when it will start, how it will work.
And the Managing Director has told me that that will be provided to you and to Council as soon as the final details are permanent.
We would certainly appreciate that. 17 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 In the Mayor's budget and brief, your department is projected to generate $41.2 million in locally generated non-tax revenues, an increase of $4.3 million from FY04. How will you generate these additional funds?
Jerry Prospero. We've, as you know, raised fees for business -- the business privilege license. We've raised sorted fees to fund the automation project that we're currently involved with. I could tell you that to date, the cash flow situation with regard to that project, we're about $1.6 million ahead of plan projections for all of those fee increases.
And I believe also the permit issuance we feel will somewhat improve and increase, and that's just overall. The Hanson system will allow us to better manage what we're doing, our computerization. I didn't mean to say that word. I'm kidding. But our computerization -- as an 18 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 example, Council President, we were doing how we issue a certain permit, and we found, Deputy Commissioner Perri and myself and his management team, that everybody went to this one person in the process, but nobody knew why. So we were able to eliminate that, which will make us more efficient and be able to spend more time on the more meaningful things, to raise revenue and create public safety to support that.
Are there any fees that are being proposed to be increased, and, if so, what are they, have they been before Council, have they been introduced?
We have proposed increasing -- actually, initiating a fee for reinspections, as Deputy Commissioner Verdi has already alluded to.
And how much will that cost? How much would that cost the individual for a reinspection?
After the first 19 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 reinspection, it will be $75. And then a third --
After the first. So it would be -- that's one way. And also we also ask the health licenses fees be increased.
And when will that come to Council as an ordinance? Because I don't believe we have received that as yet. And if we're to include it in the budget, I would think that we should have gotten it by now.
I will have to get you an answer on that, Council President. We'll supply that answer to you. 20 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455
Now, you mentioned about reinspections. And I'll just take another second, if I may. There is a property in my district that has absolutely no sidewalk. I don't know how many letters we sent out on this. We know who the owner of the property is. I believe it even made one of the -- I think it was the Daily News wrote an article about it. I don't understand. We go out, we inspect, we cite people, and nothing ever happens. Why? I mean, who is responsible for once a violation or a citation is issued, whose responsibility is it to collect? Whose responsibility is it?
Actually, the sidewalk, Council President, would be under the jurisdiction of the Philadelphia Streets Department. But to answer your question on collection, as a department, we create a bill 22 and send it to the owner, and then if the bill 23 is not paid for our various activities for demolition, for clean and seal, for encapsulations, we also copy the Revenue 21 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 Department on that bill.
And they lien the property as a first lien. And that's really the system that's in place now presently for fines and/or costs that we create against properties for abatement of activity.
Okay for the time being. The Chair recognizes Councilman Rizzo.
Thank you to my colleague. Madam President, I'd like to be excused for a little while. Councilman Clarke and I have to go to a formal opening, not too far from here, it's in the Councilman's 22 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 district, of some homes, and we'll be back, but I wanted to thank this department. Our issues are often complicated and there's a lot to do and a lot to know for all the work they do with us, and also to congratulate the Commissioner. He's hired two women, Ms. Evans and Ms. Burns, who will work well with us, and we're always happy to have people of our gender who are brought on board. Thank you very much and congratulations.
You're welcome. The Chair recognizes Councilman Rizzo.
First of 23 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 all, I recognize also all the balls that you have in the air and all of the challenges that you have, and even though sometimes things don't happen fast enough in many of our opinions, many of us are genetically impatient, I think, when it comes to what you do, but I personally understand the challenges that you have every day. I have a question about something that's interested me for a long time and it has to do -- and stop me if this is not your responsibility. When a plumber applies for a permit to open up the street, L&I issues that permit?
Good morning. Dave Perri, Deputy Commissioner of Licenses and Inspections. A plumber does apply for a permit to open the street and also to open the sidewalk. They are permits that we issue down in the Concourse. There's two Water Department personnel that are assigned to L&I. They issue those two permits on behalf of the Streets Department. 24 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455
My point is that, and maybe your answer will satisfy me, but I think that we need to do some coordinating here. What I'm seeing is that when a plumber applies for the permit -- and I know that there are a lot of people opening up the street without permits, I just want you to know that we're aware of that and I've talked to the Streets Department about that. But I don't believe that the City is compensated appropriately when a plumber opens a street, digs almost to the center line or wherever they're required to make their repair. I believe that the cost that the City incurs in restoring that street far outweighs the cost of the permit, because I believe the Streets Department has to actually go and make the permanent repair. And lately I have seen some of those repairs, that I can't imagine that the permit paid to restore the street to its original condition. Can you tell me what -- and if you're not prepared, I hope you are, how much does it cost when a plumber applies to rip up 25 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 the street, and did we ever estimate based on the cost of the permit what it really costs to put it back to where it was before they opened it up?
I do not have the fee schedule with me. The permit to open the street, what the plumber is required to do is put a temporary patch. They then contact the Streets Department. There may be additional fees paid directly to the Streets Department to do the permanent repair, but a lot of these repairs that you see are temporary repairs just to get the street back open again and move on to the next project. We can certainly look up the fees and get back to you with a full answer.
I believe that the fee that the plumber, or whoever is excavating, the utility company, whoever, I believe that the fee is calculated to restore the street. That might be incorrect, but I believe that that's the case. You just hit something else that's very troubling to me. I'm sure there is a Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 standard on what the plumber or what the utility is supposed to do when they temporarily restore those ditches. Anyone that's driven through the City knows that what we call a pothole is not a pothole that was created because of the weather conditions or the environment. Many of the obstructions that people hit are the fact that those ditches were not restored properly, and many of them, especially during the winter when the Streets Department can't go out and make the permanent repair, are very, very damaging to vehicles. I don't believe that the people that get these permits are restoring at least temporarily the street to a standard that's acceptable. Because, believe me, every time I see one, I see a pile of wheel covers on the side of the road where some person on a rainy dark night hits one of these temporary repairs that has deteriorated during a rain storm. What I would like to see happen, and today the Streets Department will be here, that we get together to make sure that we're 27 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 not subsidizing a plumber for the work that they're being paid, because I just can't imagine that we're getting compensated in just the permit enough to do all of this work that we're doing. So I think we need to do some coordinating to see if we're being reimbursed appropriately for the work that's required.
We'll certainly make the commitment to work with the Streets Department to make sure that we are recovering the proper fees and that the repairs are being done safely and they're being done in accordance with the proper standards. I will look forward to working with them to tighten up the system. It's a good point you brought up.
Well, thank you. And also the Water Department, when they rip up the street to do a repair, I believe that they refer that repair back to the Streets Department, and months and months and months can go by before the repair is done. I know they have a contract for 28 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 emergencies to do repair. And, again, I don't know whether it's a labor issue or what, who has the responsibility, but many of these obstructions just go on and on and on, damage vehicle after vehicle after vehicle, and I think it really gets people angry thinking that we don't care. I think that really we need to develop a citywide process where the electric, the gas, the water, the plumbers permits are coordinated in a way where a temporary repair is done appropriately until the permanent repair is done. Maybe the permit should require the plumber to hire a subcontractor to do the permanent repair. Again, it could be a labor issue that I'm not aware of, but it can't continue the way it's going, because it's unfair to have all this vehicular damage, people tripping and falling in some of these excavations. I don't want to beat that to death. The next issue that I'd like to ask is about the Accelerated Plan Review Program. 29 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 Could you explain the Accelerated Plan Review Program and how we are being appropriately compensated for those accelerated reviews?
The Accelerated Review Program, we started it in the department in, I believe it was, 1993. And what the program is, there's always contractors, developers, builders that need to get their project started right away. And in the past, they would make phone calls, Can you put my job ahead of somebody else's job. So Commissioner Bennett Levin at the time, he figured out a way. He said, Why don't we try to institutionalize this. If people need service, why don't we figure a way of charging them additional fees and provide them with the service that they're asking for. So what we do with the Accelerated Review Program, if the normal turnaround time is not sufficient for your project, you can voluntarily elect to pay an additional fee. We will then take that job out of the normal cue and assign it to an examiner, who works on it on overtime, and you pay the fee before the 30 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 permit is issued. The customer is satisfied that they were able to get their hot project done in a reasonable amount of time and yet we're not taking away our resources from the regular customers that come in and that don't need to pay for an accelerated service.
Who manages the overtime program? We just went through a fiasco with another operating department where employees were working overtime and we found that the customer wasn't being billed. Do you have some audit trail to make sure that this program is running appropriately where employees aren't being paid and customers -- you hit it. I think you said that they pay in advance. What happens if there's more time required? How do you know in advance how long it's going to take? That's a ballpark, I would assume, and if it runs longer, there's an additional bill? I don't particularly like programs like this, because it's too loose and too easy to go off track.
With the financial condition of the City, the last thing that we need is to pay employees and not recover those expenses. I'm sorry to interrupt you. Go ahead.
I'm sorry. I agree with you. Actually, I feel it's a necessary evil that we even have the program. In the perfect world, we'd be able to turn everybody's jobs around in two and three days, but it's simply -- we don't have the resources to do that. But the ultimate hook that we have is that before we issue the permit, the customer has to pay those fees. Now, we charge a minimum for four hours of review time, and in some cases, the review goes longer than that. They get an additional bill. The examiner holds the project until all the fees are paid. And that's been pretty airtight. We have a clerk that's dedicated to do nothing but the accounting on this program, to make sure that the employees are being compensated and for each project, that we're 32 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 also receiving the payment from the customer. So we have a dedicated employee that does nothing but manage the program. And ultimately they don't get the permit until they pay the fees.
And we have an employee that's dedicated to do this? Has anyone ever looked to see the entire cost of the administration of this program to see if we're recovering all those expenses? It's nice. From what I understand, many developers or many people that apply for permits use this program now as the way they do business. They just like to be able to have a person available to review their plan, and if they have to pump extra money into the project, they believe that it's to their advantage. Have we really taken a real good hard look to see what this program costs to make sure that the fees that you're charging bring us revenue neutral or we make a few bucks on it? I would hope we're making a few bucks on it, because it sounds to me, and, 33 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 again, I don't want to be critical, that this is a program that could go off track if it's not very, very, very carefully managed. Again, we assume in many cases that these are tight. Whoever would think that this other department that I don't want to mention by name would allow millions of dollars not to be collected. So that's made me very, very gun-shy about programs like this.
Jerry Prospero. Councilman, I could tell you that over the last -- since the program has been in existence, basically for every dollar that's spent on overtime, the City of Philadelphia receives in the General Fund between 2.50 and $3 back. So it's a revenue-generating program.
And it covers any expense that we have created with the inspection, and it's a program that is well-received. And I believe if we tried to take it away, the developers in the City would really protest, because it's beneficial to 34 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 them. As I said in my testimony, a lot of times they have a certain date they have to start in their contract, and if they don't start, they can lose X amount of dollars. So it's real critical to this group of people.
I'm not suggesting to take it away, but I'm making sure that a developer is compensating the City appropriately. Again, the person that you described that's dedicated to it, sometimes we forget to plug all the pieces when we come up with a cost of a service, and I would hate to think that we're having five people support this program that we haven't calculated into the rate that we're charging for the particular service. I'd like you to take a really hard look at it to make sure that you've plugged in all the pieces when you come up with the rate that you're going to charge, the four hour minimum.
Councilman, for 35 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 fiscal year '04, we project generating $1 million in fees associated with accelerated reviews.
Councilman, I think the answer is, it's a program that pays for itself. We will give the Council President the proof of that.
Just because you're telling me you're making a million bucks, I want to make sure you shouldn't be making 5 million. Just because you're coming in here telling me you're making a million dollars on a program, that doesn't mean that all of the pieces are together. That million, if you maybe take a 36 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 real hard look at it, could be million, million, million, million. Just because you're making a couple extra bucks on a program doesn't mean that it's running properly. You could be making possibly more money. I don't want to argue with you. I just want to make sure that you've got all the pieces together and making sure that you're collecting the right amount of money from these developers, not giving them a discount.
We will do that as a team, but I want it to be clear that we can't be making money on what we're doing. It's an expense. We have to make sure that we're collecting the proper amount of money --
-- to cover the costs, the extra costs, that are incurred. And that's what we will do.
And, again, this is one of these deals where you're going to have to show me. I haven't heard you say 37 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 that all of the support is appropriately being billed to the developer. That's all I want to make sure. I want to make sure that two or three pieces aren't being left out. Because, again I repeat, that that million maybe should be 2 million.
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman DiCicco.
Thank you, Madam President, and good morning. First of all, I want to commend you on your intention to do the increased fines for reinspection. I think that's been long overdue. I just was curious as to how you got to the 75 and the 150. I kind of think that's 38 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 a little bit generous on your part, not being critical. I don't know what the magic number is or should be, but for some reason, I think $75 is not sufficient on a reinspection. And if you pick up on the dialogue that you just had with Councilman Rizzo, the cost of sending an inspector out time and time again, I think this may not even cover those costs.
We looked at the present cost of a code violation notice as being $25 and we felt that the raising -- it's a totally new program, whereas in the past we never charged anything, Councilman, for second and third.
I know. And I do commend you for implementing this. I just --
And also, we feel that it's a starting point as a gauge. We would go $50 more and see if that's sufficient.
Again, I don't know what is sufficient, what people will react to, but generally, I think any time 39 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 you're under $100, I think people kind of just take it rather lightly. It's just an opinion I'm sharing with you.
I kind of like round numbers, maybe 100, 200 and then 300.
Well, Councilman, I'm told that one of the answers to Council President Verna's questions is that when the bills would come to Council, I'm told that our fee increase bills will be sent to Council by the Administration tomorrow.
You spoke earlier about the plan review and that some people take the opportunity to do an accelerated plan review. I think they pay a few extra dollars. One of the complaints that I get from time to time for those folks who may not pay the additional fee for the accelerated review is, when a plan and review officer is out on vacation, out sick time, the applicant generally has to continue to wait for that 40 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 person to return, because that's the only person who had that plan. Is there a way in which someone else can maybe pick up that portion of the review so that the applicant doesn't have to wait two weeks for the plan and review person to return from vacation? They're entitled to vacation. We understand that. But it just adds to the frustration of the public when they continually call and they're calling for Frank DiCicco, he's not in today, or maybe he doesn't get the message that he's on vacation, or even if he does get the message, the applicant, he won't be back for two weeks. They throw their hands up and go, Another two weeks I have to wait. And then to find out when they come back that there's something that needs to be changed, it piles on. It layers on, layers on of the time that it takes. We understand that the review needs to be done and needs to be done thoroughly for a whole host of issues, including public 41 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 safety, but the frustration level of the public just gets to the point where they think, It's the City employees, they don't care about me, my application is probably in a bin somewhere. Is there a plan, a program? Is there some discussion going on how we may be able to give some relief, if you will, to the applicant when it comes to those types of issues?
David Perri, Deputy Commissioner. I understand the frustrations, Councilman. I get the phone calls myself. There's three pieces to this. Number one, I ask the supervisors to keep track of anticipated vacation time, and we try not to give accelerated reviews too close to when a person is going on vacation, because, obviously, that's completely unfair to the customer. Secondly, what the accelerated review is meant to do is meant to get you a read on your project. Now, if for some reason 42 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 your project is not code compliant or you did not submit all the necessary information, we will get a letter out, and at that point, your accelerated review really ends at that point in time. We've done the review. We've given you a written letter of what you need. Now you're basically in the cue with the regular projects. We do have very conscientious supervisors in both zoning and in the building unit, and if we get calls that, I paid for an accelerated review and the examiner is on vacation for the next week, I know personally that those supervisors will take that job, either reassign it or have it done themselves. I've seen them do it on an occasional basis. So we try to be absolutely customer friendly and try to serve the customers to the best of our ability. We try to manage when the vacations come, we try to reassign the projects and we try to give an applicant a complete answer during the accelerated review period.
Also, Councilman, as part of our computer enhancement and study of the department, we purchased a part of this -- when it's up and running in that part of the department, in the permit review part, it's called NAG, where it's made for professional services where the supervisor will be able to see -- it's in the cue. There's a plan in the cue, and that that day that gentleman or engineer is out sick, and it will better enable -- or vacations planned, it will better enable that manager instead of having to use memory or people's memory to tell them to manage the situation, which should improve the situation you're talking about greatly.
Thank you. The other question, I want to go back to the reinspection fees. The other point that I meant to make and I failed to is that while we're talking about increasing fees for licenses for businesses, we are known as a non-business-friendly City for lots of different reasons. Not directly at L&I, but 44 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 just in general, the taxing issues that we have to deal with. I would rather see the fees that we currently have in place for an individual who wants to open up a business either remain the same or slightly increase, if we have to, and make up the difference on the enforcement side where those people are not complying and we have to continually go back to try to get them to come into compliance. I think that's where the increase should be, as opposed to on the initial desire to open up a business, we should be more business friendly. We shouldn't make it as difficult as we have been over the years for people to be able to obtain a license, or anything for that matter. Again, because it all fits into the cost of doing business in the City of Philadelphia. On the enforcement side, I think you know, Guys, how I feel. When people aren't complying, I think they should be hit with the fullest extent of all the violations and all the fees. 45 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 So I think you might want to look at that before the reinspection fees come over. Increase that, keep the other stuff either where it is or if you have to do an increase, make it less than you're anticipating.
And as I said, Council President was out of the chambers for a minute, that the fee increases will come to Council tomorrow for approval, and that can all be done --
So we can make the adjustment if Council agrees on the reinspection fees. The other piece I want to talk about, you mentioned about encapsulation. Give me a brief description of what takes place with encapsulation, very brief, because I have a point that I want to make and just for the record.
Basically, we attempt to make the property weather tight; the roof; your favorite violation, the doors and windows ordinance; and the drainage system, to make sure it's properly flowing so 46 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 it's not causing any damage, further damage, to the property itself or to the adjacent property.
So if we have a building that has open windows and doors, what do we do? What does the City do in terms of encapsulation?
At the present time, we have been, because of budget constraints, sealing the property.
With plywood, painted plywood, to make it less noticeable to the community.
I understand. You want to secure the building. Here's the point I'm making: You and I, we've had a number of discussions over the last few years and more recently about 639-41 Catharine Street. I was in front of the L&I Review Board on Monday afternoon. They voted in the affirmative. You're clapping, I'm applauding. When it's done, then I'll really applaud. 47 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455
But the point I'm making is, the owner of the property, Mr. Orapallo, finally came in and he cited a violation that he received a couple of years ago from the department ordering him to seal the property, and his argument was, I did what I was asked to do, I sealed the property. And he sealed it with plywood. My point is, on the Broken Window Bill 000404, we are requiring the property owner to replace all openings with a door, a window, whatever the case is. We are, in effect, when we do the plywood sealing violating the very law that we're asking other people to comply with. So there's a conflict, and I'm just curious, I'm concerned about when these cases get to court, on the one hand, we as the City agency are securing these properties with plywood or other materials and we're requiring everybody else to replace the openings with a door and/or window. 48 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455
I wonder if we're going down a slippery slope here for us. I'm just concerned.
With 639 Catharine, the answer to the violation notice that he received originally was prior to the ordinance being passed by Council.
No. No, it's not. I beg to differ with you. It was 2002.
It was in 2002. The ordinance I'm speaking to was passed in the year 2000. And I'm not being critical. I'm just trying to point this out, that we -- and I'm not suggesting that we can afford to do doors and windows on these properties that we want to make secure, but it does raise a serious issue in my mind about legality and who is right and who is wrong in this case.
The department 49 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 will order the owner to put doors and windows. If we have to secure it ourselves, we will put plywood, because it is the owner's responsibility, not the City's responsibility, to comply with that violation. And we will, as we said to you, increase the enforcement of that ordinance and so on and so forth, but the City itself will not do that for the owner. It's the owner's responsibility.
I understand that. Again, I'm not suggesting that we should do it, because I don't think we can afford to do it. I'm just concerned about the conflict of how it's being handled. On one hand, we're saying you have to do -- you can't put plywood up, but in the other hand, we as a City are putting plywood up. And so it can be confusing. It was raised at the hearing the other day.
I understand. And I really believe, though, Councilman, the answer to that is, it's the owner's obligation to care for his property and not the City's.
Again, 50 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 it's just something we have to be aware of and pay attention to. Councilwoman Blackwell mentioned something about the hiring of two new people in your department. I think earlier today in the testimony you testified to Council President that there's a reduction in -- you're losing six people, they're inspectors?
They won't be inspectors. We have not at all lost -- we have not taken from our inspection force for the last five years. We have met and -- it will be people who are non-inspectional will be the ones we --
But your department would be reducing by those six positions?
The two individual positions that are being hired, are they within the department, from out of the department? What is --
One lady, Ms. Evans, is the Present Director of Contractual 51 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 Services. She's right behind you. And the other lady, Ms. Burns, is coming from the Managing Director's Office. The Managing Director has assigned her to License and Inspections. And they will both serve on our executive staff.
Not to be determined, but I believe around 75. It's still yet to be decided on by the Managing Director, but I believe about $75,000 each.
License and Inspections. Ms. Evans is presently in the department's budget, and Ms. Burns will come to --
So it's 52 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 one promotion and one from outside your department coming in; is that correct?
Outside the department from the Managing Director's to our --
So then it's technically only an increase of one position?
It will be an increase of one position and I believe at the end of the day will allow the department to better manage itself and improve. The improvement of both ladies in their experience and knowledge and abilities will more than increase our ability to function as a department.
Yes. Ms. Evans is coming from a civil service to an exempt and Ms. Burns is an exempt now, will come from 53 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 MDO to our staff.
Council President, I think Councilman Cohen is trying to get your attention.
I'm sorry. His light is not on. Oh, yes, it is. I'm sorry. Did you want to be recognized now or your turn? Is there a question that you wanted to ask, Councilman Cohen? You were trying to get my attention, I'm told.
Okay. Thank you. I have no further questions, Madam President.
How many exempt positions are you allowed under 54 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 the Charter in your department?
I would have to supply that answer, Council President. I'm not at all sure of the answer. I believe it's two. It's not two. I believe in License and Inspections we're allowed six exemptions, but I would have to get you exact --
Under the Charter. I would have to get you the exact amount. I'm not positive. Council President, I'm told it's one for each board. And we have the L&I Review Board, the Zoning Board of Adjustment, and also the Commissioners Office gets an exempt position and the two Deputies.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Commissioner, I'd like to go back to a question that was asked earlier about the 55 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 fees, the enhanced revenues the department is supposed to generate. Your testimony talks about inspections and reinspections and a couple other items. Can you give us a rundown on exactly what the revenue enhancements are, which fees are being increased, how many bills are coming to Council and what the process was to determine which fees would be increased?
Councilman, Jerry Prospero. We have five or six revenue initiatives for fiscal year '05. They include expansion of the Accelerated Review Program, which we have estimated will add $366,000 to the General Fund revenue. We've proposed increasing fees in the Accelerated Review Program.
Can you get a little closer to that mic? And I'm sorry. I didn't catch your name.
Got you. Okay. Go ahead. I'm sorry. What's your position?
Acting Administrative Services Director. We propose expanding the Accelerated Review Program. That would add $366,000 to General Fund revenues. We've proposed increasing fees associated with the Accelerated Review Program.
Let me ask you a quick question about that. What's involved in the accelerated plan reviews? What actually happens?
In the Accelerated Plan Review Program, it usually applies to larger projects that the normal review time on, say, to issue the building permit may be three to four weeks. In the Accelerated Review Program --
Commissioner, I'm sorry. I don't mean to interrupt you, but let me try to better understand that. Why would it take three to 57 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 four weeks to issue a building permit?
Well, what happens is, the construction season, it generally runs from the middle of springtime into the early fall, and we have -- you have a bubble of work that comes through during those months. And in order to do -- our review times increase during those times of the year and they get less in the winter months. So during the summer months when we see the most use of this program, it enables somebody to get a review quicker than what our normal review times would be. It has to do with the construction cycles. It has to do with people taking vacation times in the summer.
I understand about the summer, but I thought your earlier testimony was the construction season is, what, March to October, March to November, something like that, people getting permits are trying to get that last bit of 58 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 project done before the frost?
And since you know that, is it that it takes a long time because we don't have enough people doing the work during the peak seasons?
Well, we've compared our review times to other cities, other jurisdictions, and we're pretty much right in where the average would be in a three-week turnaround. It does take time to do a review on a large-scale project.
Well, I understand that. We know each other well enough. I know all the gentlemen at the table, except the gentleman on the corner, so you won't take any of my questions personally or directly, but I do have some questions about this. I mean, given the fact that there was a newspaper story, I guess, recently that Philadelphia lost more population as a county than any other county in the United States of 59 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 America since 2000, can we really afford to be average?
Is there an incentive to build in Philadelphia if it's going to take you three to four weeks to get a building permit?
One thing that I'm actually proud of, if you look at our permit numbers from back in the early '90s, we were issuing about 7,500 permits, and we're issuing close to 13,000 and we're able to do that with an increase in staff. And one of the ways we've been able to do that is to be able to offer these accelerated plan reviews. It pays for the employee overtime. It takes us through the tough times.
I understand that. On the builder's side, though, look, if you want to get your project done, I mean, you're obviously going to pay. But, again, we've been faced at times with being also fairly high cost. 60 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 To get an enhanced service, you're going to pay more to get your thing done, and so the builder says, Fine, I've got to get it done, I'm under whatever my deadline is, I'll do it. They're not paying it really. They're going to pass it on, and it just continues to lift up that cost. I don't disagree that we should have accelerated review programs to help people get things done, but I would suggest that in an effort to make the place a lower-cost place to function and operate as a more friendly place, not that you folks aren't friendly, you're a very friendly guy, but, again, whether it's a citizen doing whatever they're doing or a contractor, I do think that we need to try to get ourselves in a situation where people are not necessarily at additional costs seeing the process move along a little quicker. And if it is a personnel issue, which I pretty much assume that it must be, I'd be interested in hearing how we would -- if you had the opportunity to reduce that time from three to four weeks to one to two, what 61 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 would it take to do that, recognizing that you have a period of time that you know from history this is when this activity happens and so you need more bodies and then in the out seasons, you don't?
Two of the areas in which we're trying to improve service without hiring additional examiners, number one, we have the Fast Form process, which allows people to get their permits out at the district office. They don't need plans for those permits. You basically click off a check box and pay your fee and you have your permit issued instantaneously. The second thing we've done, over the years we've looked at areas in which we can eliminate the plan review. Back in the early '90s, approximately two-thirds of the projects that came in for us to review needed building plans with those projects. We've effectively reduced that in half by coming up with other ways for people to communicate to us what their construction project is all about. 62 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 So we feel that we're doing a lot of efforts to reduce costs for the builders by not having to bring plans in on all kinds of projects and finding other ways of getting projects started and permits out the door, and at the same time, we're not adding staff, which would be a burden to the entire tax base.
Sure. Let me ask this question: For the many positive things that you're doing, I'm going to automatically assume that much of this information is probably on the City's web site. On the other hand, of all of the millions of web sites out there, I make no 17 assumption that people are checking out phila.gov on a regular basis. What kinds of things or is anyone talking with you within the department about how we better publicize the advances that you're making, the enhanced services that you're looking to provide, whether it's services online or things that you don't need to come -- the horror story for most people 63 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 is, I went to the basement of L&I or just to the basement of MSB and I spent four hours down there, I never got out. How do we communicate with the public that we're doing these kinds of things and that you don't necessarily have to spend a few hours down in the basement doing whatever it is that people need to do down there?
We do have a pretty extensive web site that has a lot of information on there about our various building permits and our programs. We made the effort to have some of our literature translated into non-English languages so that we can reach out to groups that otherwise we couldn't reach out to. And I agree. I mean, we need to do a better job with the web site, but the information is there. This afternoon we're holding -- actually, it's taking place now. We've partnered with Drexel University to have a seminar on the new building code, and myself and some other key members will be at the seminar this afternoon. 64 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 We use Drexel to get the word out about this seminar. Commissioner Solvibile has been very proactive in meeting with the media and getting stories out about the department. So we are making a conscious effort to let the people know about L&I and the services that are available.
And we also sent notice to our stakeholders of these improvements we have in our process.
Okay. Mr. Prospero -- I'm sorry; Commissioner Perri, the people who do the Accelerated Review Program, is that work taking place during the normal work hours or is that in a non-traditional work time on overtime?
That work is done on overtime. None of it is done during normal 65 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 work hours.
Is the accelerated review fee covering the total overtime costs?
Yes. I believe our multiplier was about 2.4 for last year, meaning that the fees are about almost two and a half times what the actual overtime cost is.
What I would ask is if you would, working with your other staff and through the department, if you could forward to us through the Chair your plans or ideas for how we would seek to significantly reduce the average time that it takes to issue a building permit or some of the other more sought-after permits in a fairly significant way, while not driving up the cost of getting those documents. We really have to drive down the cost of people trying to do business in the City. And I understand that's, to some extent, in conflict with much of the testimony here, because we're increasing a variety of fees. So that will be quite interesting. 66 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 Now, Mr. Prospero, of this testimony talks about expansion and increased fees for code violation notice (ticket) writing program. And I'm particularly intrigued with this sentence: "The expansion program will also require an increase in Housing and Business Compliance inspector ticket writing by percent." 10 Are you now in the process of 11 establishing, for lack of better terms, 12 essentially a quota of ticket writing for your 13 inspectors? 14
Councilman, when 15 we took a look at the number of violations 16 that each of those units issued, in the 17 Housing unit, Business Compliance unit, across 18 the board, it was felt that at least in the 19 first year we started to issue -- at least in 20 the first year, if we started issuing tickets, that there would be greater compliance brought on by the issuance of these tickets.
Okay. You just said that if you started issuing tickets.
In the course of a Housing inspector's duties during the course of the day, he will be asked to look for those situations that require the issuance of a ticket. We assume that that number could increase by approximately percent. 11
And I guess 12 what I'm asking you is, if you're a Housing 13 inspector, aren't you supposed to be doing 14 that anyway? 15
Councilman, Dominic 16 Verdi. 17 They are supposed to -- they will 18 issue tickets for violations that we feel 19 would be better served with a CVN than trying 20 to get the case into court. There are some situations where a CVN, there's no one to write the CVN to. There's absentee landlords, there's absentee owners. But we have sat and talked to the Managers of both Business Compliance and Housing, and they intend to 68 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 increase the use of the CVNs.
Okay. Let's go back to the original question, though. I mean, you're going to leave me with the impression, certainly from reading the testimony, if not listening to some of the responses, that we are, because of our financial issues, we are now moving from a realm of "We go out and do what we do because we're in the public safety business" to "We need money, and now when we go to your house, we're going to look for every possible thing that we can find in order to generate more tickets, because I've now got a percent 16 bump in what I'm supposed to write, because 17 the department is being pushed to generate 18 more revenue." 19
As we saw it in 20 our discussions about doing this, it's a way to put more pressure on the owners to comply with our violations and our public safety, our nuisance violations that we write for high weeds, high grass, trash in our communities that really just tear down the fabric of the 69 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 community. It's just a way to give them more incentive to comply with what we're doing.
I understand. How many tickets do we issue annually or in a fiscal year?
I have that. I'll get that to you. I have it here. It's in these notes.
This year, Councilman, if I'm not mistaken, it's approximately 2,500 to 3,000.
I'm not complaining. If you're one of the people that didn't get one, I guess you'd be happy, but given the number of houses, the number of inspections, I just assumed that, quite honestly, the number would be much higher. 70 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455
Fiscal year '04 we received from revenue directly from the issuance of CVNs $37,000.
I appreciate that response, but that wasn't my question. My question was, what was the total value of all the CVNs issued?
So is your response the answer to what would have been my next question, which is how much did you collect? $37,000?
37,000 is what was collected fiscal year '04. To date, the information that I have on that number is -- it's not through April. That would be through 71 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 like February.
Well, I understand that. Now, you say it was 10,000. I'm looking at your five-year plan on 122. Your Key Performance Measurements section indicates for Code Violation Notices/Tickets issued for FY04, your original projection was 2,100. Your current projection is 2,600, and I thought you said 10,000.
I'm on of the five-year plan. I asked you earlier how many CVNs you issued in the last fiscal year. You told me 10,000. The five-year plan indicates that you anticipate doing 2,600. I'm trying to understand.
We issued between fiscal year '01 and fiscal year '03 just under 10,000 CVNs.
We issued 9,998. Approximately 3,200 of those were issued for tobacco-type violations. Another 2,400 were 72 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 issued for vacant lots, high weeds, that sort of situation, and the remainder were for licensing issues.
What about just regular CVNs for basically property violations or property maintenance code violations?
Because I know my time probably expired a long time ago. Why don't I, for a moment, take you out of your misery. Why don't you just get us a complete report and give it to the Chair.
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Tasco.
Thank you. Good morning. 73 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455
I just have a couple of questions. During the Police Department's testimony on April 19th, Commissioner Johnson stated that the Police Department has allocated funds to provide surveillance of illegal short dumping of trash. How is this initiative coordinated with L&I?
In some cases, Councilwoman, the Police Department refers over to us nuisance businesses or nuisance properties. In some cases, if the person dumping, they'll come to -- the Police Department will discuss issues whether these businesses or people that are dumping are licensed in any way, and at that time, we will look into removing their licenses as a public nuisance.
And also the Police Department under state law can 74 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 confiscate the vehicle used to do the dumping.
The Police Department coordinates with us in various different ways. We coordinate on nuisance locations, bars, businesses. And in this case, they will refer to us on the illegal dumpers. Say, for instance, it's a contracting company that has a legal contractor's license or a business privilege license for other services in the City. If they get caught dumping on a property and they're short dumping, those people are turned over to us and we look into immediate revocation of their licenses to actually do business in the City.
Regarding the CLIP program, I know that you're going to target zip codes in the City. During the discussion with the Managing Director, we looked at the zip code map, which overlaps Council districts. How do you all plan to identify 75 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 whether or not that you will reach a Council district going solely by zip codes?
Our system, whether -- the Managing Director is using the zip codes, but in our system that we're creating, we're created over Council districts. We're aware if it's zip code at 19125 and it's on the cusp of two districts what district it's in. So we would be aware of that. Although they'll set up how we'll make the inspection code, we will be aware and the Managing Director will be aware of what Council district we're in. And as I understand it, they will work with that Council person to insure that the violations being written and the areas picked will be areas that Council person wants us to be active in.
So tell me, what do we get with the CLIP program? What services are there?
It's a program being still developed as we speak by the Managing Director's Office, but as I 76 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 understand it, what we'll get is the nuisance-type violations that are in every community, high weeds, trash in the yard, violations of that sort. We'll be real proactive. We'll write the violation, and if the owner does not comply, there will be an abatement of that situation. And a program overseen -- coordinated by the Managing Director's Office, it will not just be Licensing and Inspections involved in CLIP. It's not now. Or the CLIP expansion. It's the Streets Department, it's the Water Department, the Police Department for towing cars. It's a lot of agencies that come under the jurisdiction of the Managing Director and the program. That's why the program will be coordinated through that office.
And I know that. The organization or the program is not yours, but what impact will it have on service to other communities with no CLIP? We have problems all over this City, and I'm going to be asked to select an area 77 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 for a CLIP program and I'd like to know what impact that has on the other parts of my district in terms of accessing service, particularly for L&I services, and enforcement throughout my district.
If a department receives a complaint, wherever it is, we will answer it and write the proper violations. And the CLIP area expansion, they're being more proactive, and I see that program is eliminating a lot of complaints that we would normally receive. We'll just be able to attack the situation in a more efficient way. From L&I's perspective, that we find the violations before they're complained about, hopefully, and get the enforcement action that's needed or the abatement activity that's needed to satisfy the community's desire to have a better place to live.
Tell me about Logan. How are we going to deal when we finish the demolition over there?
Hopefully by the end of next year, with the plan demolition 78 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 that NTI will take on and the emergency demolition that License and Inspections will take on, the triangle will have no buildings that need to be still demolished. We'll have it all done.
The demolition of the dangerous buildings in the Logan triangle. I'd have to get back to the Council President with the number, but I believe right now it's about buildings, if my memory 15 serves me. Fourteen of the buildings will be 16 done under the program in the Logan area that 17 you're working on with NTI, Mr. McCullough and 18 Pat Smith presently, and that the others will 19 be done by License and Inspections contractual 20 services as emergency -- 21
I think 25 that's all. 79 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman Ramos.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Maybe Commissioner Solvibile can help me with this one. The sale of cigarettes to minors, what jurisdictions, if any, do you have on the enforcement of this violation? And this happens a lot throughout the City. I know it happens in North Philadelphia a lot where neighborhood stores sell packs of cigarettes to minors and the loosies, the loose cigarettes to kids as well. Do you have any jurisdictions over that?
Last year alone, I think, if I'm not mistaken, we shut down 13 locations in the City for sale of cigarettes to minors. We have a partnership right now with the Health Partners of the State of Pennsylvania and also the Health Department 80 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 locally where they send in young teenagers to verify the fact that these cigarettes are being sold, and the information comes back to us, which in time an immediate ticket is or a CVN is issued to that location. After two infractions of that ordinance, we then send out a letter to the business explaining to them that if it's done again, their business is in jeopardy of being closed. And any further infractions after that require immediate closure of the business. And the only way those businesses get reopened is through court order and an agreement with the Law Department.
Yes, we are. We just met with the Health Council last week, and our rate throughout the state was at one time percent. I think we're back up to 40 22 percent. And we're looking into further 23 enforcement. 24 What we've asked for is to combine 25 our efforts and concentrate on the areas that 81 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 we know have high rates of sale to minors.
I think this is something that we definitely need L&I and community groups to be of support to the enforcement of this law, because we see this as a major health issue in this City. I have approached at least one group of businesses and I have asked them to help enforce this. They need to make sure that among themselves they are enforcing themselves and making sure that children are not being sold cigarettes. I would like to extend my hand to be of whatever help I can be in the enforcement of this law, and also that we need to shut these places down and maybe we need to consider a campaign where we set some time aside this summer where we go after any store in our neighborhoods in this City and close them down once we have proof that they have, in fact, sold cigarettes to minors, whether loose cigarettes or packs of cigarettes.
Again, Councilman, we've had this meeting last week and the 82 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 Health Promotion Council is now in the process of putting out information, advertising information. Also, they're going to offer all the stores in the City -- if I'm not mistaken, there's over 2,000 or 3,000 stores that sell cigarettes or tobacco products -- classes on what they can and cannot do according to their license.
I think all that is fine and dandy, but I'm not talking about -- they're very complimentary and very needed. What I'm talking about is start closing these businesses down. Once it hits them in the pocket, then they will realize that they have to stop these activities in our neighborhoods in Philadelphia. All that is fine, but unless we launch a campaign, and that's what I'm recommending, that you launch a campaign of a given period of time and do all the exposure and all the media stuff that's needed and promotion to get this message across, because it is happening, and it's probably worse now 83 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 than ever. We have this growing population of young folks in this City and they're being sold cigarettes, loose cigarettes, packs of cigarettes, every minute of the day. I'm of the belief we have to do a whole lot better. And I'm not just putting it on you. I believe that this promotion has to be for the community to get much more involved. Those business associations have to patrol their own people and make sure that they have repercussions if they do not comply by the standards that their business associations have established.
So are you okay with this campaign? We ought to get together and get this campaign going.
If not, I'll start the campaign myself and say you didn't want to be a part of it. 84 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455
Councilman, being an ex-smoker, knowing how hazardous it is, I fully support it, because it is a habit, an addiction that needs to be kept away from our children.
Thank you. In your five-year plan, you have an item here on in the five-year plan book, it says Code Violation Notices/Tickets Issued. It tells us how many tickets were issued, but I don't know how many of these tickets got paid.
We would have to -- that is not something that's paid to L&I. It's paid to Revenue, I believe, and we'll have to get that information for you.
Thank you. The other question was concerning -- you've had a very long commendable tradition in clean and seal and the demolition of abandoned 85 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 properties in our City. And during these testimonies during this budget hearing, particularly when the representatives of NTI came before us, we posed the question of your workings with NTI. Are you doing more of the work that you have done fairly well over the years for NTI at this point? I know you mentioned something in your report here, in your presentation, but it's not a whole lot. I think the City of Philadelphia, and some of my colleagues have expressed the same concern, that we'd like to see L&I that has done this over the years do more of this in our NTI program. It's probably -- the indication is probably more cost effective. What is your role and has your role been increased in the NTI, particularly the demolition end of the work?
The NTI program has only enhanced our license and inspections effort. A building, we still supply the building inspectors to go out and identify the buildings, working with the Council people and 86 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 the NTI staff, that need to be demolished. We supply the inspector who oversees the demolition contractor to insure that there's compliance that the property is done right. Matter of fact, yesterday there was a statistic at a meeting I was at that the number of claims about damage to the adjacent property under the NTI program has gone down considerably, and I believe the reason, because each demolition project has to have the L&I inspector on site. Whereas, in the past, our inspectors had multiple sites and multiple locations and could not spend every day being at a site. So I see it as being an improvement. The system works. I like the way the planning is done with the Council people, just not reacting to a person's complaint or an individual's, that we sit down and have a plan discussion of what will be demolished. Prior to the demolition package being approved or submitted to Procurement, the Council person whose district that is has to sign off on the demolition that they agree 87 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 these buildings be demolished. And to create that list, we go door to door physically in front of the properties and pick and choose which is the worst of the worst, and they're the properties to demolish. So overall, Councilman, I just see the NTI program as being a great enhancement to what L&I's goal is to public safety.
So you have more involvement with NTI now than at the beginning of the program?
From the beginning of the program, Councilman, I was always involved. "I" representing the department. L&I was always involved from day one and had complete -- a seat at the table in deciding how it would be set up and what we would do. We were never not involved.
You're welcome. 88 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 The Chair recognizes Councilman Cohen.
Thank you, Madam President. Mr. Solvibile, I agree with the fact that L&I has a pretty good record and has over many years and that you've played a very important part in achieving that record.
However, I am mystified by the notion that L&I has been in the midst of the demolition program of NTI since the beginning, because I remember spending long periods of time questioning the Administration on the NTI program and being told that L&I would have nothing to do with it and for good reason, because the Administration didn't think it was good enough, they didn't have enough experience and they needed separate companies dealing with it separately. So apparently somehow or other, the differences were bridged over and a place was 89 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 found for L&I in the program, because we would have had much more confidence in the NTI program from the beginning on had we known of L&I's involvement.
Councilman, the only thing I can say to answer that is that from day one of the NTI program, I represented the Department of License and Inspections sitting at the table. Weekly meetings when Ms. Smith, the director of NTI, I'm not sure if that's her proper title, when she first came on board, I spent two weeks with her touring the City of Philadelphia going from place to place. I just -- I'm mystified by how that could be, because I was always involved and obviously myself representing the Department of Licensing and Inspections.
Because sometimes two different groups get two different stories. We were told that L&I did not have the experience to engage in a large-scale demolition program and that what was needed was a separate commercial 90 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 component, not consisting of government people at all, but a separate company set up. And even though that company may have had no 5 experience in the past, it would be far better than the L&I. But we're delighted that something happened along the way that overcame that. I guess had we had better communication between the Mayor and the Council, we would have learned that sooner and many of our questions might have been relieved. But we were under the impression that a company, I think called the Hill International Company or something like that --
-- was needed to run the show, because it was said L&I had no way of running the show or handling the matter. Were you in agreement with such a conclusion?
I would add that the Hill International has brought to the 91 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 table in working with them a quality and assistance to the department that the department did not have as far as the massiveness of the NTI program. But I would disagree with any notion that we were not involved from the beginning, because as a fact, I sat personally on a panel of about five different -- I think there was six of us, that interviewed various companies that would provide project management, and we graded each company. So it is an involvement from the beginning. And I see the benefit of having Hill to assist us in setting up the different parts of the program that are really -- that L&I would not be capable of doing. We're capable of the bricks and the demolition process and the overseeing of that, but the planning and the creating of maps and all and all the situations that would go into supplying Council people with the information they need to make informed decisions would be beyond what L&I is capable of doing at the present time with the staff we have. 92 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455
Let me ask you a very specific question. Is it your feeling that the cost would have been as high as it's been now if L&I had handled the matter from the beginning on?
I believe the cost of what it cost to demolish a building is irregardless. Right now presently our average cost on curbside demolitions is $20,012 per house, counting the stucco, the demolition, the removal of asbestos, the investigation if there's asbestos, and the NTI average cost is roughly 22,000. Now, their cost is higher because we in our curbsides do not provide seeding for grass nor fences. We just demolish the building. So that's why their average cost -- our costs are similar, and that's the reason I believe for the driving cost, is just the demolition has -- the cost of providing that and stuccoing the party walls has increased greatly over the last few years. To give you an example, Councilman, stuccoing a party wall, the average cost was 93 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 roughly, three years ago, $4,500 a wall. It is now averaging about approximately $9,000 a wall.
But what puzzled the Council, or at least a number of individual members of Council, was that it would seem to us that with the greater call for more stuccoing and more demolition, we were of the view that the costs were going to go down, not up, and this whole schedule seemed to be in reverse order, and we wondered why was it that instead of volume decreasing the costs, it seemed to be increasing the costs.
I believe that part of the answer is that several years ago, the Philadelphia Police Department in cooperation with L&I and also the District Attorney's office did an investigation of contractors and what they were doing, and found that what they were putting in the holes was not necessarily what we want in the holes, in the cavities created by the demolition. It wasn't all clean debris. Not necessarily 94 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 unclean, but like wood, and you cannot have wood in the hole. And they were filling the holes with that, which would cut their dumping costs. With the DA and the Philadelphia Police Department enforcing that strictly and bringing a few companies to trial and a conviction on one of them, that itself drove up the cost of demolition from that moment on. And then also with the better ability for us to enforce what we're doing, what the specs call for, by having our inspectors on the job, also I would guess drives up the cost, but provides a better service to the homeowner, because if you remember, I just said that the claims of damage to adjacent properties is down dramatically from the past because of the inspector being on the site.
Well, in the days before you became Commissioner, I remember there were many questions by City Council in the old days, before NTI, as to why the costs were as high as they then were, 95 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 because the then costs, which is much less than half of the current costs, seemed very high, and we were told, Well, we can't get contractors to build, to do the work. I think at a time only one contractor was even bidding on City contracts. And if only we could get more contractors working in the field and add more demolition, we could probably get the costs down. So many of us felt very comfortable that with NTI engaging in an expanded program for demolition, that would happen, but exactly the reverse happened.
And not just with NTI, Councilman, but as I said, in our curbsides, which is separate, and I believe there's 15 or 16 contractors on that list, we call it the daily list that we pre-approve -- that we allow to bid on emergencies for us, that that price went up, too. So it's a matter of what the market is calling for the price to be. And that's the part that was unforeseen, at least in my part, because I agree with you, I thought the 96 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 price would come down. But I've been proven wrong.
All right. Now let's go to another area. Tell me, how does a homeowner or homeowners who have seen building taking place, have never seen a permit posted anywhere and they wonder what's being built, how do they find out what it is that's being built, whether it's permissible or not, whether people have a permit?
There's a requirement that the permit is posted, and part of our enhancement of the code violation, CVNs, this coming year and presently will be that we will write violations against the contractors for not or homeowners for not posting the permits so the community is aware of what's allowed to be built there. And if there is a question, they can call us at 215-686-2463 and we will get the information to them as to what is allowable at that site.
All right. Because there's a place on Kemble and 20th Street that used to be called a Baby Doll Bar 97 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 for many years, then it was left vacant, and for the last couple of months, workmen, nobody knows who they are, come in at various hours of the day or night and start working. They don't talk to anyone. Nobody has ever seen a sign posted. People in the community say they have called L&I and got no answer. If you could repeat the numbers again. Should they ask for anybody in particular?
The number is 215-686-2463, and that's our general complaint number, and the customer service representative that answers the phone will make sure that it gets to the right district and the right person. And as far as the address you just gave us, Deputy Commissioner Perri will have it investigated and an answer to Council President Verna and to your office sometime today.
That would be very good. Now, one last series of questions relating to the billboards. On this occasion, 98 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 I think I may have to be giving you some congratulations. I sense over the last period of time, maybe a year, maybe two years, there seems to be a change of attitude and a more law-abiding policy being followed. In other words, apparently the laws against illegal billboards at least seem to be more enforced than they've been in a long time, and I want to congratulate you for that.
Because it's been very embarrassing to have a period of time where there were plain violations and nobody doing anything.
I hope I'm not just wishfully dreaming that this is so and that the facts are bearing it out, but that seemed to be the conclusion.
The first day that I was told by the Managing Director that I'd be Acting Commissioner, I took a crash course in signs, because, as you know, my involvement with signs was very little, it was 99 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 somewhat new, at least to me. And I would say that Deputy Commissioner Perri has done a great job and Deputy Commissioner Verdi, and we have met with the Law Department and we're now awaiting a plan of attack, a further plan of attack. And Deputy Commissioner Perri has some stats that he could give you, but we're going to be proactive in getting the signs legalized and the ones that aren't capable of being legalized or in the owners to be demolished, and that plan is being worked out with the Law Department as we speak.
Well, I'm very pleased to hear that, because one of the embarrassing features was that despite a Supreme Court ruling is the illegality of a group of signs near the bridge, I think, near Ben Franklin Bridge. The City seemed to be taking the position that it didn't matter and they were going to ignore the Supreme Court decision. And that's very embarrassing to the whole legal fraternity, to have a decision of the Supreme Court not enforced. So we want to 100 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 congratulate you and hope that that continues. And one last question on that. Who would know what kind of revenue is derived from the signs? For example, I understood there were a group of delinquent billboard owners, I'm not sure exactly who they were, who were taken to court for either having illegally posted billboards who created them and there was some kind of a hearing, they were fined. Who would know whether the fines were paid? Because in the past when there have been fines, they've also been routinely ignored. Would your department be in a position to determine whether the fines were actually paid?
We would have to ask the Law Department for that input, and we will provide it to Council President so she can share it.
We would be very appreciative. In the meantime, we appreciate very much apparently the changed approach, which we think is a healthy one for 101 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 the City of Philadelphia. Thank you very much.
Thank you. Just to follow up before I get into the questions that I have, sometimes it amazes me when I report construction to L&I and a person is putting an addition or doing something very obvious that is taking -- it's not just a small over-the-weekend sneak-it-in type job, that we call and find out that no 18 one has reported it before a member of City Council. What are you doing proactively to see the things that our constituents see? It amazes me that time after time after time walls being built or a retaining wall or some type of construction, that we're the first person to see it or report it. 102 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 What are the employees of L&I -- I hope as a work force, that you're all the eyes and ears of the City and when you see something, you report it.
Our inspectors in the district, our building inspectors, are assigned areas, and from going to stop to stop and job to job, they know their area. If they see construction, they will stop and put a cease operations on it. We do that frequently. That's part of their job to do that, and I believe that they do it rather well. We can give you the stats of --
Whoa. If a building has a second floor being put on it and a member of City Council calls and they're told this is the first we've known about it, somebody is not doing what they're supposed to be doing here. How a job could go on for two weeks, I'm not going to be specific, and me be the first one to report it, somebody has got sunglasses on. 103 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455
Deputy Commissioner David Perri. Councilman, just to give you a little bit of background statistics, we have 29 building inspectors for the entire City.
No, no. I'm just talking about question it. If you have something on your way to work that you see being done, I think that you have the inside track in e-mailing or asking the building inspector or the supervisor of the building inspector to check it out to see if there's an appropriate permit. I'm talking about all employees. The Streets Department, when they see a pothole or a stop sign down, they don't wait for an employee that's responsible at the sign 104 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 shop to report the sign down. What I'm trying to say is, if members of Council and members of Council staff are seeing this stuff, all the people that work -- I'm not talking about the secretarial force. I'm talking about the people that are intimately involved in the L&I process. They should see this stuff and report it at least to check it out.
Councilman, to follow up a little bit on that, what we see as a key to making sure that these jobs can be identified readily is the initiative that we're undertaking this year to make sure that people post their permits. I mean, it will enable us to at a glance know if a job is illegal or not without even stopping. So we're going to make a deliberate effort this summer that if we get calls or know about jobs that are working without permits, that they will be getting a $75 ticket for not posting it. If jobs are working with a permit but they're not posting it, there will be a 105 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 $75 ticket assessed to try to encourage contractors and building owners to post their permits so we can at a glance know which ones are legal and which ones aren't.
Commissioner, do you ever have people use an old permit just to try to do what you say, satisfy the person because it's a ride-by, they see the orange sign, it was from two jobs ago? I mean, I think people really have to look to see if it's the real deal or not.
I'll only do this because I love Councilman Rizzo. Is there any way we can put this online so while your secretaries aren't getting in car accidents when they're home looking for buildings falling down? I mean, seriously, if we go on the computer -- don't tell anybody, but I just came from LA. They 106 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 do it in LA. You know how I said LA? I just worked. I was in Los Angeles. They do it there. So if my friend Janice, who works in one of your guy's office, I don't want her to get in a car accident when she's riding home tonight looking for buildings. Now, I know Councilman Rizzo means well. He really means well. And he's right. Everybody should be looking for these things, but that would alleviate fake permits. It could be online. So if I live in a neighborhood, either I'm a Council person or just a concerned citizen, a committee person, a block captain, what are they doing. It's better than clogging up your phones. We talked about that before.
The whole purpose of our computerization is to allow us to collect this data and make it available online. That's one of the goals. That anybody should be able to look up a given address and know if a permit was obtained. I mean, that is one of the goals. 107 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 It's one of the keys of the department becoming automated.
And my further answer to Councilman Mariano is that in LA they're using the same system that we're now implementing and we'll be able to duplicate whatever LA is doing, only we'll be doing it better because it's newer.
There's a new committee here in Council. It's called the Technology and Information Committee, and we're planning to bring you in to talk about technology and where you are, but I'm not finished with the proactive side of L&I. And, Councilman Mariano, I exempted the secretaries in my statement. But my point being is, it's kind of distressing when you're the first after observing something going on for a week, two weeks, ten days and no one else saw it. And 108 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 you know what people sometimes suggest, that we sometimes only see what we want to see. And I know that that's not the case, but many people are very -- that's the conditioning that they've come to accept in some big cities. So I want to make sure that we do have everybody engaged that's the appropriate people, that when they see something, e-mail, voice mail, have somebody check it out.
Absolutely. It's a great suggestion, Councilman, and as Deputy Commissioner Perri has just stated, with the enforcement of making sure that permits are posted that are legal, that this will help us and the counterfeit, people have used counterfeit permits and we pick it up in about two seconds. And with our new system that's coming online, it's going to be more difficult for people to counterfeit and it will be easier for us to catch it, because the inspector in the field will not have to use his or her memory, it will be right there in their hand-held or their computer that they 109 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 have that that building is legally permitted. So we're getting there, and in August of '05 is when we're due to be fully operational in our Hanson system and our new computerization system, and between now and then, we'll have certain phases that come online and will be operational, and we'll obviously share that with Council.
And just one more thing on that. We also have a training class of building inspectors. When we hire building inspectors now, they come in as trainees. They have to pass certain modules in order to become a full-fledged building inspector. But what we have them do is do patrol inspections, looking for illegal work. They go up and down the streets. They go look at the loading docks. They look for work being done without permits. They also look for licenses for contractors. And it's been successful. And we currently have a trainee class that's coming through the department and we're able to use them effectively in doing these type of patrol inspections. 110 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455
Also, Councilman, if I could add one thing to that, please. The department, in cooperation with Drexel University, has created a License and Inspections University at Drexel where we've had recently ten individuals who graduated that program and passed the required modules at Drexel to receive a certificate. One of the people that were in that program, Inspector DiPietro from Center City District in making a routine inspection, found that the illegal construction, I might add, on a complaint from within the department that the chimney was blocked and it was an occupied property and there was carbon monoxide poisoning going into the property. He evacuated the property, and that was not an easy part of the inspection to find, saved at least eight people's lives in doing his job. And I would suggest that the men and women in License and Inspections all have that same commitment to public safety and 111 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 they're not trained to look away. We don't want them looking the other way or putting sunglasses on. We want them to be proactive and to stop anything that's illegal and not being done properly.
Well, that's good, because there's nothing more important than being proactive. Something else that I thought was good that I saw in another jurisdiction, a lot of people that do what you do now refer to their operations as code enforcement. I like that. Is that something that we have considered or terminology that we have started to use? Because many jurisdictions throughout the state, New Jersey refer to the people out on the street, the inspectors, as code enforcement. Is that a term that we use at all or considering?
It's a term that we're working into the department. We call them code officials, and that implies a certain amount of impartiality when they're 112 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 doing these inspections and it also implies a professionalism. It's more than just being a building inspector. They're code officials. And even though I slip myself, that's how we want to address the individuals that work for our department.
My last question is, I believe it's to Commissioner Perri, could you give me an update on the conversations with the Planning Commission and the Department of Licenses and Inspection with the proliferation -- we talked about billboards earlier -- the proliferation of wireless antennas that are being attached to everything that's above a few feet off the ground anymore? Everywhere you go, abandoned buildings, smoke stacks, billboards, you name it, wireless antennas to support that technology is everywhere, everywhere you look, around the perimeter, atop of buildings. My initial concern when I met with you was what are we doing to insure the integrity of those installations so some day we don't have one of them coming down on the 113 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 sidewalk and kill someone. And, again, it seems as though we wait until a tragedy occurs until we look at an issue, and then all the sudden millions of dollars are spent, a lot of panic and immediate reaction to work people ten days straight to go inspect every one that's out there. It looks terrible. The Planning Commission, I believe, agreed with that, that the way these things are being nailed to everything that, again, exists -- and for the people listening, I'm talking about these big boxes that are attached to the side of the building to support cell telephones and other wireless communications. They are everywhere. Water towers, 360 degrees around them. I really think that we need to get this under control, A, for safety reasons; two, for anesthetics, and I think it also maybe require a permit to put them up. I know presently it's kind of loose. Could you just bring us up to date on this?
I haven't had any 114 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 recent conversations with the Planning Commission, but we have found that the vast majority of these wireless operations is City obtained permits. They obtained both the zoning and building permit for the installation of these wireless facilities. Most of the ones you're seeing today are basically the antennas with an equipment box. Years ago you were seeing a lot of the larger holes and the erector set type towers. There's very, very few of those going up today, and most of them are light-weight antennas. And the zoning code is quite liberal on where those can be located, because, in general, wireless communications are protected under the Federal Wireless Telecommunications Act.
Well, I really think that even though what you've just stated is correct -- and the reason they're using the buildings to attach them, it's cheaper than erecting a unipole, a monopole or some other way of supporting the technology. So to pay someone 500 a month to attach these 115 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 antennas and put an equipment box -- I believe there was a height restriction of four feet, six feet, couldn't be any higher than that. I can't remember. But I really think that we need to focus on this before the City becomes cluttered with these antennas. It's cluttered already, and I don't think we can dig our way out of that.
Thank you. Councilman Rizzo, I believe Councilman Cohen has a question or a point of order.
It's a question on the same issue, sir? On the same issue as Councilman Rizzo is addressing?
No. It's a follow up on a question I did not ask before.
I'm finished. I just wanted to see if we could get together with the Planning Commission and 116 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 the Department of Licenses and Inspection just to tighten this process up a bit.
Very well. Councilman Cohen, you're not next, but go ahead.
Commissioner, let me ask this: In the event a court finds that a billboard is wrongly posted or your records show and it doesn't go to court, do you have any need for additional legal support to enable you to take down the sign? For example, as soon as a court finds that the sign is illegal or you determine it in the department, you have the right to order the sign removed by the company that put up the sign. You also have the right to impose a penalty. For example, it's getting common these days to prevent stalling by people who don't like the decisions of courts to just appeal cases, because they take time to be heard. So courts increasingly are adding a provision that says you forfeit any 117 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 funds you earned during the appeal time. In fact, some courts are saying you not only forfeit the money, but you have to pay interest because you owed us that money as soon as you earned -- as soon as it became due. And you can't keep it, because otherwise you're profiteering by stalling on appeal. So I'm asking, do you need help? Is there any change in the law you need? The City has always had the right to impose a lien. If a company puts on a sign that's illegal and refuses to take it down, you can lien them for the cost of it if you go ahead and clear it.
I'm thinking of ways to do it without the City having to expend the money in the first place.
I understand. The Law Department, as I said earlier, Councilman, the Law Department and License and Inspections and the Managing Director's Office have met on this very subject, and the Law Department is coming up with a plan of attack 118 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 that legally and enforcement-wise that we can enter into, and I would best ask that question to be answered by them to answer your question. I really feel it's beyond my capability to answer.
I would then like to suggest that you inform them of the suggestion I've made. If they want, I'll be ready to go into it more fully with them.
Because right now, it often takes three or four years to get an appeal through the courts, and all that time the company is illegally collecting payments from it. And to prevent them from using that to their benefit, it ought to be used for the benefit of the City. The City can be entitled to get that money together with interest. And that will discourage the appeals. And then if there's any -- I hope you will also raise with the Law Department, I don't understand why the City can't immediately move, because if a company that 119 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 we're doing business with regularly has put up this wrong sign, you can lien them for this money of removing the sign and demand that they pay for it right away.
In License and Inspections' budget, there's absolutely no 8 money for the removal of signs.
Councilman Cohen, I think that what is being suggested is that this issue be addressed when the Law Department comes before us.
It's not a question. I said I believe that what is being said is that your question would be best addressed when the Law Department comes in to testify.
Well, no. I think it's best addressed by the agency that has the duty under the law to accomplish an orderly procedure of legal signs and preventing illegal signs from occurring. 120 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455
The Chair recognizes Councilman Mariano for a point of --
Councilman, not to step on you, but I think the Commissioner just answered that he agrees with you and he just is not a lawyer. Nobody sitting there is a lawyer.
No. All I'm suggesting is that they raise it with the Law Department.
We have and we will, and I'm sure that I will bring your concerns to them and they'll be prepared hopefully when they come here to provide an answer to you as to your question.
Okay. Well, what I'm trying -- I guess I'm not putting it forth yet. I don't believe it appropriate for your department to be quiet and just say, Well, there's an illegal sign, there's nothing we can do with it. I think you've got to 121 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 indicate to the Law Department that you believe something has to be done and you're offering them one opportunity to see whether that works.
Also, Councilman, in our budget, there is absolutely no money for the removal of signs that we could tap into to remove signs. All the money that we have in our department is geared towards removal of dangerous buildings, not the removal of signs.
Well, then you would like an ordinance produced that would give you that power?
Well, then we'd have to budget it, because we'd make a lot of money in return, because we would be getting the profits that the companies get by illegally stalling on appeals.
I personally would prefer that the enforcement process using the courts be used to require owners to 122 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 remove the signs, in that it's a situation where it's not easily -- it seems easy to just say, Well, remove the sign, but it's probably -- it is definitely more complicated than just saying that we'll remove it and everything will be fine.
No, but I think the enforcing department has a responsibility to make clear that the L&I Department, which I say enforces the sign law, has a responsibility for making clear to the Law Department that the current system of enforcement takes many years, isn't there a better way and offering them a suggestion. I'm not saying that you do the enforcement yourself.
Can I speak to a point of order? Councilman, you asked a point of information and I was okay with that. Councilman Nutter's turn, then mine, then we go back to you. I know it's an important 123 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 thing that you're doing here, but we all have things to do and you can ask those questions after we're done. Would that be fair?
Well, then you know what's not fair? That Nutter is next and I'm after him. So you had a turn, so let's do Nutter, then me and then we'll do it. You're beating these guys up for nothing. They agree with you.
They agree with you, Councilman. They agree with you.
We all agree with you, but you got to take a turn. You asked for --
It's very 124 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 difficult --
My time is important. I got things to do. I got questions just like everyone else and I'm willing to sit here, but not for him to badger these people over a point of information.
It's not the point, Councilman. You're out of order. 125 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455
Councilman Cohen, I think you had asked for a point of order. Actually, Councilman Nutter was next, then Councilman Mariano and then you. And I thought your point of order would be following what Councilman Rizzo was asking. So rather than belabor this issue, I think it was asked. I think we have to move on to the --
I don't think it's belaboring an issue when we're trying to get something --
Well, you asked me to speak. 126 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455
I didn't ask you to speak. You raised your hand --
I did not say it was following up Rizzo. I said it was following up my own question.
You asked whether I was following up with Rizzo, and I said no. 14
-- asked for the point of information, I wasn't finished, but I did say I was finished just to try to be accommodating. I would like to just ask a 127 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 30-second question so I can end this contact. Could you tell me the relationship, Commissioner Solvibile, that we have with the Streets Department for the Streets Department to report construction activity that may be put out at the curb? What's the relationship we have, again being proactive when the Streets Department comes to a location? And, again, the reason I'm asking you this, many times I talk to some of the employees in the Sanitation Division and they complain that they have to pick up construction debris and it's suggested that there is work going on in a particular premise, because each trash day there's significant construction materials put out for collection. Do we have some kind of a relationship?
The Streets Department has a complaint unit or a service, and they daily have contact with our services and operations unit. Their customer service reps and our customer service reps daily 128 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 communicate. So any concern that the Streets Department employee has given through that system would come into our system and we would handle or investigate the complaint.
I doubt very much there's very many employees of the Sanitation Division that would call customer service to report construction debris on their route.
I'm not at all sure. The answer to the question, though, is that there's a unit in Streets and a unit in Licensing and Inspections who daily communicate concerns back and forth. It's an issue that if we receive an issue that's a Streets Department-related issue, we will communicate to them, send people to them, and they do it with us. So that relationship has worked for years and rather well. But I don't know what the sanitation workers would do or not do.
We'll find out later this afternoon. So, again, if a communication came 129 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 in that a truck was in front of a certain location and there was significant construction debris, they radioed it in, you would assign someone to investigate the source of that construction debris?
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman Nutter.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Mr. Perri, you said something in response to a question I think from Councilman Rizzo, which I had planned to ask you anyway, so let me start there. You said that you have 29 inspectors. Are these the Housing and Business Compliance inspectors?
These are the inspectors assigned to the Construction Services Branch that do what would commonly be 130 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 known as building inspections. They're looking at work in progress.
They're looking at work in progress, work in which a permit was obtained, there's required inspections to be made.
And, Councilman, in addition to the 29, there's roughly 12, I believe -- inspectors in 13 Contractual Services supporting the demolition 14 program and the NTI program. They're also code officials that oversee demolition that are the same classification.
How many Housing and Business Compliance inspectors do we have?
It's 40 Housing inspectors and 20 Business Compliance inspectors.
20 Business 131 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 Compliance inspectors.
There's approximately 400,000 parcels in the City of Philadelphia. It's generally estimated to be about 200,000 of them are residential.
Are you sure there are only 200,000 houses in the City?
They're the estimates that we use as a rule of thumb based upon the information that we have. There's probably better sources that could give you an exact number, but they're the estimates that we have available to us.
I thought when we went through a painful exercise with the Board of Revision of Taxes along assessment increases, I thought there were somewhere between four and 500,000 residential properties in the City.
I would defer to the number that they provided to you rather 132 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 than the numbers that we would use based upon the number of zoning files in cases that we have.
Okay. It's just a number that I remember based on how many people got assessment increases. This was in '02 versus the number who did not. In any event, and I think we went through this a budget or two ago, I mean, how do you provide the level of service that I know you want to provide with 40 Housing inspectors and Business inspectors for a 14 City of our size? 15
Councilman, the 16 level of service is based on the severity of 17 the complaint. The issues with the Housing 18 inspectors -- the Housing inspectors and 19 Business Compliance inspectors, for the 20 record, are two separate units that handle two different issues. Business Compliance handles mainly business inspections and commercial locations. They at this point are still doing census track inspections and they're also doing complaint-driven inspections. 133 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 On the Housing end, we are actually at this point fielding approximately 1,200 inspections a month in that unit in relationship to housing issues, property maintenance issues and housing and fire issues. The housing and fire issues take precedence over -- I mean, the fire issues take precedence over any other complaint that comes into the unit. But we are, in reality, getting to 90 percent of those inspections a month of the complaints.
Councilman, we're also in areas like with our R-2 program where we're proactive and we don't wait for complaints, we go into buildings of three or more apartments on a routine basis without a complaint to insure that the fire alarm and the life safety issues are, in fact, being up 134 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 to date and current.
A couple last questions. The Managing Director, when he was here about a week or so ago, talked about enhanced enforcement regarding illegal signs on poles. In the past, I know the department has been asked about that as well. Are you involved in this signage enforcement issue?
As of the present time, the City of Philadelphia was sued in Federal Court and we were remanded from taking any enforcement actions against temporary signs. And we are awaiting the City's lawyers to give us additional direction on what the next steps are.
Well, I think you're talking about the recent Bill 20 that was passed primarily regarding political posters. But, again, the Managing Director actually in his testimony a couple weeks ago -- I may still have it here -- talked about going after the illegal signs that are primarily up by companies. He talked about 135 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 having gone after, I think, a couple of them and issued some cease ops orders. He talked about a new tool or device or something that he carries around in his car to take them down and made actually no mention of the lawsuit, which I think was in progress at the time. So are we talking about two different things?
No, we're not talking about two different things. What happened is, we do have a program that we have working with community groups, and I can get you the figures on how many signs we've taken down, how many intent to cease letters have gone out due to the fact that we did go after the companies that were producing these temporary signs. I could show you an issue where we even went to the promoter, didn't have his name on the sign, so what the issue is --
Yes, we were 136 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 involved in that. And at this point, as Deputy Commissioner Perri said, the unfortunate part is, those temporary signs have now gotten thrown into that lawsuit with the election signs, so at this point, we're at a standstill on enforcement.
Just to follow up on that, Commissioner Verdi, I've been advised that we can only take action at this point against signs that have been pasted on various poles in the City. We're still remanded from removing other types of either political campaign signs or advertising signs on poles until we can sort out the judge's rulings involved with the lawsuit.
Wait a minute. So if it's pasted on, you can do something about it, but if it's nailed on, you can't?
On a regular wood, I think generally, either PECO 137 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 or telephone company pole?
Like I said, the judge made a ruling and I believe the City is appealing that ruling, but it was fairly broad-based in preventing us from taking much enforcement action against these signs at this point in time.
Well, I think even before we passed the Bill, which was last year, it was already illegal to have some of these signs on poles anyway, right?
Correct. What happened was, the lawsuit went beyond just a recent amendment to the sign --
I didn't read the complaint, so I don't know what the filing was, but okay. Well, that will be interesting. Commissioner, I have one last issue, which I think I'm getting the supreme bureaucracy treatment. It involves a property that you and I have talked about on a number of occasions and I'm still getting calls about it as recently as either yesterday or this 138 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 morning. 6028 Daniel Street was supposed to be demolished last year. As recently as this morning, a constituent called about that property, and I'm at a loss to explain why it hasn't been torn down. I need the property demolished.
And I hear you, and I'll provide an answer this afternoon as to why and what will happen. And I'm at a loss as to why that property has been not demolished at the present time and I'll have to give you that answer, Councilman.
I would greatly appreciate it. I mean, it's ours, it's on our property, we own it. It's time for it to go.
Councilman, I said the street name before you said it, when you said 6028. But I would have to really get back to you on why it has not taken place.
All right. I got a call this morning about it. I'd like to move on from that. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. 139 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman Mariano.
Thank you, Madam President. Before we get into it, one of the important things that Councilman Nutter said I want to talk about, but I'd just like to thank everyone at this table. I know I personally have your cell phone numbers. Didn't we give you your cell phone back?
I still have your number. I can track you down. But I really harass these guys.
And he told the City Hall operator not to give his number to you.
And I got a feeling every other Council person does, not to place you above any other --
I 140 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 don't think that's so. I think we all have their cell numbers.
Not to place you above any other department, but you guys are very responsible and I think you're doing a good job with the money we give you. And I know there's always more money that you need, and I think your people are very responsive, from Janice that answers the phones, who grew up on my street, who I did not know worked over there until I became a Councilman, does a great job. I won't say her last name not to embarrass her, but she's a very short woman, amazingly short.
Oh, yeah. Hi, Janice. Councilman Nutter was on the pole thing. I guess I am -- not the pole, Councilman is not on the pole, but the pole sign. I guess I am the culprit of the sign. Now, in this City, it seems that billboards are bad, but little teeny signs, 141 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 which are little teeny billboards, are good. This isn't a shot at any Councilman in particular or any group. I can't understand. I have an idea, and I say we have to get these signs down. Whether they're for Rick Mariano, Anna Verna, anybody, weight loss, computers at home, baby-sitting, they look bad. It's as bad as graffiti. It's as bad as taking a spray can and writing on that column Vote for Rick Mariano, Vote for Anna Verna, Councilman Cohen. This isn't against anyone. I asked the Law Department to write this Bill. They write the Bill. They write the Bill. The Bill gets overturned. I don't know why. I didn't go to law school. I should have went to law school instead of Local 98 school, but I didn't. I don't understand. I don't want to understand. All I know is, now, as Councilman Nutter was befuddled, it seemed to me over there, at the other stuff -- and I know this isn't your fault or anyone sitting there. It's judges, and that's why they're judges and 142 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 that's why they don't have to answer to anybody, because they're all basically nuts anyhow when they put that robe on. Because I've been screwed by the best of them in my political career and I probably will get screwed more after this, but it don't matter. The lawsuit was for political signs. So okay. They make a decision. We live with that. How do they stop the weight loss signs, the computer signs? It's all graffiti. It's all a form of a disturbance. It's all a public nuisance. Mr. Verdi and I had a talk last week about benches, and I kidded him, I said, Dominic, you're going to harass this guy for his bench with his roofing company's name on it. How can we not harass people with the big signs or Rick Mariano for Council signs? I'm sure there's a couple still out there from last year. Where do we go with this? We had something before that the political signs, but only the political signs, and correct me if I'm wrong, I could put a political sign up if 143 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 I paid 50 cents and put a little sticker on it. Because I worked for a guy who actually did that. He's the only one I ever knew that did that. If anyone else ever did that --
Did you? That's good. At a point we stopped doing that because I guess it wasn't enforced. I don't come here to embarrass anybody. I come here to get information. If I want to embarrass any of you, I'll embarrass you in person just you and me so the whole dog and pony show is not here. We need answers. And if it's not from you, we'll ask Pedro Ramos when he becomes the new City Solicitor. How do those signs get thrown in with the political signs? Because the weight loss signs, could you ever go around and say, I want to put a sign up, Miracle Weight Loss Pill? Could I get stickers for that? Could I ever have gotten stickers for that? 144 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455
You could have gotten -- in the past, you could have gotten stickers for temporary signs. You couldn't have put them on those particular poles. You couldn't have nailed them on those poles. What happened with the lawsuit, it went beyond just a recent amendment. They went after the entire sign license piece that's in the Philadelphia Code, and there were several parts of that that we're being prohibited from enforcing. So we probably have to --
Dave, let me stop you on that. Who went after it? The people that filed the lawsuit?
Could you hold on a minute, Councilman? Maybe you could 145 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 help us. You never wanted to go after those signs; you just wanted the political ones you were trying to save, correct?
The ACLU said they read the transcript of testimony and decided that it was unconstitutional and they took the same position I did. Now, they dealt with all the signs. I didn't care about the other signs. I was interested in the free speech sign.
I understand that. I'm just trying to get in my non-lawyer mind how we correct the situation. If they make a decision on the political signs, fine, but I have a problem in the City where we fight for, and rightfully so, rightfully so, we should fight for things like that, and that's the thing that makes us work. When we don't agree, we can argue and yell, 146 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 but eventually we work out a compromise. I don't understand why the ACLU would do that or why a judge would let that happen.
I felt very strong that the law has been passed to Council, and I like the constitutional rights of people to use poles for political purposes, and I testified to that effect. That was my testimony.
We just got to ask the judges, who don't answer to us, how they get to that point beyond the political aspect.
Well, it happened to be a good judge from the constitutional point of view and he found merit in the proposal. Now, I don't know what his reasoning was with respect to the partial signs. I was 147 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 not interested in that part.
Thank you, Councilman. Can we go back now and reconstruct these laws or do we wait for Mr. Ramos, the City Solicitor, not the Councilman, to come up with an opinion?
Because I'm going to tell the guy to put his signs instead of putting them on the benches, I'm going to say, Just throw your signs anywhere. As long as they're not billboards, it's fine, right?
Dave and I are still waiting for the transcripts and the actual opinion from somebody in writing in reference to what he means by temporary signs. If they're temporary signs that are described in the ordinance, they're signs that are nailed to a pole. 148 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455
A temporary sign could also mean a temporary sign is a billboard.
Is a billboard temporary? Because that might be there for -- Mary, you're the expert. Is a billboard temporary, 30 days, 60 days? MARY: It's permanent.
Now, let me play devil's advocate. I just want to be fair. If I want to throw Frankie's Roofing signs up there, it's going to be permanent because I'm going to use the big heavy nails when I ram it into PECO's pole.
Matter of fact, can I add -- 149 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455
First of all, it's a safety issue, and the existing law prohibits any attachment. Matter of fact, SEPTA had to get a variance and create a sign that a lineman's gaff could penetrate to allow them to even attach to a wood utility pole. So any attachment to a utility pole is considered improper, and PECO Energy can go out at any time they choose and remove an attachment to a wood utility pole. I think where the confusion may be is that the aluminum light standards are City property, and putting a permanent adhesive to the aluminum light standard, in many cases it's a permanent attachment. I see Tom Gola signs still on them.
It's still based upon -- again, until we get a written statement from the judge as to what this whole issue deals with, we have basically stopped enforcement for threat of --
If PECO 150 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 Energy wanted to send out a work force, a crew, to remove ABC Roofing sign from one of their poles, they don't until they actually -- they work on that structure --
They'll take the sign down and throw it away. But if they wanted to be aggressive, they could go out and take them down and they could have a campaign to take them down.
And the lighting division of the City could do the same thing, because it could mess up the ground.
Well, until this issue came about, and to get back to what Councilman Nutter asked, is, we did have an initiative and our partners were PECO, the Street Department and Verizon. So we were taking signs down systematically throughout the City from one end to the other until this issue came about.
And by the 151 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 way, I know the Councilman left. We weren't taking political signs down except in past campaigns.
And the reason, many years ago we started -- do you remember when we were kids, all the street signs that identify the name of the street were attached to the PECO wood utility pole. A very serious accident occurred to a lineman that fell and hit one of those. Then they decided to put the pole up its own structure to support that information. But now because linemen don't climb like they used to, they use the bucket trucks, they're not as dangerous as they once were, so they're not aggressive as they once were.
We'll provide you with a written copy of the opinion or a copy of the agreement.
Also, I want to add that the new signs they put in the grass, on Henry Avenue on my way to work this morning, I noticed they were all gone already. I don't know if that's because they have a 152 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 value and they're reusable, but every sign, both for both parties and losing and winning candidates, was no longer there, which I thought was a good thing.
That's what they should be doing. My next question, to curb the stuccoing on the NTI. I heard you debate with Councilman Cohen. Now, me and my background in the building trades and knowing what Local 8 does, Local 8 is a plasterers union. You guys probably know. If union plasterers are doing stucco out at 61st and out your way -- I know they're doing it out there because one of the young guys from my neighborhood is out there, they're doing stucco -- that's a really hard job to be on that scaffold eight hours a day. And the young guys are humping that stuff up there by bucket, and they got arms like -- and there's black guys and white guys. It's very diversified. It's an old union, but they're really diversified. To have union plasterers on that scaffold to do that as opposed to somebody 153 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 that doesn't live in the City or somebody that's not paying any City wage tax, these guys are trained. Believe it or not, you have to be trained to put stucco up, to do the right finish, to make sure that it works, lasts longer than just throwing -- Look, if nobody is around, I'll throw some of that newspaper in the hole and just put a little mix of stucco, but I'll save some money in the stucco and throw some Quikrete in there. That's what the non-skilled people do. And then it doesn't last and who knows what they're mixing.
And the most important part of the stucco, Councilman, as you probably know, is the wire that goes on.
We've caught contractors putting the wire upside down. There's a little lip on it, supposed to be facing towards the sky. They have it the opposite, and it negates the whole idea of having the wire there. And if the wire is not properly nailed, it becomes loose and it bangs 154 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 against the wall. So there's a skill. It's a lot easier, as you said -- it looks a lot easier than in reality it is.
I know. It's hard work. And it's a very skillful trade. Let me tell you, it may cost a little more to have them guys do it. This isn't a commercial for the plasterers union. They don't need my help, but that's why probably the prices go up. And my question to you was, on all your curbside emergency stuff, probably some of the guys you use, you have no way to know who is Local 8 and who is not and what guys are union, because you don't need to know that, it wouldn't be right, but I suspect most of the people in NTI are, most of your guys may or may not be.
The spec that we created for stucco and demolition for curbsides and for NTI is now similar, and the bid for stucco is a performance contract citywide that recently a different contractor won. There's two contractors now that have 155 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 that, but it calls for prevailing wage to be paid.
Excellent. And the reason I say that is, Councilman Nutter, Councilwoman Verna, the other District Council people here, not to leave Councilman Rizzo off, but someone calls you in your office and they live on a street where they're knocking some houses down -- I mean, I can picture this one case in my district where it's an elderly woman, and it was her life, that house. Now, those neighbors are gone and she's got two empty houses between, and eventually there will be a lot. The last thing she needs to worry about is two, three years down the line that the stucco is wearing off and the rain is bleeding through in her nice wallpaper in her bedroom. I mean, and that does happen if it's not done. So that's why the cost may be a little -- you get what you pay for in this world. If you want a half-assed plasterer, you pay less price. If you want a good one, you pay the right price. It goes for all the 156 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 trades. And these guys are trained. And if you want to call Bill Taylor at Local 8, follow him around on the jobs and see what they do, them guys earn their money. And ladies, too. There's some ladies on the job, too.
Also, Councilman, as you said, water damage to the adjacent property is the really big enemy, and that's mostly at the top of the roof and in the cellar. And we insure that the inspector sees two coats of mastic waterproofing agent put in the basement before he'll approve the backfill going down. And also at the roof top, we made that and took it away from the stucco contractor putting that tin that they were bending and they now have to cap the roof with a barge board, and it's done -- it can only be done by a professional roofer. And that improvement is 100 percent in that, that the -- we've been doing that for the last three years and I believe we've only had about two or three call-backs at the roof line, where it used to be common every day. 157 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455
I appreciate that. Let me talk about the last thing. I want to talk about the sprinkler Bill. I did a Bill couple years ago with the sprinkler fitters, and all these guys at the table know what it's about, and the rest of the people in this room probably don't know what it's about. We actually have people who put sprinklers in the high-rise buildings in the City of Philadelphia that may or may not at one point have been licensed. So as serious as that sounds, there was all kinds of people coming in. And these guys, we busted their stones for a while until we got it together and we worked. And Dave is smiling. We spent a lot of hours with my staff and their staff trying to get the stuff done. But for the first time in this City -- and it happens in a couple other major cities, but not most of them. We're ahead of the curve on this one. This sprinkler Bill is really important. Anybody installing these sprinklers 158 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 is going to be skilled, and they're going to be not necessarily union. I'm a union guy, but it doesn't have to be. I would like it, but I don't run the City yet. I don't know if I ever will. But we need to make sure that we keep doing what we're doing. I know the program has been going on. I'd like to thank you for bearing with us and with the sprinkler fitters, because I know Business Manager Miller can be a tough character, but I think we got it down to a point, right, Dave, now where you're starting to -- where everybody is starting to be certified and it's going to be pretty safe, hopefully not just for the residents but the fire fighters that have to fight them fires? We had that tragedy across the street years and years ago, and we hope to avoid something like that.
We agree 100 percent. We've now started taking enforcement actions against the companies. I believe we faxed over to your office results of several administrative hearings and we're suspending 159 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 licenses if we catch sprinkler contractors working without the proper employees. It is a life safety issue and we're 100 percent behind it.
Thank you. And just one point. Councilman Cohen talked about Hill International, and I don't know if you guys will know the answer to this, but I think that Hill International is doing construction work in Iraq right now.
So I would say if they're able to do that there, they might be able to do this NTI program here in Philadelphia.
They were hired to help with project management, which is -- I don't have to say that we in License and Inspections aren't perfect, and to have somebody else to be another pair of eyes working with us is a great thing.
There were some Commissioners before you that thought you were perfect. Not the one before you, but a 160 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 couple before, before-before that were perfect.
I know you don't, but I appreciate it. Thank you. Thank you for all the help and for all the grief we give you, for the money we give you. I mean, it becomes a dilemma, because we could give you all the money the world, but it comes out of your tax dollars and your employees' tax dollars. Again, it's easy to come here and beat guys like you up, but I know you are consummate professionals. If I can get Verdi on the cell phone at 2 o'clock in the morning, I know everything is right in my world.
Since he's got remarried, he doesn't even answer my beep anymore, so I don't know how you get him, 161 Whole - 4/28/04 - Bill 020455 Councilman.
He answers mine. He must go, It's Mariano, I'll answer it. Thank you.
Thank you. Are there any other questions or comments from Members of the Committee? (No response.)
-- for all your help. The Board of L&I Review, please. 162 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04
Please identify yourself for the record and proceed with your testimony. Please abbreviate your testimony.
Good afternoon, Council President Verna. I am Jerry Prospero, here to testify on behalf of the L & I Review Board. The L & I Review Board's budget for fiscal year 2005 is $212,927. It supports a full-time staff of three employees, as well as funding for six board members.
Thank you. Are there any questions from members of the Committee? (No response.)
Seeing none, I thank you. The Board of Building Standards.
Good afternoon, Council President Verna and members of Council. I am Jerry Prospero. I'm here to testify on behalf of the Board of Building 163 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 Standards fiscal year '05 budget request of $121,054. This budget will fund two full-time employees and four board members.
Thank you. Any questions from members of the Committee? (No response.)
Seeing none, I would then call upon the Zoning Board of Adjustment.
Good afternoon, Council President Verna and members of Council. I am Jerry Prospero, and I'm here to testify on behalf of the boards proposed '05 budget. Zoning Board of Adjustment is requesting a budget of $497,658 for fiscal year 2005. The budget supports six full-time employees and five board members.
Thank you. Any questions from members of the Committee? (No response.)
Thank you 164 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 so much.
We appreciate your testimony. The Committee will stand in recess until 2 o'clock at which time we will have the Streets Department. After Streets we will have the Water Department coming in. Thank you.
Good afternoon. This Committee of the Whole is now back in session regarding Bill Number 040255. We will now hear from the Streets Department. Good afternoon and welcome. Commissioner, we have your testimony. It will be given to the stenographer. It will be transcribed in whole, and I would ask you to please abbreviate your testimony, if you will.
Good afternoon, Council President Verna and members of City 165 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 Council. My name is Clarena Tolson, Commissioner of the Streets Department. And I am here today to present testimony on behalf of the department's proposed fiscal year 2005 operating budget. We request a General Fund appropriation of $116 million and an all funds appropriation of $149 million. 6 mill from fiscal year 2004 estimated obligations. 6 million lower than our fiscal year 2004 general obligations. The sanitation services, with regard to that, the fiscal 2005 budget request for sanitation is $98 million for all funds. 4 million over 2004 estimated obligations. This is offset by an increase in contractual landfill fees. 166 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 Sanitation will continue to provide a variety of programs, designed to collect and dispose of trash, as well as the recyclables from the waste stream. Additionally, the department has assumed responsibility for refuse collection at all recreation facilities. Economies of scale as they set in, the department expects to bring a net savings to the General Fund through these agencies. Discussions are ongoing at Fairmount Park that will also result in a similar arrangement and savings. 6 percent of respondents said that trash was always or frequently collected on time. On time collection rate of 94 percent in 2003 is projected for 2004, and projected to increase to 97 percent for 2005. 35 in 2005. We expect to reach these goals by continuing to focus on maximizing efficiency and productivity through innovation and collection route optimization. With regard to recycling, in fiscal 2003, 45,000 tons of recyclables were collected. Projections for 2004 are 44,000, and for 2005, forty-nine nine are expected. The negotiations of the most favorable contract rates in nearly a decade has industry analysts noting that Philadelphia's material marketing arrangement is the most lucrative of any major City in the mid Atlantic region. 50 for each ton of mixed paper recycled in the fourth quarter of 2004, generating an estimated revenue of $500,000 from curbside recycling during that three-month period. This number can be compared to 168 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 $238,000 for the four quarter of fiscal 2003. The Streets Department is tackling several significant issues impacting the future of the City sanitation costs, including the expiration of the current disposal contracts and a proposed increase in the growing greener tipping fee on the disposal of trash in the state's landfills. The City's currently in the second of three one-year options in its disposal contracts, with the last option expiring on June 30, 2005. These contracts include language protecting the City from tipping fee increases, by imposing a cap that limits the City's exposure to increased costs from changes in law, such as the states growing greener fees to five percent per year. With regard to transportation services, the Highway, Engineering, Traffic and Street Lighting Divisions provide the departments transportation services. The goal of the transportation group 169 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 is to continually provide cost effective and functionally safe movement on streets and bridges for public transport, commerce, and automobiles, as well as for bicycles and pedestrians. We accomplish this by continually exploring new approaches to improve productivity and delivery of services, such as continuing to invest in innovative, geographic and management information systems, managerial accounting and information systems, and through upgrading of computer equipment. In January of 2004 the department implemented a pilot to test automatic vehicle locator, AVL, and equipment sensing technology for use with highways and sanitation operation. This equipment was placed on 50 vehicles.
The department projects a 10 percent reduction in the use of road salt through real time monitoring of distribution rates during winter whether events. This will provide a budgetary 170 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 savings and environmental benefits. Continuous knowledge of vehicle location and status will provide a higher degree of certainty and accountability, especially during snow events and other critical operations. For fiscal 2004 and 2005, the department, Highway Division, projects resurfacing 122 miles of streets and placing 85 linear miles of pavement markings, including traffic lanes. Ditch restorations are projected at 7500 and 7600, respectively. The department repaired 24,000 potholes in fiscal 2003 and projects repairs of 25,000 in 2004 and 2005. In 2004 the division again leased spray patcher units, also known as pothole killers, to assist during the peak month of repair. These machines quickly and safely perform the repair in a more durable and economical manner. In conclusion, the employees of the Streets Department continue to work 171 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 diligently in the delivery of services to our citizens and neighborhoods, and to improve the quality of life in our City, by providing clean and safe streets. Therefore, we request your favorable consideration of this budget request. Thank you so much.
Thank you. Commissioner, what is the number of positions you will be eliminating as a result of the DROP related work force, right sizing?
24. Can you tell me what those positions were, for the most part?
Yes. We're going through a reorganization within our transportation group, particularly focusing on --
Reorganization. As we have employees who are 172 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 retiring and leaving through DROP, we're taking the opportunity to review all of our management positions that we have in place. We're doing some consolidations. And we are not replacing all of our management positions, and instead focusing on new worker level. So as opposed to hiring, say, a district manager, we may be hiring a raker instead or a semi-skilled laborer.
How many positions do you have? How many positions do you presently have?
I'm sure if I checked the budget book, I could find that very easily.
Oh, I'm sorry. I thought you were telling me that you were going to get it. I can get it for you. 173 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 Our budgeted level is 634, fiscal '05.
Okay. In the recycling program, you mentioned a pilot program.
Will you please explain what the pilot program is and the areas of the City it will cover?
Yes. The pilot program for recycling is called A Single Stream recycling program. And what that program does, it allow citizens to commingle, put all of their recycling materials out at the curb at one container. And in fact, they may be able to add additional products that we are not now collecting. And those products would be cardboard and plastic. The beauty of this pilot is that we will be able to collect the materials in a 174 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 packer truck or a compactor versus an open truck. We expect to find some efficiencies through that system. Presently with our open truck system we can collect approximately four-and-a-half tons per day. The packer system may allow us to collect as much as or 14 or 15 tons per 10 day per crew. 11 It is the system that we have not 12 yet identified the location or the route 13 that will be used in the test, but it will 14 be some place where the packer truck will 15 be able to fit.
Will that all have to be sorted at one point in time?
Yes. In a system that requires us to work with our vendor who will agree to accept the commingled materials and then sort them through the processing system. It will probably require us to receive less revenues in processing, but we're expecting to find a benefit and a 175 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 savings through the collection process, because of the larger amount that we can collect with each crew.
How do you define your department's relationship with the Recycling Advisory Committee over the past year?
Our recycling unit within the department works, I think, as close as they can with our RAC, as we call them, Recycling Advisory Committee. It is a group that is made up of business interests in some citizens, some of whom have a vested interest in the business because they too are in the same business they are advising on. They have expressed concern from time to time with regard to their involvement on policy. But to the extent that it's possible and prudent, our recycling office works with them.
Last year, nine times. 176 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 And it's usually a once-a-month arrangement. But about ten per year because usually about a couple months are skipped.
Can you remind me what the RAC's role is as defined by the law. What is their...
While you're searching for the information, let me ask another question, and then we'll get back to that. Commissioner?
I said I'll ask another question while he's searching for the information.
You mention in your testimony that there will be some reduction in areas such as highway roadside work and response time to repair major streetlights or those that are not in operation. 177 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 Will you elaborate as to what the reductions and delays we should expect?
Yes. Highway roadside work is repair to islands, cleaning islands, cement repair work. So, a reduction and delay in time to those repairs is expected. For the streetlights, that really should read alley lights. Right now the alley lights are done on the -- many of them are done on the weekends.
No, not for the alley light repair. There is some contract work. There's also some City work involved, too. And much of that is done on overtime on Saturdays. One of our cost savings measures is to reduce some of our overtime. So we expect a delay in the amount of time it will take us to respond to some of the alley light repairs.
How long do we have to wait now for an alley light 178 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 to be repaired?
Our plan is days, 4 our average. And we expect it to go to 30. 5
We're not increasing 10 the City's liability in the event of an 11 accident by delaying either the repair of 12 the streetlights, alley lights or the 13 highway roadside work, are we? 14
We certainly are very 15 concerned about maintaining our safety levels. And what we've done is to look at those areas that we think we can minimize the impacts to safety. We will be maintaining our on-time expectations, with regard to streetlights. Right now there is... Our efforts are to have streetlights done within the day. When people call... The same day they call, if they call in the evening or 179 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 in the daytime, we're out that night to check them and repair them. If they call at night, after crews have been dispatched, then the next night the lights are checked upon. We do most of the investigations there at nighttime so we can see the condition versus the day.
Well, Commissioner, earlier we had the Commissioner of L & I. And they testified that they are going to be setting fees for re-inspections. For instance, the fees will go up for... I guess the first inspection violation will be $75, the second will be $150, the third will be $300. You are very familiar with an issue that has actually had some publicity in the paper about someone in my District who does not have a sidewalk. And he should have a sidewalk. Consequently, people have to walk through a mud pit. How many times has he been cited? And I know he has been cited. 180 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 And what does it take for him to have to abide by the law like everybody else? Now, who follows through on the citations that the Streets Department issues? Do you have somebody go out and check if the work was done; and if it was not done he receives another citation? Walk me through this process, if you will, please.
Okay. When citizens... If a citizen calls to express concern about a violation with regards to sidewalk repair, we have someone go out and inspect the location. The challenge that we have right now is with regard to how ultimately the sidewalk repair is done. As Council is aware, there is some legislation that would require the City to do some of that work, should the citizen not prepare it himself. We are presently challenged with regard to that because we have not identified -- 181 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04
I'm sorry. You're going to have to pull the microphone closer to you. I'm having difficulty hearing you.
We are presently challenged with that because we have not identified a funding source to support repairs of the sidewalks. I think that the numbers that we identified in previous testimony may cost as much as $6 million to repair sidewalks, the problem that we have right now. So we are still trying to investigate and figure out ways to follow through, as you suggest, and see that sidewalks are repaired, but --
Well, I don't know if we're ever going to have the $6 million to do that. So tell me: What do we do? And what is the process at the present time to do something about this mud pit that people have to walk through every time there's rain.
Presently we do not 182 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 have a process for getting the sidewalk repaired because we don't have the ability to pay to get it repaired. And we have --
You don't issue citations for people who have a problem with their sidewalk?
We haven't presently, in the -- in the recent time, in the last six months, issued citations. The location that you talked about, yes, we did issue citations for that.
All right. So, say citations are issued. Where do we go from there? Who's responsible for collecting the fines on this citations? And what other steps could be taken? Because I think this is horrible. I really do.
The challenge that we have is that when citizens ignore the 183 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 City's request that they follow through and take care of their own property, it's left to the City to do something. And we have limited means of doing something, and that is the problem.
I know if I have a crack on my sidewalk, it's my responsibility. And if somebody falls, I could be sued; is that right?
Right. Here somebody doesn't even have a sidewalk. So what did you site him for? If it's not the City's responsibility, what did you site him for?
We cited him for the inappropriate sidewalk, not having... for having a damaged sidewalk because, I mean, there's something that exists there and it's been damaged.
So in other words, If you could issue 50 citations, and this gentleman will never be required to actually install a sidewalk. 184 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04
In this case the gentleman knew very well that he had a very bad sidewalk. This gentleman, I believe, was an attorney -- is an attorney.
That lives in Center City. And he chose not to do his part, in a community that was in much worse condition than where he lives. And I don't know how to answer that. I don't know how to answer that, in terms of citizen responsibility or property owner responsibility. But I do know that we are fully challenged with regard to how to respond to people who will not do their part. 185 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04
I just can't... I just can't understand it. And I think we have to look into this further. And nobody from the Streets
I am not sure. I can get an answer fairly quickly, but I'm not sure.
Are you able to lien his property if he doesn't pay the citation?
Yes. It was a lot. It was a vacant lot on the corner. We even gave him estimates, what it would cost to get done, and he was just reluctant to pay it.
Well, have you liened his properties? 186 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04
He has since sold it, and the new property owners will -- said --
About two months ago. And the new property owner is to take care of it.
The Chair recognizes... I would just like to remind everybody, when you ask for a point of order your name suddenly disappears from the screen. So we're going to write everybody's name down as it appears. 187 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 Now, thank you; the Chair recognizes Councilman Rizzo.
Commissioner, there was some confusion. You're talking about sidewalks. This winter I got a few calls about people getting a ticket for not shoveling on their sidewalk, and they didn't have sidewalks. So I don't know how some of those things are being adjusted. Up in the northwest especially, many people got -- and I assume that's somebody in your department that issues those tickets?
Don't you think it's kind of strange to give a person a ticket for --
But they got them. So, I assume they'll be adjusted. But that's the question that we have. How do people... And again, it's 188 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 some of the older neighborhoods. I notice when you're out walking, you'll run across a property that just has grass.
No sidewalk. Is there a requirement to have a sidewalk?
There are some requirements with regard to having sidewalks. The location in question is a thoroughly... It is not near a park. It is not near other green space that might require a sidewalk --
Commissioner, I don't mean to interrupt you, and I don't want to belabor this issue. You know how that area is changing, how the prices of real estate is skyrocketing. 189 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 And we allow somebody to get away with this? Who apparently has the wherewithal to make what is required of him to do. And we allow him to get away scot free? I just don't think it's right. I don't think it's right. But since the property's been sold, I assume the new property owner understands that there have been citations issued on this?
I am certain that the property owner would get the citations that were there from before.
And what I will also do is go back to make sure that we deliver to the new property owner a new citation.
Thank you. I don't want to tell you what their response was. I mean, it's utterly 190 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 ridiculous. Chair recognizes Councilman Rizzo.
Oh, great. Thank you. Thank you. Commissioner, let me first say that after many, many years the Germantown Avenue bridge turned out to be a very, very beautiful project. I think you must agree that the community, the Streets Department worked very closely together. I know it got heated at times. But now I think that is probably one of the most beautiful bridges in the City of Philadelphia, the one that spans the Wissahickon Creek at... up in the northwest. It's really impressive when you go over there, day or night. Great job that your people did, in creating something that will be there for many, many, many years. But my question is that, a few days 191 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 after that bridge opened, the little bridge on Bells Mill shut. And I know it was turned around quickly. Temporary repairs were made to get that bridge reopened in its full capacity. I anticipate... I understand we can anticipate a major bridge construction on a bridge that will cause a lot of confusion again in that community. For eight... seven, eight years the bridge on Germantown Avenue was shut and then one way. What can we expect, and... What can we expect? And if you have someone on the staff that has, you know, up-to-date information, what can we expect to have happen? When will that bridge be shut down for the repairs? And what can we do to alleviate a major artery that connects Roxborough and Chestnut Hill? What can we expect the impact to be and keep it to a minimum?
In the design plans for 192 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 all of our bridge work, whether they be some renovations or reconstruction, the engineers take into some consideration the use of the bridge and the need to maintain some -- and whatever need to maintain traffic, as required there. We understand that for -- for the bridge in question, that it is an important artery. And what... I am not clear about the time line for repair. But when the repair does happen, as traffic is needed to be rerouted, it will work -- we will work with, I think, Flowertown and the other communities, to try to route the traffic properly and as best as we can. But because it is fairly small, we probably have limited capacity to maintain it being open. During the short period of time that we had it closed or partially closed, we had a lot of disruption and a lot of intervention by police because people were failing to heed to the directionals and the 193 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 one way that we had put in place. But I am confident that we will be able to work it out, once the full construction goes into place. And I also add, with regard to the Germantown Bridge, I thank you for your comments on that, and also tell you that the work on that bridge has just received some national recognition. In fact, we are putting out a press release today to talk about the national award that the engineers on staff have won for the work that they did on that bridge.
Yeah. It's magnificent. Commissioner, would you mind? I hate to again have to get real... have to nail you down. But could you bring someone to the table that can for the record talk about a time line for that Bells Mill bridge? Could Mr. Sernick or --
To the extent that he has it, sir. I would really not like him to speculate on it for the record. 194 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04
I don't want to speculate. I want to nail you down a bit.
Because when this project starts, I don't want to say... I don't want to be told something differently than we can expect here. So could he come to the table --
-- and talk about exactly what the community impact will be.
Good afternoon. Joseph Sernick, Chief Engineer and surveyor, Streets Department. Councilman, that bridge is, as you know, it's a historic, very old stone arch bridge. We have a program for a rehabilitation in fiscal year '06. Our plan would be to use a new process that is currently being tested on the Century Lane bridge, which has just undergone construction within the last month. It's that technique which is sort of 195 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 a non-destructive arch-strengthening method, if that technique works well on Century Lane, which is a very similar bridge, we would be instituting that on the Bells Mill Road project. We are looking at that process very closely, as is PENNDOT, because they have a lot of stone arch bridges also. It's a process that was imported from Britain. If that process works, it will shorten greatly the amount of time needed for construction, such that the bridge will probably be closed about six months. That's still a long time.
And it's a very difficult detour, as you know, because we've got to run up through Whitemarsh, 196 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 over Baron Hill Road. You know the detour.
The question. That's the shortest, six months. Now, if they don't use that technology, what's going to be the long side?
Well, we're going to have to go in and conventionally reconstruct that arch, which means taking the stones out, putting up some false work, and putting them back in. Again, we're forced to pretty much keep the look of the bridge the same as it is. So it would probably take a full construction season, probably eight or nine months.
That's going to be... We're going to be back where we were with -- pretty much, or maybe worse than having the Germantown Avenue bridge out.
Well, the Commissioner just asked me would the start time change under those two scenarios. And I would say that the start time would not change. However, in the longer 197 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 technique, would have to make sure that we started at the beginning of a construction season, such like in February, because you would not want to be in a situation where you did not get it completed and had to have it sit over the winter closed but not being worked on. So the timing gets more critical in the second scenario.
So for the record, when you talk about fiscal year '06, could you be clearer on... We're talking about the calendar year '05.
We're probably talking about starting this project in the spring of '06, the latter part of the year. Again, you don't want to have it under construction so that it would sit over a winter.
And the strengthening that we made to the bridge in the work that you just described at the beginning of your testimony there is fine in order to hold the bridge over for that length of time. 198 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04
Well, thank you. And let's hope that the new imported technology works because six months is even a long time to have that particular roadway shut down in total.
And again, we have to keep in consideration when there's a hospital case that goes to Chestnut Hill, lots of the Roxborough community is serviced by emergency medical care that uses that road, and that creates a significant delay. And I know you even went out there on your own and timed it, which I appreciate, to make sure that we're not delaying hospital cases being taken to Chestnut Hill Hospital. Madam President, I know I went long. And I'll just pass and come up to the next question on the second round.
Thank you, Madam 199 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 Chair. Commissioner, I have a couple items that I'd like to raise with you. Some are slightly old in nature, but I'll get through them with you. But let me ask this question now. Does the Streets Department work in concert with the School District, the other large governmental body in the City, on sanitation removal? Do we pick up trash and debris from public schools?
At the choice of the 200 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 School District, they wanted to try to use a private vendor, and see if they could expand their recycling program.
Okay. Do you know what the result of that effort is? S. TOLSON: I think that the School District is still trying to work through a good -- a good program.
Is the City charging the School District for trash pickup?
And do you recall what it was? What is it; a tonnage issue or is it a flat rate or...
No. We charged our cost. So it was time and material, time and tonnage.
And do you have any idea what the cost of the private service was?
The cost of the private service is about a million and a half. I think that... I'm sorry. Two-and-a-half 201 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 million. I believe that the School District believed that they could get recycling and waste collection at the same cost. They have not yet achieved that, but they're still working on it. And we are trying to assist them in getting a good contract, in terms of the... working out for them the terms of the contract, the suggested terms.
And when did the City School District relationship, at least on trash, end?
Okay. All right. I was looking through the large budget book, and I could not find the detail on the contracts I assume we have with companies for resurfacing. Do you know where I would find that? I'm assuming they're under contract to the Streets Department. 202 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04
A page number. We're looking through the book to get you the page number.
So you're talking about item number 305, building and construction, highway materials: asphalt, super patch, et cetera?
Okay. Normally in that section these kinds of listings, although I see this appears to be a Class 300? Do we have contracts with companies that provide these services? 203 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04
So you do street resurfacing through the Capital Budget.
Just to inquire, why would we do street resurfacing through the Capital Budget? Doesn't that have a useful life?
Within five years or seven years or something like that?
We do a significant amount of reconstruction and resurfacing. And it historically has been through the Capital Budget. We have about $11 million there.
We do our own, 204 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 right.
How many companies provide street resurfacing services to us?
There's probably a handful that are available for that service.
Okay. Could you be a little more specific? How many... I know what a couple is. I know what a few is.
Four to five. Okay. All right. A new definition. How much do we spend... In addition to the City's $2.49 million, how much do we spend on street resurfacing with private companies?
Let me get my Capital Budget book. I'm sorry, Councilman. We don't have our Capital Budget book here.
That's all right. I have one, but that's not going to... Okay. That's fine. The Capital Budget is not going to tell me what I want to know. How many companies and what are their names?
Okay. We will get that for you. Okay. The list of vendors here are our vendors that usually participate. AP Construction.
I'm sorry. What was that name again? 206 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04
AP Construction, DePaul, Anderson, Glasgow, Seravelli?
So there are five firms that provide street resurfacing services to us?
Okay. And what I'd like is, if you could provide us, say for the last two fiscal years, all the companies that bid, the companies that were awarded, how much they were awarded. To your knowledge, are any of these companies owned by either a minority or a female or any other person or entity in a disadvantaged business class?
I believe... Let me just confirm... that one is a female. I think Glasgow. Glasgow is a woman-owned business.
Okay. Are there any minority-owned firms or of any minority status?
Okay. All right. And the amount that we spend annually on street resurfacing, is it fairly consistent over the years?
The number is somewhat 208 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 smaller this year.
Okay. Okay. When you gave your answer on street resurfacing regarding minority firms, you seemed to make it specific to resurfacing. Are there other minority-owned companies that do major work for the Streets Department?
For example, they were 209 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 a major player in the Independence... independence Construction project on Chestnut Street? They did the sidewalks the streetscape work...
All right. Why don't we do this. Can you provide to the Chair a list. Is there, again, any central place that I would be able to go in the budget? As I said, I've been looking through the detail, and generally your 200 series or your 250 series. I don't see a lot of contracts or traditional... in the traditional places. Can you get to us a list of the various... Now, you did some one page with a whole bunch of professional services contracts on it, which I've now lost. Could you give us a list of all your 210 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 contracts, and the amounts and what they were for?
Indicate, if you would also, of those which are Philadelphia based. Thank you, Councilman Nutter.
Sure. Well, why don't we just ask. I mean, there are only a handful.
At least on the resurfacing. Are all these companies Philadelphia based?
Councilman, Joe Sernick again. 211 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 Anderson, Seravelli are Philadelphia based. Ramos are Philadelphia based.
Well, hold on for a second. Ramos wasn't in the five that I was initially given. So they must provide -- What service do they provide?
I believe you said other types of work. And we had said that Ramos had done street reconstruction...
...streetscaping, concrete work, curbing, sidewalks, that 212 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 kind of thing.
Right. Right. Yeah. They did Allegheny Avenue a bunch of years ago. So, I don't want to get caught in the you-didn't-ask-the-right-question situation. So, I know we have straight resurfacing work. And then we have road reconstruction. We've got streetscape and all the rest. Can I have the larger list, then?
Okay. All right. So, go ahead. And all of these companies do their own milling work or is that someone else? Is that a separate --
That's part of that. Okay. Let's go to in your section 5 37. Can you just provide to the Chair some additional information about all of these companies in your 250 series, in terms of a little bit of additional information on what the contract is, some demographic information about the contractor, including whether they are in the City or outside the City.
in section 37. Okay. And Commissioner, we heard the other day, when you go out into the marketplace for professional services contracts, is it normally with... Do you normally... I guess we've got RFPs, RFQs, RFIs, you know, RF, any other letter of the alphabet. Is yours usually a written proposal 214 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 or document? And do you usually seek competitive bids or do you just often know who you want to pick and you just pick them?
In writing with some general description or scope of services requested.
Okay. All right. A couple outstanding items. I've got... We get these letters from time to time in response to requests from constituents about streetlights. Am I over? Okay. Constituents ask about streetlights, for whatever particular reason. And at varying points in time, in the year, the response comes back that you're unable to install additional streetlights because you don't have any funding for new street lighting. My concern with that is... I got one of those letters last year. The reply was dated July 10th. The fiscal year 215 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 started July 1st. And so, on that one I'm slightly perplexed to understand how you could be out of money ten days into the fiscal year. So, I do wonder both about the response itself. And I know that you actually have money for street lighting. So, how do we go about getting additional streetlights when constituents ask for them?
We certainly had money on July 10th from July 1st. And the focus of our program --
Yes. We don't spend it quite that fast. The focus of our program has been on the replacement of obsolete fixtures throughout the City, replacing them with energy efficient, high pressure sodium fixtures, and also doing repairs. We have the opportunity to and we're able to also place new fixtures where 216 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 there's existing poles. Because of our limited funds, we are also taking the opportunity to include on our federal aid programs street lighting replacements and fixtures, where we can.
We are challenged to get a little bit past that. And I think that we have to do a better job, maybe in working with Council, to identify possible funding sources and support for those requests.
Okay. Which I'd be pleased to have that discussion. I mean, I think our goals are the same. We want to provide the service. If for some reason, with the exception of ten days into the fiscal year, you don't have the funds available, then I would like to have the discussion. I'd like to provide the service, and, you know, kind of move on. So, I will give you copies of these, a couple of which I did not receive a 217 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 response to and a couple I did. There was discussion earlier -- I hate to take you back into this territory -- with the person with no 6 sidewalk. And when the President returns, I actually would love to hear what the Law Department said about that. But I get requests from constituents on a pretty regular basis, and you know I've been involved in this issue for some time. But I got the 3,000 block of North Bambrey. Those constituents wrote earlier this year about their curbs and sidewalks. And there is a provision in the Code related to Streets, providing for if you're resurfacing a street, and if as a part of the work that needs to be done a determination is made that curb and sidewalk needs to be replaced, that you will do it. I guess the question is: Has that particular provision ever been utilized in 218 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 the Code, related to these kinds of problems?
In my previous commentary, that was the issue that I expressed some concern about, our lack of ability to fund that.
Okay. So... Well, let me ask this question: If you had the funding, and if there were a street in such poor condition that while you were pursuing resurfacing... It was in such poor condition that you really did need to reconstruct the curb and sidewalk area to make the resurfacing effective, would you pursue the curb and sidewalk replacement?
I'm sorry, Councilman. I turned away for a minute. I apologize.
I can understand that. What I said was, if you had the funding, and you went out to resurface a street, and the curb and sidewalk were in such bad condition that it basically didn't make sense to resurface the street without 219 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 repairing the curb and sidewalk, would you do it?
I think that's when we certainly would be able to engage with the Law Department, in a real conversation about how we proceed, then; you know, what are the legal issues, what are the policy issues; probably that said aside, you know, so that we can move forward with implementation.
Okay. Well, again, I'll give you another copy of this particular letter. And we've received some others, because I think some response to the citizens in that particular case would be helpful. And we didn't get anything back on that one.
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Tasco. 220 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04
Last year a million dollars of NTI funds were allocated to do a study and pilot program regarding driveways, sidewalks and retaining walls. What was the result of the study and the pilot program?
I'm pleased to report that we have achieved a great deal with regard to our retaining walls. Over this last year three retaining walls were repaired, Berk Street, Mascher and Nedro. And we've identified the next two that are to be done. We did a significant survey throughout the entire City of all the retaining walls, to assess where we had our biggest challenges with regard to walls that were potential safety hazards. In fact, some were just teetering. So, the intervention and concern of Council was certainly very, very helpful to move ahead with that project. 221 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 We've identified a priority order of walls that need to be taken care of and removing post haste to get those walls addressed.
But the million dollars was for a fund to do a study -- are you aware of that -- in the NTI program?
I wasn't aware that it was for the study. I thought it was to do some of the work.
The sidewalks and driveways... There is some analysis about 222 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 that potential cost to do those. They are significant. They do not pose -- What was found, they do not pose the same safety hazard and concern as retaining walls. Some of the retaining walls were quite significant in size. Obviously, there was a concern with either things falling from above onto people or people falling down through something because of failing retaining walls.
Is the million dollars being used for retaining walls?
So did you do a study -- I think the purpose of the study was to look at how you could come up with a program that would be helpful to neighbors, in addressing the issue of driveways because right --
And curbs and sidewalks. And because the problem has 223 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 been that there is no... has been no effort to try to come up with a plan to help neighbors to repair their driveways. And that was the major concern, why the million dollars was done, to do some of this stuff, but also to do the study, basically for driveways and curbs and sidewalks.
Yes. I understand. I think that some priority was given to the retaining wall because of the safety issue. There is some analysis and commentary, with regard to the sidewalks and driveways as well. And I can pull that information and get it to you.
But what's important for us who have to deal with these driveway issues every time I go to a meeting, the neighbors want to know what can the City do. They don't necessarily want the City to pay for it. They want a process by where everybody... They understand it's a common driveway. But they can't, through 224 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 their own process, engage a hundred percent of the neighbors in paying for the repair or repaving of the driveway. So what we ask the City to do is to come up with a way that the City could involve itself, somewhat as you're doing with the retaining walls. I think the people who live where the retaining wall is being repaired have to pay, right?
Right. And the City does put some money in that, right?
All right. So what will you all do to help the people with the driveways, even absent the money, even helping them to understand that you have to pay. This is how much it costs. Then we will do X, Y, Z to help you get it done. That is what people are asking for.
I think what we've done -- what we've started in this process with the retaining wall is just that 225 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 approach. We've -- We've had community meetings with people, to talk about why we're doing retaining walls or their retaining wall first, the dangers and concerns that we have. And we've also talked about the need for citizens to repay the money, because the fund is somewhat like a revolving fund. And as people have the work done, we talk about -- they pay it back so that more work can be done. We have billed for at least two of these walls several hundred thousand dollars. The money has been slow in return. And I guess we have to give people a little bit more time. But those bills have been out there probably a little over a month at this point.
Are they -- Are the people -- Are the properties liened?
They have not been liened. Well, actually, let me back up one 226 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 second. Citizens have up to three years to repay the funds or pay it all at one time. After that point they are liened. So no 6 one has been liened as yet. But the feature of the program that talks about being the revolving fund is explained on the front end, so that people understand that as we do a retaining wall, it's very helpful to put the money back in so we can do more and more work. The fact is that these retaining walls, some were very, very bad and some were very, very large... in and of themselves have used up now nearly a million dollars. Now, certainly many driveways could be done for the same amount of money versus, you know... You could do, you know, ten, twenty times over the work with driveways, as opposed to retaining walls. But these were safety concerns that we felt had to be addressed fairly immediately.
So you're 227 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 saying if you had a million dollars you could do how many driveways?
I'll give you that calculation in one minute. If you could ask other questions, somebody will give me the answer to that.
So if you had another million dollars we could begin helping to repair driveways.
Yes, somebody's going to give me the answer. We need a calculator.
Thank you. For reconstruction of a driveway, 10 to 15. That number can be made even larger if we use other techniques, such as resurfacing and not fully reconstructing. 228 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04
And that number can be even larger if we were to use other techniques, such as resurfacing, other resurfacing techniques.
So we might have got more for our money if we had done driveways, right? I certainly had less grief. I don't get complaints about retaining walls. I got one complaint about one retaining wall. I get hundreds of complaints about driveways.
In a lot of instances the City is culpable because the 229 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 trash trucks use the driveways. And the argument by the homeowner is that, look, our driveways probably wouldn't be so bad if the trash trucks weren't there. So I have one block, as you know, 7400 block of... 2400 block, I think, of 76th or 77th Avenue, where the driveway has been condemned. So now they are picking up the trash in the front. And the neighbors are upset. And there's nothing being done to help these neighbors try and resolve the issue of how their driveway gets repaired.
So are you all going to do anything about the study on how to come up with a plan for driveways? Would you come back to City Council and ask us: We've come up with this program for driveways and here's how much it costs?
We can do that, Councilwoman, yes. In fact, we can work 230 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 with Council to try and develop a strategy that will be suitable.
Well, we're supposed to use some of this million dollars to do that.
Yes. Well, as I said, for the first three they really used the million dollars.
Well, you weren't supposed to use all the million dollars. You were supposed to use the million dollars to fund the retaining wall, alley, driveway, curbs and sidewalk repair, and reconstruction, pilot program and analysis.
Unfortunately, I think the magnitude of the problem and the safety concerns that were highlighted with these walls kind of forced -- forced everyone's hand on the issue of addressing these retaining walls immediately.
Thank you. 231 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 Thank you, Councilwoman Tasco. Commissioner, I'll be the first to say that I am very pleased, very proud, very excited about the retaining wall work that was done. Possibly one of the first letters I wrote when I arrived in City Council in January of 1992 -- I didn't even have regular stationery yet -- was about the retaining wall in the 5200 block of Berks and Euclid, which was completed earlier -- earlier this year. It is tremendous. The work was fantastic. The neighbors are very happy. So, you know, finally that got done. And I'm very pleased with it. But I do want to point out to you, and I also respect the fact that, you know, the magnitude of the problem, you know, was very large with the first three walls that were done. What I don't recall is, what the full cost was for the three. There was one done in Councilwoman Tasco's District, one 232 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 in Councilwoman Miller's District and mine. But at the same time, I mean, the million dollars was for a certain purpose. It was very clear. It was from NTI funds. It was in the NTI budget from two years ago. And I don't think even utilizing, you know, your good judgment about trying to address the issue that Council wanted addressed, I mean, you can't... you can't change the purpose for which we authorize the funding. And the study issue certainly could have been done before the three walls were worked on and completed. So... I mean, we now find ourselves in the situation where we authorized money to do two things: Start a retaining wall pilot program, which you did, and fund the study. We don't even know how much the study was going to cost. I've never received any kind of detailed response, at least from the NTI people, as to what they were doing because they were actually 233 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 charged with doing this. Obviously, they were going to work with the Streets Department on it. But... I mean, now you're in a situation where we ask about the study and you're left to say, well, we spent all the money on the retaining walls that you, Council, asked us to do, but now you don't get the study on all the other elements. I mean, I don't think that's... I don't think that's going to work too well.
I understand what you're saying. And I will certainly make sure I communicate the need for the portions of the study that talk about the sidewalks and the driveways, to be shared with Council, to address your concern.
All right. I appreciate it. Thank you. Thank you Councilwoman Tasco.
Right. I just -- I think it's very important -- And 234 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 I don't know how we impress upon you all -- We have talked to you on Council on record, and as well as privately, about the need to find a way to deal with the driveways. Our curbs and sidewalks are important, too. But for me it's the driveway issue. We have a meeting tonight about the driveways because it is a problem. And particularly where the trash trucks use the driveways, which most of them do in Mt. Airy, to pick up the trash. And then the trash -- the driveways are in such bad condition because of the constant traffic of the trucks, as well as just normal wear and tear. People are saying, help us fix this. They're not necessarily saying, City fix it, but help us fix it. And that's what I -- When we voted on this, and I was very happy that... Finally we keep telling people, well, there's a study that is going to be done, to talk to us about how to do it.
I have one other question, and I think I'll be finished. Could I do that?
We asked for a traffic turn signal at Rising Sun and Adams Avenue. It was refused. And last year we introduced a bill, Bill Number 030338, calling for installation of two left-turn green arrow traffic signals at Rising Sun and Adams. And I'd like to know the status of this traffic light. Will the ordinance be enforced?
Councilwoman, we would like to talk to you about this issue in detail. I certainly respect the fact that there is an ordinance in place to support this. We do have some concerns on that. And I understand your concerns. And I am willing to get past our concerns. But I'd need to talk with you probably in greater 236 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 detail and share some information with you. And if your concerns outweigh the concerns that we have, we'll move ahead.
Well, we've only been talking about this for about three years or more. I think everybody who travels Adams Avenue and Rising Sun will tell you of the debacle with the traffic there. It just doesn't seem that the Streets Department can understand the dynamics of what happens there. I avoid the area because of the traffic, and the congestion, and the way the traffic flows. And you know, I will tell you my concern about it, in terms of whether or not it's enforced. Just recently I had a meeting with -- Was it Streets Department -- to talk about Haines and Stenton. And ever since I've been on this Council, since 1988, neighbors ask me about traffic controls at Sedgwick and Philalena. Oh, no, we can't do that. We 237 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 can't -- The study says you can't do it. The study says you can't do it. About a month or two ago I got a meeting with the Streets Department, talking about controlling traffic at Stenton and Hanes. And oh, by the way, we're going to put traffic controls at Stenton and Sedgwick. So it creates for me a problem, in terms of being able to rely on how decisions are made in the Streets department. So, if I ask for something and we don't get it, and all of a sudden you all think about it... Well, it may be done now. We don't know if the same conditions existed existed before. So now I need a traffic light at Rising Sun. And your people in your department say, we can't do that, for whatever reason. Something's going to happen there, and then you're going to say, oh, we can put the traffic light there. 238 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 Because I don't see any justification or rationale, that's based on anything, how you all make these decisions. And I was totally concerned when they told me they were going to put the traffic controls at Stenton and Sedgwick where there have been any number of accidents, any number of accidents. But nobody listened. So I have a real problem with the information that flows from the Streets Department, regarding these traffic signals, regarding traffic control, because it seems to be based on not what we want or the community wants, but what the people in the department thinks ought to happen.
I understand what you're saying, Councilwoman. And I am very concerned about decision-making process because it doesn't seem to be based on anything that is credible. I would say that sometimes in doing traffic studies, conditions do change over 239 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 time. And I understand that there are regulations that... that kind of guide -- I won't say govern but guide -- the decision-making process for our management. But we need... We're still working on being more flexible or being as flexible as regulations will allow us to be. We haven't gotten there as yet, and we're still working on that point.
We need some help with Rising Sun and Adams. I will tell you I've had a conversation with PENNDOT. Doesn't seem to be a problem with them. We met with the Secretary.
And the staff people. And we raised the issue with them. And they can question sometimes how we make decisions using PENNDOT as the excuse for things not getting done. So we have a democratic government. We have a very good relationship with that department. So, I will talk to you about Rising 240 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 Sun and Adams. But what I want is the street signal put up.
Chair recognizes Councilman Rizzo for a point of order.
I'd like to add to the list Bells Mill and Germantown Avenue -- Bells Mill and the Ridge, a left turn arrow. And I don't mean to be critical of traffic engineering. But I'll tell you this: That when you ask for a left turn arrow you're told, no, it doesn't meet the standard. But when the bridge was out on Germantown Avenue, they put a left turn arrow for... I guess that would be southbound Ridge Avenue, for lack of a better direction, heading towards the City.
That's a question. 241 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04
To help during the detour at that location to get traffic over Bells Mill. Well --
Well, when it comes to your turn, you'll ask that question.
Thank you. Chair recognizes Councilman Clarke. 242 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04
Thank you. Thank you, Madam President. Good afternoon. I have a couple of relatively quick, slash, easy questions. And then I'm going to get into a little more detailed questions on some other issues. First, can you tell me on the hazardous waste sites, what the policy is in selecting the sites, how you select the sites, what kind of communications you have with the surrounding community, slash, community groups or elected officials, in terms of selecting the sites. The other one I have is the status of the Avenue of the Arts, North Broad Streetscape project. And then I have some more detailed questions.
Okay. I'll have Mr. Sernick come back up and talk in detail about Avenue of the Arts. For the hazardous waste, you're talking about the household hazardous waste? 243 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04
Yeah. There was -- Yeah. I think it was probably two years ago. There was a hazardous waste site at Sedgley and Ridge. It was one of the City's municipal yards. And it was utilized for hazardous waste sites. And the only way I knew about it, although I lived in the neighborhood, like three or four blocks away, I just happened to be driving down the street. And I believe the collection was minimal because I don't think the people in the immediate neighborhood knew exactly what that was all about. And I'm wondering if we've changed or altered that process, to better communicate, particularly to the people who are closest to you, that there's an opportunity to dump off some of the hazardous waste, as opposed to putting it in the trash in a clandestine way, which is 244 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 not obviously good environmentally for the citizens to have done. Can you talk to me?
Surely. The City offers six household hazardous waste collections per year. And they move around the City. Additionally, we have an intergovernmental agreement with the surroundings counties which gives us another ten collection points. Those sites are designated usually just by where we own a facility. At Ridge and Sedgley we own a facility that we thought could accommodate the cars coming in and out fairly easily. We work with a vendor, Claim Ventures, that captures the material and handles it in a safe and proper manner, and then takes care of disposal in the proper way. The advertising for that is usually through the community papers, the radio and flyers. Flyers and notices go out in the mail -- 245 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04
Yes. We share those with... Usually share it with the Council offices, recreation, and lending library.
-- do you mean you put them out -- you give them to the Councilperson for them to put out or do you have an employee of the Streets Department physically placing flyers in the doors in the --
So it's essentially left to the -- It's the responsibility of the Councilperson to distribute the flyers. 246 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04
Well, to various levels. I don't just mean Council people. I mean elected officials, our libraries our recreation centers, we hand them out. And then we do... We do little giveaway, like bookmarks and things like that, to advertise in the front end. And we do that several times throughout the year. But in the beginning of the year we have a big push, listing all the dates and the locations, to encourage people to come out. And you are right --
Yeah. I mean, there was like -- There are -- There -- There are no libraries in the immediate vicinity, and no recreation center in the immediate vicinity, and so the distribution didn't take place in the way that it should 247 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 have.
You can maybe schedule something special to that location and try and do a better job of that --
One of the things, if you let us know early on that that's going to be the location, we could be helpful in the distribution process. In some of the neighborhoods, I know that throughout the City we have contracts. OHCD has contracts with NSAs or NACs, NACs. Their prime responsibility is dissemination of information in and around communities. So I would suggest that we touch base with those organizations. I know in Strawberry Mansion we're actually hopefully going to get one -- back online. And that would be a good opportunity to have them distribute information. I know South Lehigh NAC has a contract with the City to provide that service. 248 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 So if you can let us know early on, we can make sure that they get the information because, frankly speaking, if you give to it me, I don't want to guarantee you that I'm going to distribute the flyers door to door.
Right. And we're not trying to put that on the Council to be the ones to communicate. That really is our responsibility.
And we can do a better job. And we can -- And we can talk to the other groups for our future household hazardous waste events, as well as other programs that we're doing through the Streets Department. We can use them as a point of information.
Avenue of the Arts. Yes. Joe is going to come forward and give you an update on that.
Joseph Sernick, 249 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 Streets Department. Councilman, as you know, we were directed by PENNDOT to rebid that project. It was actually re-advertised for bids yesterday. Bids will be received in about one month. And if everything goes well, we should be starting construction midsummer.
So one month we'll receive bids back from the respondents?
We need to review the bids, get approval from PENNDOT, and then go through the contract process, actually getting a contract with the successful bidder.
Do we anticipate a reasonable response from PENNDOT this time?
When somebody issues that, we're involved in the original 250 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 bid solicitation that were problematic that created this resubmission resolved so we don't go through that again?
The biggest issue there was a prequalification issue. We changed the bid proposal to include in there the different bid codes for the different items of work, so that a contractor -- should be very clear to a contractor whether or not he or she is prequalified to do a particular item of work that should make it, number one, easier for the contractors. It certainly will make it easier for the government to evaluate. The evaluation will be very clear, that you either are or are not to be qualified.
So both with respects to the capacity issue and the participation levels, we've made it clear...
Because my understanding is that those were the two 251 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 key issues that created a problem with our prior --
That's correct. With regard to participation, there was a question on -- originally, on whether or not one of the minority suppliers was, in fact, a real supplier or, in fact, a broker. That issue sort of dissolved when the lawsuit was withdrawn. But it hopefully will not be a problem in the rebid. So we'll have a ceremony midsummer?
Okay. All right. One of the things that concerned me over the years in government is trenching and street opening, the lack of coordination. We resurface a street. Two months later, the gas company or the water company or some entity will come and take -- you know, tear the street up or we'd have a situation where an entity would tear the 252 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 street up and put a line in, and three months later somebody else will come in. And I see in your testimony you talk about improvement in street openings and in the permitting process, and you also anticipate forwarding an ordinance to Council in the spring. Could one of you talk to me about the ordinance and what specifically will you anticipate. And I understand it may not be ready. If you can in general terms give me a sense of what that ordinance will entail. And the other question... Well, I'll let you answer that, and then I'll ask you to follow up to that.
The... We call it the right-of-way ordinance. What it does is, it allows the Streets Department to organize the work in the construction on city streets, and it also allows to us recapture the costs to repair and restore the street after others do what they need to do on the streets. 253 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 We presently have a system where a street can be paved. And sometimes within weeks, the street -- the street is cut into, as you said, by the gas works or by a cable company. We saw Ogontz Avenue that was not even completed cut into within -- within a week of its being resurfaced and in part reconstructed. And it's a very sad thing for the City because every time a street is cut, it degrades the life of the street, potentially. In addition, it looks bad. And we go through a lot of effort to do our work, and we really cannot afford for others to come in and tear up behind us. We've improved our ability to coordinate between the Water Department and the Streets Department. But they are the external agencies of the utility companies and cable companies that don't kind of follow the same rules. So through our right-of-way 254 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 ordinance and also through our payment management system, we're looking to track the condition of streets, track who's doing what work, and maintain the streets in a proper manner. And for those who want to cut into those streets, they can do so but they can also pay for it at the same time.
That's correct. There would be fees for cutting into the streets.
So you say currently there are no fees for cutting into the street?
So you just pay for the permit to do the work, and there's no fee for actually degrading the street.
That's correct. So, when PGW goes and then does its work, it's usually labeled as an emergency. They cut into the street. They repair it and 255 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 restore it, and then that's it. But if it degrades the life of the streets, limits the life of the street, there is no 5 compensation for that.
Will there be an across-the-board cost for all individuals, slash, entities?
That will trench the streets or municipal -- municipally-owned facility such as PGW would pay a fee that would essentially come out of...
...the budget, PGW's budget, and then be subtracted from the $18 million that they're not going to give us. So we won't really realize any increase in revenue from that particular transaction.
Well, one of our hopes is that through this process, that we will heighten the issue for management to understand the implications of some of the 256 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 decisions that are going on. Right now there is... There appears to be a lack of concern about cutting into streets, cutting into brand new streets. I can give another example in Center City, where, you know, a main street, after a lot of work being done on it, was cut into it, while almost the asphalt was still wet and soft. And right now there's nothing to encourage management to think about those decisions. And we need to put in place a system that encourages them to think about it.
Have you ever given any -- First let me ask this question. Are there any shared utilities, in terms of the trench.
Say, for instance, if there's a certain trench line along the street, that there's a shared utility line.
Say, for instance, you have the water lines and water supply lines or sewer lines and the gas lines and telecommunication lines all in one trench. Or are they all across the street and throughout the sidewalk?
Where possible there is some commingling. Obviously, you can't put, you know, a water line, you know, right with something else that can be damaged by that same -- by that product. But there are opportunities for work to be shared or at least areas, space in the street, to be shared so that the lines are not all across the street.
However, there are also significant occasions where there's a need to have some separate space between -- between the lines, just so that when work is going on, when you -- when you go to work on a water line, you don't hit the gas line, you know. You want to have -- You want to have some space. 258 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04
Right. Is there a possibility -- or does this make any sense -- that we dictate the time line on when individuals could put telecommunication lines or other types of utility lines during the course of the year? Say, for instance, during the month of July, we tell -- the notification is out. Are there any entities, slash, companies that are interested in the foreseeable future putting in lines, be it utility or telecommunications line, this is the time, so when there's an opening in the street it will be done in this particular time line so you'll just have the one -- one opening, and then subsequently the one resurfacing --
-- of that particular trench, in the case where you do have shared or commingling of lines? Does that make any sense or is that just something that -- 259 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04
No, no, no. You're making absolute sense. We didn't necessarily look at it from the standpoint of making it a month out of the year. But what we have done, through our payment management system, is to kind of advise folks, if you want to do work in the 2200 block of Sansom Street, there is a scheduled reconstruction that's going to happen on this time line. Do your work in advance or you can't do it for a certain period of time afterwards, with it, you know --
But we don't require that they do that. It's kind of a notification, and we're not -- we don't tell them that if you want to put a line in the street at a time separate and aside from this designated time, you will be prohibited to place a line in the subsequent months.
We have limited our permits. In fact, I think we identified 400 conflicts just this year alone, where 260 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 we avoided that very problem. And we have not given permits or permission to do some work if we thought that it was inappropriate. However, we do run into a problem where we have the... what could be called emergency work. And we're trying to tighten that definition so that the right-of-way management system will work well, work to the City's advantage.
Yes. Yes. So the payment management goes hand in hand with the right-of-way ordinance.
Could you... Since you're not done with the ordinance, could you incorporate or give some thought to some defined times in trenching because frankly, I think that, you know, I think that the City should manage the streets in a way that people have to adhere to what it is we want, as opposed to us responding to their needs. 261 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 And I think that our ability to manage the degradation of the streets, if we set certain time lines and certain locations where people can trench these streets, it would enhance our ability to do this type of work. And ultimately, once people understood that, you know, whatever we're going to do, this is the time line that the City has set. And in fact, add that into their budgets or their capital budgets or their need to do telecommunications or installation of water or sewer lines or whatever it indicates, that's us; that, you know, you have a certain time period and you have a certain trenching area that you want to do that in. Can you, like, look at that --
-- of that to 262 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 see if that makes some sense?
All right. I was going to ask you about street paving, but I kind of think I'm not going to like the answer, as we move ahead. But let me ask you part one of that, street paving. What's the criteria used for street paving? And I'm assuming if it's capital budget, there's a time line associated with -- Is it a five-year life to which capital budget funded street repaving? And what's the criteria, first, for the selection of streets for street paving? And what's that process? I know in the olden days -- And I'm hoping it's not still the way we do it -- we used to have a couple of employees to actually drive every street through the City of Philadelphia and write down a list of streets that should be paved. And actually, in the olden days I remember we used to get a list -- and I 263 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 don't recall seeing them lately -- of streets that were recommended for repaving, and in individual Council Districts. And we would get an opportunity to look at it and add or delete wherever possible, based on the condition of the street. Where are we at with that process? Because I haven't seen my list in a while, so...
All right. We actually brought that into the 21st Century. Part of our pavement management system is -- offers us the ability to kind of assess conditions of the streets on a global basis, based upon conditions that we state. We still do have to look at the street and see what the conditions are. But through that assessment, we supply the information to our GEFA system which then can tell us, you know, if we delay resurfacing for how many years, what condition we can expect the street to be in. It kind of gives a grading to the 264 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 street, to say, you know, it will be satisfactory or unsatisfactory in so many years, absent --
Yeah, but that doesn't take into account of a bad winter on a street that's on a grade, where you're probably going to put a lot of salt, a lot of treatment or a substantial amount of trenching on a particular street, that would not fall under that category of analysis.
to give you an example, we are right now repaving the street... I guess it's Vine Street, coming off of the bridge, essentially right off the bridge, the Ben Franklin Bridge...
Up to 20th, 20th Street, I think. But just around the corner, going up 20th Street, the street is in poor condition, and there's a substantial amount of trenching and other things, and ruts. 265 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 And it's all types of problems. And we're not doing that particular street. And the street coming off the bridge, Vine Street, frankly speaking, was not in that bad a condition. And it could have been determined that that should have been redone as a result of the timing issues. And that's what concerns me, that, you flow, when we make these decisions, is it done -- by now this new system that doesn't take into account some of the unforeseeable events such as weather and trenching things of that nature.
The system also allows us to collect information about what's happening on the streets. So it kind of stays current. So it never replaces a need for having somebody go out and look to see if there's some things that we can't identify by computer, that -- conditions. You know, if there's raveling or just pitting that's occurring that we have not anticipated. 266 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 But another issue that I think that you're highlighting that you may not be aware of is that some of the work in resurfacing that happens on City streets is not happening by the Streets Department. In fact, PENNDOT does a significant amount of --
I wouldn't say that coordinate's the best word for that because they have those streets to maintain, so --
But we do work together so that we understand where they're going to be. And to the extent that we can work, you know, we're not on top of each other, 267 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 in terms of messing up their work as we do our work, that's a very important thing.
Do we still get the -- We haven't gotten the list in a couple of years.
You're welcome. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Miller.
Thank you, Madam President. Good afternoon, Streets Department. I have just a couple questions here. And I do want to say that I, too, have the same concerns as my colleagues around the driveways, retaining walls, and the traffic, traffic signs, traffic lights. I need to ask a question about the pilot trash program in my District, you know, with the big green cans?
It's my understanding that's going to be stopped or is it going to be continued?
Oh, stopped, Councilwoman. 269 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04
Okay. When is that going to happen? Because I got -- The reason I'm bringing that up, I got a fax today from someone in that area regarding the trash pickup and the large heavy containers and whatnot, and the problems that it puts people through when they're trying to put those big cans out from a driveway.
Okay. Because actually his suggestion was that the streets -- sanitation trucks come down the driveway. But hearing Councilwoman Tasco talk about the driveways and the sanitation trucks, I don't know that that's such a good suggestion. Okay. That's one. And we got a letter, I believe, from Paul Vallas, saying that they're going to put, you know, the money up for flashing lights. Correct?
And I just have some questions in terms to process and time line. So, once the School District puts the money up, then I guess you're going to be actively involved in going out. I guess my bottom line question is, how long will it take, basically, to get the flashing lights up? You're going to do... Your schedule will change from the two a year per Council District to more or has any of that been worked out yet?
Oh, the details and time lines have not been worked out, but we will be moving fairly quickly. We have a contractor for that.
Okay. And one 271 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 other question. In that letter, I believe it said that they were going to be... that they, I guess meaning the Streets Department, was going to be back out reassessing corners where schools are located or areas surrounding the school to evaluate the signage.
Okay. And I also once again request that the intersection of Armat or Maplewood, whatever street we want to call it, you know, right there --
-- that street is called Armat by some people and Maplewood by others, and Green be reevaluated for a traffic light. And I know the rationale is that the four-way stops makes it safer. But in that particular intersection, it's in the middle of the business district, and we have a charter school and a private school right there at the intersection. 272 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 And maybe cars do actually come to a stop with the stop sign. However, they never stop coming. If it's not one coming one way, it's one coming another way. And for young people trying to cross the street there, it's potentially dangerous. It's bad enough to try to get through in your car with the four-way. The stop signs, the car stops. Doesn't mean that they stop and wait for the pedestrian. They just stop, and they keep going. So I'd like to get that reassessed again for a traffic signal.
And those are my two questions. And thank you, Councilwoman Brown for giving me your time. Thank you, Madam President.
You're welcome. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman 273 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 Brown.
Thank you, Madam President. Good afternoon, Commissioner.
And your team there. Let me continue with the line of questioning raised by Councilwoman Donna Reed Miller regarding the flashing lights. I, too, am enthusiastically interested in knowing what that plan will be, around the installation of -- They actually quoted a number someplace in the literature. 140 schools that don't have them. Currently there are 40 schools on line that have applied for signals. Could you forward to Madam President a copy of the list of those schools that are currently on line that have been identified either by your department or the City Managing Director?
Okay. And we'll just have to wait for the plan to hear how you and the School District will spend that additional million, and how you will ultimately arrive at making sure all the schools are taken care of, correct?
We did some applications and information about applications to the School District to share with principals, and we advertised that we have them as well.
The others have not requested them. 275 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04
Very well. So I'll be interested in knowing who's on that list. Follow-up to Councilman Nutter's questions around MBE WBE participation with Streets Department contracts. What is the role of the Office of Procurement when it comes to the Streets Department letting contracts?
They certainly review and final approval on that contract. I'm not sure I understand what you're...
I am making an effort to learn more and more how and to what extent the Office of Procurement is involved with Commissioners across the state -- across the state -- across the City departments. So I want to hear from you specifically how it's handled.
Because there's not a consistent standard on the role and involvement of the Procurement Commissioner. So how the Streets 276 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 Department --
Right. For all of our public works contracts, Procurement actually does the advertisements, and they receive the bids. With us they are reviewing the bids. They review for meeting certain expectations and goals requirements. Procurement tells us that, and actually does all the tabulations and gives us the final tabulations.
Tabulations. Which ultimately move you towards a short list, as such.
Okay. What is the role of the office of MBEC in that process?
MBEC works with us to assure that we're aware of available contractors. They also work with us to 277 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 find out what our needs are, to try to find potential vendors to work with us, as well as certainly setting the goals.
All right. And I should just mention for the record that there are a number of members of this body that care, that consideration is given to Philadelphia-based businesses because they typically employ our citizens, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. So that's why the question is raised about how many are Philly based. Is there a requirement or a stipulation somewhere in regulations, either in Procurement, your office or MBEC, that... And Councilman Nutter may be able to help me with this because I do not remember if it is stated in executive order, that businesses... a percentage of them or whatever have to be Philly based. 278 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 Does that exist anywhere?
I don't think that there's something that requires that. But I can also say that on the federal jobs, which is a significant portion of our monies, you know, our matching monies, we are not allowed to do that.
Yes. Councilwoman, what you're recalling is last year, much to the dismay of apparently some members of the news media, we passed a number of amendments to the Home Rule Charter, one of which was a five percent bid preference for Philadelphia-based firms.
Which hopefully 279 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 is in effect and the Procurement Commissioner is talking to all the departments about it. If companies when they bid in the lowest responsible bidder situation which does not apply, naturally, to the professional services. But in regular bidding process, if a Philadelphia-based firm, their bid gets five percent taken off of the amount. And if as a result of the five percent discount, if you will, if that ends up being the lowest responsible bid, then that company gets the bid. So, it was a bid preference program for Philadelphia-based businesses. That was just approved by the voters last year.
And should be in effect now. That, to my knowledge, is the only, you know, preference that we can show to Philadelphia-based firms.
Thank you for that clarity. That is what I was trying to 280 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 remember. Let me move to a question raised by Councilwoman Jannie Blackwell. She had to step out for a meeting regarding Walnut Street. Then I have a couple of additional questions around recycling. Her question was: There's been dialogue, conversation, planning with regards to helping Walnut Street return to the way I knew it which is just street lanes. Currently it's street lines and bike lines. And she wanted to know where were you in the status of returning it to the way it was.
Yes. We were -- I think the issue there is with regard to the traffic calming, slowing the traffic down and making it a safe -- safe corridor. And we have engaged in discussions with the Police Department, with regard to their enforcing the law on that corridor. Absent that enforcement, we are having some problems. Things that need to be enforced are rush hour movement and cars driving in 281 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 lanes other than travel lanes.
So that is to say, then, that you're still testing the existing patterns or do you ultimately see moving toward -- moving back towards the original configuration of those lanes?
Well, what we had -- Through evaluations and some traffic studies, it theoretically should work. But we don't have in place all of the components of -- for safety or for efficient movement that we need to have in place. And one missing component is the enforcement for the rush hour removal or not allowing parking. Presently cars are parking during rush hour, and that -- it doesn't allow for safe traffic, because it should be a travel lane, not a parking lane. So what is happening, people are sharing a lane with parked cars. They're trying to drive and park in the same lane.
So then the 282 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 response to her would be you're still -- you're waiting to put in place all those remaining components first to see if it works, based on theory; and then you'll make a determination on whether or not you're going back to the original configuration.
Right. We had engaged the Police Department to say that we need their assistance and support on this, in order to make it work.
Okay, then. I'll certainly relay the information to her.
I'm sorry. If I could add anything or ask a question on top of that which may also enhance the response to Councilwoman Blackwell. 283 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 I take Walnut Street every now and then, and Chestnut Street as well. Commissioner, is it true that a number of years ago -- and I think this may be Councilwoman Reynolds Brown's recollection as well as Councilwoman Blackwell's. Many years ago wasn't Walnut Street three travel lanes west all the time?
-- side of the street. And then somewhere in more recent times you introduced parking during non-rush hour times on the north side of the street?
Well, the parking actually changes. There's a portion of it that had parking on both sides of the street, and there's portions that only have it on one side of the street.
It was three absolute, all-time travel lanes on Walnut Street, correct?
And the challenge -- That's why I mentioned, I think it was a safety issue, that Councilwoman was trying to get to.
Three full-time travel lanes east on Chestnut Street which have now in some portions been reduced to two.
Is that about traffic calming? Is it about allowing people more opportunity to park on the street? Because I could never figure that out. 285 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04
Right. It certainly does allow people to park, but that was not the goal, the goals with regard to traffic calming. What the three... always having three lanes and sometimes four, we had a speedway that was fairly dangerous. People were kind of jockeying around each other because the lanes are fairly narrow. I think they're as low as eight or nine feet on some of the lanes, which is a fairly narrow lane. If you're on a small street, that might work fine, but on a street like Walnut Street where cars are going 35 miles an hour in some cases, it's a challenge. And you had more aggressive drivers on the outside which were against the parking lanes. So that was causing a big problem. Now the lanes are wider. They are 10- and 11-foot lanes. There's a bike lane in a portion of it. And that allows for everyone to travel at a slightly slower 286 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 speed. So it its calmer to that extent. But where we have a problem is during rush hour in particular. There's one lane that is now parked that is supposed to be removed during the rush hour. People don't remove their cars. They instead park on the curb which gives you the appearance of there being space for another lane of travel.
And you have cars driving and parking in the same lane, and that's the problem.
You're welcome. My final few questions are around the issue of recycling. I was encouraged to learn, through the reading of your testimony, that the City now has a new recycling pilot program in the works. More importantly, it's providing positive 287 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 revenue projections. Please speak to where the City or how close the City may or may not be moving towards weekly recycling for the whole City, as opposed to certain areas.
Surely. Let me start by saying that the positive returns on recycling is coming off of the present system, not the pilot program.
The pilot program, in fact, may have lower revenues. The pilot program will allow us to collect all the materials together.
Commingle. They call it single stream recycling, everything being collected in one truck. The benefit of the pilot, though, is that it will allow us to use more efficient 288 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 trucks. We should be able to carry more materials at a time --
-- versus the open trucks that we use now. The pilot program will allow us to use a compactor or packer truck to collect the materials. So, we may double, triple or little bit more on our collection efficiency. But that's yet to be seen. We're developing a pilot around that, in looking at some interesting ideas. David Robinson has been working on that program. He initiated that in the City, initiated the thought and has been developing it. And we hope to have that in place sometime later this summer. So the revenues is really off the present contract. The present contract is one of the best around, and we're getting paid quite nicely. We made $500,000 off of the last quarter, and compared to the maybe $200,000 289 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 the previous time. In part, the markets are doing better in the area; and in part we've negotiated a good deal. We have a structure where we share the risk on recycling contracts.
We as citizens are not doing as well as we should. There are opportunities to recycle that are not being taken advantage of.
Just putting it out at the curb. And we have sections of the City where we have tested weekly, and we are still doing weekly. Even with weekly recycling, we do not have material at the curb to show that people are sincere about the program. But we do have other areas of the City, even with every other week collection, that do an excellent job of putting materials at the curb. 290 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04
My own editorial comment on that is, though, we should not give up our on generation, we should probably focus more on teaching the next generation, with hopes that they'll get it. While it is not major, there's a slight tip in the tons of recyclables from FY '03 to FY '04. What do you attribute this to? It's about 45,000 six plus in FY '03 to 44,000 in FY '04, if I'm reading this correctly.
Sure. That's right. Recycling is probably far more sensitive to set out, and what's going on at the moment, than trash is. Any inclement weather, you will always see recycling suffer from that, because people tend to put out only one thing. They only want to do one thing.
And they will not separate the material. So it's fairly sensitive. No change in the system that 291 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 would have caused the degradation in those numbers. As you said, it's about 1300 tons, but there's nothing that changed in the system to cause that. We have... We're doing what we can to educate our citizens, and we continue with that. And we're hoping to step that up over the -- over the next --
We now have music as part of the testimony. My final question about recycling is -- Let me say I would be remiss not to say thank you publicly to David Robinson for sitting down with my staff, David Ford, a few years, to talk about recycling in a real global optimistic way. And we did some discussion around recycling at the airport. Can you update me on the progress we're having at the airport around recycling, if you could.
I think that's an issue area that Mr. Robinson is still working on. We have some concerns there. And we are 292 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 working with the Air Force Management. I think his name is Mr. Davenger and Mr. Isdell, to try to address how we can make that program really work. They have done a great job. The Airport has done a great job in trying to move ahead with their advertising and promotion of recycling program. I think it's a stellar position that they have taken. And we're working with them to try to improve their process on the back end.
Okay. So, what does that mean, you're working with them? You've come up with some recommendations and they're implementing them or --
What we had suggested is that -- And actually, Dave and I talked about this right before we came here, is that we're ready to sit down with them a little bit more and maybe give them some guidance about how to process their materials, how to get it from the citizen dropoff, and then to the facility versus 293 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 just collecting it and having problems and troubles with the sorts thereafter.
The sort. With the sort. With the sort. After materials are collected, we want to make sure that once it's collected and sorted -- Once it's -- I'm sorry. Not collected. Once it is dropped off by the citizens or the users of the Airport, that the newspaper make it to a paper recycler.
I see. I see. Okay. Well, we are paying close attention to recycling out at the Airport because which need to. Thank you very much for your testimony.
Thank you, Madam President. 294 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman Rizzo.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Okay. I want to get back. I have a few points I want to make, so I'm going to go fast. Bells Mill and the Ridge. Bridge closes on Germantown Avenue. We put up a left turn arrow to accommodate the flow of traffic so it can go east on Bills Mill Road. The bridge --
I think you may have gotten it, counselor, to be honest with you.
Earlier today I think when you said it, you gave a location where you wanted the left-hand turn -- turn arrow?
Well, let me just finish the quick story here. 295 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04
No problem. The Bells Mill bridge, I thought the Streets Department said when the bridge reopened they were going remove the arrow. I thought that maybe, everybody being busy, they'd forget about it and not take it away. Not Charley, right? Okay. But here's what happened. What motivated... He has a list of taking out arrows?
I didn't know that. The bridge, then, the little bridge that we talked about earlier, goes out. So that forced us to remember that that left arrow needed to go. So that we took the arrow out after being there for a number of years. The problem that I have, we resist these left-turn arrows and we say it's not according to the code. But the crazy thing is, they work. Everybody calls and says, thank you, 296 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 the left arrow. Thank goodness. You know, it really makes life a lot easier. We say that we are not allowed to do it. We do it. Everybody is pleased with the fact that it's working, it's doing what it's supposed to do. And I don't know whether... What can we do to do some of these things that work? And I'm not saying ignore the code, but it just seems stupid to fight it all the time, when they're working. And again, I wouldn't support something that's absolutely a violation of some engineering code. But maybe we have to kind of look at it and address it. Could somebody tell me just quickly why there's such resistance to these left-turn arrows, especially when they work?
I don't think it's necessarily the left turn in and of itself. I can say to you from my perspective, that what I'm understanding, what I've come to 297 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 understand, there's certain resistance with regard to something that may not meet the regulations because of the liability issues that incur. Our engineers, unfortunately, spend a lot of time in court. And in court they're talking about what's warranted, what's not warranted. And the things that are unwarranted give a City some level of liability. And that's one of the concerns. Certainly where we have discretion, I think that we should exercise to the fullest extent that our political leaders would like us to exercise it. I have no 16 problem with that.
And I think that we still have to work on the issue of how we bridge that gap between the warrants and some other desires.
Well, I'll give you another copy of my March 18th letter. And I know Councilman Nutter, we're working together to try to accommodate -- 298 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04
We talked about this about two or three weeks ago, these left arrows?
And if the little bridge hadn't gone out, I believe that maybe that arrow would have stayed there. At least I think it may have; it would have. But that forced your hand because it had to come out because we didn't want to direct traffic over that bridge. So I have a letter dated March 18, 2004. Councilman Nutter has discussed it with you. So maybe we can revisit that because it worked well. The community appreciated it. And if there's a way that you can 299 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 exercise some flexibility on that particular location, it would be appreciated. And that leads me to the hearing that we had recently about the school crossings, the safety zones for the schools. There's a new committee in Council. It's technology and information service, that I'm a member of. And I don't want to have to drag you into the technology era, but I would hope that we would please start looking at new technologies that aren't -- that gets old, mechanical timers. You know, there's all this new stuff out there. I don't know what you're doing about it, but this technology committee is going to bring you in here to talk about what you're doing to minimize maintenance of timers, to make sure that the newest technology that's available is at least reviewed, to make sure that we're taking advantage of it, like other municipalities do, like the speed -- the speed radar signs 300 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 and things like that, that could be very very helpful. The other question that I have is with -- You said something today that I just wanted to make sure I understood. And we talked about it with L & I today. When you open up a street, when a person, a plumber -- Let's say a private contractor asks for a permit to open up the street, I hope the value of the permit also includes your restoration that you -- that the City pays to restore the street. Did I hear you say that that's not in there?
It is not sufficient for the plumbers' ditches. It is not sufficient. In fact, we have an ordinance 18 set is on its way over to increase the plumbers' ditch fee.
Now, you know for sure that we should be recovering our investment in restoring those to the proper status. So, that leads me to the new ordinance about the Water Department being responsible for the laterals... the 301 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 laterals out into the street. Now, the Water Department comes. Now that they're responsible, they have to dig up the street to make the repair to the lateral. Who's going to fix the street? The Water Department or the Streets Department? You're going to have a budget impact here. You're going to have to start repairing all of these streets that are going to be dug up by Water to repair these laterals. Do you have money to do all this?
Historically the Streets Department and the Water Department have had a very good relationship with regard to restoration. The Water Department has not been able to restore it on its own through their contractor. We will work with them, and we restore it, and they reimburse us.
Well, but my point: This is a new scenario now. All these years the plumber, the private contractor, the homeowners', responsible 302 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 for the pipe between the curb and the water main. Now the Water Department is going to assume that responsibility. I understood that the Water Department sent some piece of paper over to you, and you were their contractor to repair the streets. I don't believe the Water Department comes to you first -- or second. I believe they come to you first to repair the street. Am I right? And they do have a little money in their budget for emergency repairs, but I don't believe... I believe -- You are their contractor to fix their dig-ups. Am I wrong or right or wrong on that?
We do a significant amount of work for them. We're reimbursed.
But now you've got another piece now. You've got all of these laterals that are potentially going to be dug up. Is there money to -- Who's going to pay, the Water Department or the Streets 303 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 Department to repair all of this new work that we were never responsible for?
My understanding is the Streets Department is not going to be responsible for funding repaving after sewer laterals.
And that's... Charley McPherson reminded me -- and I'm having a hearing later next month on the 43 percent increase in water rates over the next three years. So, Charley just reminded me that that's probably why we have such a significant increase. But somebody's going to have to pay because before the contractor is responsible to make that repair. Now the Water Department is going to be responsible. And that is going to be a big budget item, with both the repair to the service and also to the repair of the street. Okay. That's also... Recycling, my last issue here. In this... And did you see this document yet, 304 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 Commissioner, that was sent to all the members of Council? I hope you got a copy of it. Recycling Alliance of Philadelphia. Did you read this yet?
Okay. There's something here that's interesting. It says every recycling news in Philadelphia is not all good. Philadelphia still ranks as the second worst City with a population over a million people, in terms of recycling diversion, with a rate hovering around six percent, while many other urban municipalities such as Los Angeles, Chicago, are nearing 30 percent rate. However, if Philadelphia is able to improve its recycling rate, for each percentage point the diversification rate increases, the City will save an additional $200,000 per year. If we recycle at the same rate as Chicago, we could save almost $5 million a year just through recycling. Is that what you said earlier? 305 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 Is this basically what you were saying earlier with this new process, that you'd be able to commingle, recycle more, even though you'll get less? Will you be where this paragraph that I just read will be eventually?
Well, I think it's a couple of things that are a little misleading in there, from what I heard. First I should say that Philadelphia ranks fairly high in its commercial collection. Our diversion rate is 30... 38.9 percent. Our curbside household collection is not good, and that could be improved. I think that there's also some concern about, from what I heard, about we approach -- have to account for that improvement through that report. But I'd be more than glad to review that with you and discuss it with you.
Well, I think we all got a copy of this letter. And I would be more than happy to share it with you. 306 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04
Okay. Let me see if you're cc'd on it. Just a second. I can't -- Let me -- No, you were not. I'm sorry, Madam President?
I believe we received that either today or yesterday.
I'll share it to you. You are not. Well, thank you. And I guess that's it. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you. Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman Nutter.
Just one question. Commissioner, there's been a lot of concern over the past, I guess, few weeks. Councilman Kenney through his committee had a hearing. Councilwoman Reynolds Brown asked a question earlier. 307 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 With regard to the flashing lights for the schools, I think this program started back in... I think I worked on this in either '97 or '98, with a fair amount of kind of pushing and shoving between us and the City Administration at the time. But we got through all that. And my recollection was that when the program started, we allocated for the first few years $500,000 in funding each year for the schools and the flashing lights. The agreement was the City would pay for them and install them, the School District would maintain them and take care of them. So, I need to ask a couple questions just to understand why we apparently are where we are, which I'm not completely sure where we are. What's the current backlog? How many schools are on the list that have applied and how long have they been on the list? 308 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04
Right. And in the past when we funded this program better, how many lights were being installed or how many schools were being taken care of per year?
The number varies. Our costs... Our costs vary significantly, based upon what's required. If a mast arm is required versus having, you know, a single pole put in. We've done about 150 so far.
What was it, two or three per Council District; is that 309 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 true?
20 a year. 6 Okay. 7 And when was the last time the 8 funding was at the $500,000 level? 9
$500,000... I think it 10 was capital budget year before last. 11
And I'm just reminded 16 that was the first year that it was funded 17 in the capital budget. 18
So, you're 310 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 saying two fiscal years ago was the last time it was at $500,000?
Okay. And that was also the time when it was moved to the capital budget?
I think it's an appropriate capital expense. I believe that before it was in the --
Yeah. I'm not sure the exact reason why it was moved in, to answer very honestly.
Okay. And what was the funding level last year? Was it three?
I'm sorry. The funding 311 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 level before that was $300,000, I believe.
Okay. And why was the funding cut, if there were still a significant number of schools on the list?
There -- There are 40 schools still on the list, and funding is not as complete as we'd like it to be. But additionally, we're looking at opportunities to use -- utilize federal funds. Something that we started doing this year was to utilize federal funds support our traffic flasher program. We had not done that in the past.
Right. No. I understand that. Has the decrease in funds impacted the number of installations per year? Did you do last year also? 19
And how many do you expect to do this fiscal year, the current fiscal year?
So we have 40 on 312 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 the list. And you expect to do 20?
Well, the expectation 10 is that some of the schools who have not 11 applied will begin applying. There are a 12 significant number that have not applied 13 for a flasher. 14
No, we do not. We have 17 advertising communicated with what the 18 schools -- through the School District, as 19 well as through ourselves, to encourage 20 them to review their needs and determine if they'd like to have a flasher.
And I know that you -- the department has also sent applications.
My assumption is that some school principals do not believe they have an issue or a concern where they need a flasher.
Okay. When the question was asked earlier, then, about the million dollars, so, do you know when you're going to get it, and are you going to get the million dollars all at one time?
Okay. I was curious, though, at your response earlier as to a plan for utilization of the money. I mean, we have a fair amount of experience. We've spent, I think, well in excess of a million dollars on the program, so why wouldn't we just keep basically doing what we've been doing?
Well, I think earlier I was trying to explain that, for example, if the money comes in all at one time, and the 314 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 School District is able to get all that school to apply immediately, that we could then go for a contract that gets everything done a lot faster.
If it comes in over time then we'd have to develop a plan that would be over time as well.
But at a minimum it's at least going to take care of the backlog.
All right. Okay. And then it was further cut this year to $200,000?
I mean, if we know we have so many more schools out there or we're anticipating so many more applications, this budget was certainly put together before the offer was made by C.E.O. Vallas to enhance or for the first 315 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 time for the District to put money up. I guess what I don't understand is for such an important public safety item, why does the number keep going down?
I think, in fact, the $200,000 was noted in the capital budget process last year, if not the year before. But additionally, we are working with our federal funds, to support doing some of this work that before we were just using City monies for, and now using federal monies to supplement that.
And so you're saying notwithstanding the budget may show $200,000 of City dollars, that's not necessarily how much is actually being spent?
Not actually how much we expect to spend, that's correct, because we're going to leverage on our federal projects.
Okay. All right. Do we have any kind of problem with the program, in terms of materials or 316 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 getting equipment or anything like that? We had a --
I seem to remember three or four years ago we had a little situation.
Okay. The last question is with regard to the federal funds, normally in the capital budget, if we're anticipating utilizing federal funds or leveraging federal funds, it's usually shown on a separate line for the same item.
Reconstruction and resurfacing. 317 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04
Which includes -- Which can include larger programs and streetscape and the like.
No. It's under... We'll give you the page number in one moment. It's item Number 77 on .
So you're saying some of the $4.9 million in federal funds is going to be used for school flashing lights?
I don't know that only because the streets have to be identified through this program. These will be for specific federal streets.
Once you do that, you'll be able to give us a report on that?
Councilman 319 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 Nutter, it was just called to my attention that there may be an issue regarding Act 46 on this.
Yeah, old Act 46 gets in the way every time, every time.
I was feeling neglected. I thought like you guys didn't like me any more. 320 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04
Now I feel better. I'll check that with the Law Department, but I don't think -- I think we were not giving the money to the School District, and we were doing the flashing lights ourself, that reducing it wouldn't be -- reducing that line item wouldn't be a problem with Act 46, but I'll check.
I think we better. I think we better. Are there any other questions from members of the Committee? (No response.)
Commissioner, I want to thank you and your wonderful staff for everything you do throughout the year. And I don't know whether anybody else has any questions. I know I don't. But I know you've been very patient. Thank you very much.
Thank you, Madam 321 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 President.
Joe Sernick, Joe Doyle. I see Dr. No. They're all here.
Water Department is next. Good afternoon. Commissioner, I'd like to offer you my congratulations and best wishes. Good luck.
Good luck. And also to you, Deputy Commissioner. We do have your testimony. It will be transcribed in full. So if you would simply abbreviate your testimony, we'd really appreciate it.
Absolutely. I know the hour is late. Good afternoon, President Verna, members of City Council. My name is Bernard Brunwasser. I'm the acting Water Commissioner. To my left is Debra McCardy, who is now the Deputy Commissioner for 322 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 Operations. And to my right is Joseph Claire, who is the General Manager of the Finance Division. It's a great privilege for my to address this body in this position. I testified a number of occasions before.
Monday was my first day, and I was out at 9th and Girard and literally got my feet wet.
Anyway, before I go on, and it will be brief, I just wanted to say a few words about the outgoing Water Commissioner, Mark Kissenshand (phonetic), and the outgoing Deputy Water Commissioner, Richard Roy. I worked very closely with these gentlemen for the past dozen years or so, as they led the department, and they did 323 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 such a magnificent job, and there are no 3 finer civil servants, I think, in the City. And I'm very happy to hear that you'll be honoring them tomorrow morning. I will certainly be there for that.
Well, I will tell you that I think we all have the greatest respect for both men. They're always very, very professional. And I don't think there was ever a time that I called either one of them that they were not responsive, and they really bent over backwards to try to be of assistance. And that's what we're supposed to do. I hate to see them both leave. I really do. But I guess we all have to do what we have to do. But I think that without any question the Water Commissioner was, in my view, one of the best Commissioners we ever had. And I just hated to see him leave. so I totally agree with everything you said thus far.
I agree. We have 324 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 big shoes to file; and, you know, we will do our best.
We still have a lot of talent in this organization. We're recognized throughout the world, in addition to this country, as a world class water utility. We've just had visitors from Russia, from China, from Japan, dozens of officials from each country, come into our offices and find out how we do things here in Philadelphia. The water quality that we produce is excellent. All of our plants, our three water plants, our three waste water plants, and our bio-solids recycling facilities are winning awards every year. And we get a lot of accolades within the industry. Rates are going up, as you know. And we have filed those rates with the Department of Records. But the rate increases that we're asking for are the largest ones we've had 325 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 to ask for in about a dozen years. In the 1990s we were able to absorb a great deal of the increased cost of salaries and benefits and other inflation because we had saved so much money in operations, and by refinancing, that we absorbed a lot of these increases. And we had no increases at all for six consecutive years. And then we had three small residential increases the last three years. So we've done a terrific job. Our rates are the lowest in the region. They're actually lower now in relation to our surrounding areas than they were before because we've been able to keep a lid on rates by all of the savings that we have accomplished. Problem is we still have additional costs that are coming down the road. Some are regulatory in nature. We have to continue to replace those pipes, like the one on Girard Avenue. We're getting hit with a lot of debt service in this next bond issue. We 326 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 have... We have the lateral program which we are in favor of, and we have put that in the operating budget. We have a lot of regulatory costs that we have to meet. And we've lost our subsidy, our annual subsidy, or actually a grant program from the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania which was there for 50 years, and of course, was finally abolished last year. And that cost us $8 million a year. So, for a number of reasons we do have to come in and ask for those rates. And we're phasing them in over the four-year period. They will average 9.3 percent annually to the residential customer. They will now -- They will now be able to have their water lines and sewer lateral in the street repaired. They won't be faced with a $1,500 to $3,000 surprise bill. And it's an insurance policy. And it will cost them when it's fully implemented about... we have estimated around $3.50 a month. 327 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 So that's the gist of what I want to say. And again, it's a privilege to be here. And I'm ready to take any questions that you have.
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Brown.
Thank you, Madam President. Good afternoon, gentlemen. Good afternoon, representative of the women in City government. You say you are acting Commissioner?
Oh, my. Okay. Is this called a setup? Did they set you up for this? (Laughter.)
We expect you to be the miracle worker through this 328 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 segment of the hearings. Before I get to operations, I have a couple of questions around staffing. Composition of the upper level staff; what is it?
Mm-hmm. First answer me this question. Are upper level staff -- And upper levels is relative, so you'll have to tell me what that is in the Water Department. Are they Civil Service, appointed? Does staff exempt equal Civil Service? Give me a hand on that.
Okay. Water Department like, I guess, many of the other departments under the Managing Director basically has, I think, four exempt positions allowed, a commissioner, two deputies, and one other position which can vary.
Now, is exempt synonymous with can be appointed by you?
That's right, can be appointed. 329 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04
Okay. I want to follow this. So it's a commissioner, two deputies, and what did you say?
And another -- another position which can be used as a confidential secretary. In our case, the head of our Help Loan Program is officially the fourth exempt position.
Okay. How many of those four exempt positions are women?
No, not in the 330 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 exempt position.
And the reason for that would be? How long has there been a vacancy?
Where I'm headed is, in government there are men and women of color. I mean, if it's MBEC or Procurement or just equal opportunity across the board, in terms of professional positions, where there's leadership and authority, men and women of color and women period should be fairly represented across the board. And if we don't ask the questions, then we can't assume or be hopeful that leadership will recognize that that is the 331 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 right thing to do. So, my hope would be that next year across the board, not just the Water Department, but across the board there is better representation of people of color and women in positions of leadership and responsibility. So I'll put that on the record, knowing that you're only three days old. Okay. In the Water Department, this document... I want to speak to this document. Did this paper go to all residential water customers?
Okay. Do you know -- And you really are maybe at a slight disadvantage. How much did it cost to produce and distribute this document or did the Water Document do this?
So it's federal. Okay. That's helpful. 332 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04
Right. And I think we look at different ways. I think last year we actually distributed those through the Inquirer, through the newspaper because you actually can reach a broader audience.
Apartment owners. I mean, people in large apartment houses get the paper.
Not at all. We happen to have gotten awards for the quality of what we've done. Many cities have been criticized quite a bit for a lack of quality in their document for the public.
I see. Okay. Well, that certainly answers that question on the why and the value of it. Final question from a constituent. The Queen Lane Station is going through 333 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 renovations that currently have Fox Street closed in one direction. Can you share with us how long you anticipate this street being closed because of that circumstance?
I don't have that answer personally, but maybe someone on my staff. Two months, I'm hearing.
Two months? Okay, then. That takes care of all my questions, Madam President.
Madam President, I'm actually going to be uncharacteristically short. We have a big hearing, I think, coming up with the Water Department primarily around the issue of the proposed rate hike. And I'll save my questions for them as a part of that larger discussion. 334 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04
Yes. Good morning or good afternoon, Commissioner, or acting Commissioner. Can you talk to us a little bit about the Water Reserve Fund. What jurisdictions, what controls do you have over it? In your opening statement you refer to something that happened, I believe, a few years ago, where you were able to make some changes and help increase your revenues into the water fund, that -- you know, close to $2 million a year. Can you talk to us about what kind -- you know, who controls that fund? Is it your office? And so forth. 335 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04
Oh. Okay. I believe you're speaking to the Sinking Fund Reserve of the Water Department?
...release or approve $125 million for a River City concept.
Yes. In our general revenue bond ordinance under which we issue all of our debt, there's a provision, a covenant that we've made with bond holders that states that at any given time we will have in this fund enough money to pay one year's principal -- maximum principal and interest payment. 336 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 And that fund is there primarily for the benefit of the bond holders. In other words, our debt service is approximately $160 million annually. And that fund is supposed to be funded at $160 million. It is... If you read the ordinance, you'll see that it is permissible to replace the cash in the Sinking Fund Reserve with a surety bond or a letter of credit. And so, that is perfectly permissible.
Yeah. I understand that we can do it. I just want to see if you can talk to me about... Do you see any negative effect? Are we going to take a good chunk of the money that's there out of there? How does that -- What happens if we ever -- if we need -- there's a real -- a big emergency? And we can -- Are we going to be okay to remove $125 million and still be able to deal with a big emergency?
I don't think that the money -- that particular pot of money 337 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 is designed for emergencies. Actually, it is designed to be in place in case the Water Department cannot make the full principal and interest payment on its debt.
That would be an emergency. And then the... For instance, $125 million surety bond would cover $125 million of potential -- of cash. The other $35 million is there, as well, in cash. I believe $35 million would reside in cash in the Sinking Fund Reserve. And either one of those would be used to -- to come to the aide of the bond holder.
So you feel -- You feel -- What I'm hearing is that you feel comfortable that -- for the Administration to do this at no -- with no 21 major negative impact on the fund.
I think most departments have a kind of a parochial interest in having full control of all of its assets all of the time. 338 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 But what I'm saying is that so long as this is done and it's done in a way that is neutral to the department and neutral to the bond holder for which this fund is there, then we should be fine.
More or less. There's -- There are different schools of thought. When interest rates are very low, like they are today, putting a surety bond -- buying a surety bond at... I don't know... three or four percent, rather than -- rather than going out and getting capital at five or six percent, you know, may make sense. But what I'm saying is, the real function of that fund is for the benefit of the bond holder. And as long as there's a surety bond or a letter of credit from a triple A rated company, then the bond holder, I think, would be reassured.
Thank you for 339 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 your insight on that. I live near 9th and Girard Avenue, not too far away. What caused that rupture and how much would that -- how much did that cost to get repaired? I know you were there for many, many hours. I was coming home that evening, and...
Right. I want to say to everybody that -- You know, I was out there. And again, I was in the Operations Division for the first years 13 of my 33-year Water Department career. So the last 20 years I've been in finance, and I don't get to see too much of that. But I was out there. And I thought our employees did a marvelous job, quickly shutting down that pipe. It's not easy. It's a 30-inch main. There's 120 MGD, million gallons that can flow through that main in a 24-hour period. And you have to go find the valves. You have to be able to turn the valves. Sometimes these valves haven't been turned in a while. 340 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 And they protected the property. There were no... No one go got hurt. One business had a wet basement. And you know, most of the damage was confined to the streets. And they cleaned up -- They cleaned up the area, and, you know, allowed two of the four lanes of traffic to get through. So...
But that itself wasn't the cause. I mean, perhaps. There could be maybe long-term corrosion or soil might have washed away in some of these heavy rains that we've been having. It happened during a day we had one and a half inches of rain. Maybe it undermined the support for the main in that particular location. 341 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 We have a very scientific way of evaluating these pipes, and we know when they fail. We know -- We evaluate on the basis of age, what type of material was used. Some of the newer pipes than that failed quicker because maybe 50 years ago the Water Department tried some material that wasn't -- that has not held up, you know, with hindsight. So, we evaluate these pipes. And we also have a history of all of these pipes. And in my testimony there's a table there that indicates we've been accelerating the replacement of water main over the last 10, 12 years. And we have seen a drop in the rolling average of water main breaks.
What is the condition of our water pipe infrastructure? I know that you've just mentioned you've been doing --
-- some work around this area of improving, repairing, 342 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 replacing. What is the status of our infrastructure, as far as you're concerned?
Based on looking at the national average for water main breaks, we are probably slightly better than average. And that includes newer utilities -- I mean, newer cities than Philadelphia. So we're pretty confident that we -- by doing to miles of water main 12 replacement each year, and now we used up 13 the liner, and we use very high quality 14 material, we believe that we -- you know, 15 if anything, things are improving. 16
Are you... If 17 you were to grade where our -- what's the 18 status of our infrastructure, what's your 19 grade? Is it... Is it... One of the 20 things that concerned me on 9/11 -- and I 21 worked at the Municipal Services Building 22 back then -- was: Do you know what happens 23 if, you know, these terrorists are, you 24 know, heading towards one of our, you know, 25 heading towards one of our plants. 343 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 I mean, do we have infrastructure in place? What kind of long-term planning are we doing to make sure that our infrastructure is good enough to provide water to our citizens, but also how do we protect that structure?
That's a very good question for, you know, these times. We have done -- A lot of -- Some of the money in this rate hike that we are requesting is for safety, additional safety. We've -- We're changing out chemicals that could be dangerous for safer chemicals, as far as volatility, not safe as far as water treatment, but as far as... You flow, chlorine gas, for example. Chlorine can be a deadly chemical if used improperly. But we've weaned all of our waste water plants off of chlorine. We used to chlorinate before waste water would go back into the river. And one of our three plants, water plants, is now completely off of chlorine and the other two will shortly 344 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 be off of chlorine. And we're changing to sodium hypochlorite, which is more expensive, again, one of the reasons that we need a bit more money. Status of our infrastructure? I'm familiar with a lot of what's going on around the country. And you'd be surprised how badly the infrastructure of a lot of water and sewer utilities have been allowed to deteriorate in this country. And it's a crisis. It's a crisis for water and sewer utilities. And they are looking to the Federal Government to help bail them out. Unfortunately, the Federal Government does not have the wherewithal right now to help very much. So, you have that business. On security, our water treatment plants have undergone a assessment, a security assessment. A vulnerability assessment, I should say. And most of the big water plants in the country have 345 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 gone -- have undergone this. And we are -- We have taken steps, and we are continuing to take additional steps to improve security at all of our facilities.
Thank you, Commissioner. Good luck to you. And in whatever I can be of service to you, please feel free to call. MR. McPHERSON: Councilwoman Brown.
Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. I just wanted some clarity. Your response was that it was a federal guideline that you must inform, alert citizens of the water quality, correct?
Yeah. I believe it actually -- I happened to pick up my copy the other day. And I think it actually says it on the front cover somewhere that...
...that this is the case. 346 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04
And traditionally you do it as a mailing? I guess what I'm getting to is, are there other cost effective measures to convey the message but less costly? And there may not be. I'm curious.
We look at this every year. And we look at our postage costs, and we look at -- As I said, the Inquirer was able to do this for us last year. For this year they could not, for whatever reason.
We could not get into agreement with them. And we do look at the lowest cost. I'm going to introduce Ed Grewshefski (phonetic), who's head of our public affairs group and is responsible for seeing this gets to everyone.
Good afternoon, Councilwoman. 347 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 In fact, one of the reasons we have been praised for this document is that we've looked at it as an educational document as well, to try to put all of this in context.
These figures about what's in the water. The E.P.A. actually requires that we present to our customers are pretty confusing. And so, a lot of the... A lot of the water quality report focuses on generally telling people what the issues are for them.
Vis a vis each of these particular chemicals are possible pollutants that might be in our source water. The other thing is that we have looked at many ways of trying to cut the cost. And one is that we're presenting it in a newspaper format.
Originally we 348 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 probably cut the cost in half by going from a sort of newsletter paper quality to this news print. And last year we went into discussions with the Inquirer, and they really -- It seemed like they were going to be able to get it to even more people. Right now we send it to all of our rate-paying customers.
Rate-paying customers. And that looked like it was very promising for us because we'd like to have as many people see it as possible. However, we were not able to legally set up a contract with them, with the Inquirer.
And it had to do with sole source. And it also had to do with some of the issues the Inquirer has with the City contracts. But at any rate, we're -- you know, 349 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 we're back to this format and trying other ways to get it through the apartment owners' associations, and groups like that, so that more people will have access to it.
Can get it. Thank you. Thank you again for your testimony, and your clarification. Thank you.
I could just read into the record, if you don't mind... This is the drinking water quality report. And it does state on the front cover, this report is being mailed to you as a requirement of the Federal Safe Drinking Water Act.
Thank you. Thank you. MR. McPHERSON: Councilman Nutter.
Thank you, acting Chair. Good afternoon. Good evening, Commissioner. Welcome. Congratulations to you. I would only echo comments made by 350 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 Council President Verna about your predecessor, both or predecessors, Commissioner Kishenshawn (phonetic) and Deputy Commissioner Roy. And from time to time we will have our little situations out there. And now I'll be calling you in the middle of the night, asking what's going on with the water somewhere in the District. I wanted to go back to the topic raised by Councilman Ramos, with regard to the Water Department, that reserve fund, and the proposal to remove $125 million. What I'd like to ask is, those funds could also be used for infrastructure improvements to the normal network of infrastructure that we presently have; is that correct?
Okay. And if we were to use those funds for that purpose, is it also true that we could put off probably for at least a year or so additional borrowings by the Water 351 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 Department for infrastructure improvements or capital program; is that right?
Yes. I mean, you could -- you could push the next bond issue back or make it smaller.
Right. And if we did that, wouldn't it also reduce the amount of debt service impact to the General Fund for such an offering, if we're going to push it back a year or so?
There would be -- There would be some impact. But again, that's a part of the larger revenue requirement need.
In other words, yes, that's a portion of our revenue requirement debt service. And we're going out for a four-year plan, so what -- if we were able to push that -- 352 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04
For rates. So that bond issue would still occur within the four-year plan, but a bit later than what we have projected.
Right. And we're going to go into this much more extensively, so give me the shorter answer. I mean, what is... What's driving such a significant rate hike? And what, if any, positive impact could we have on the size of the rate hike by using those debt reserve funds in a different fashion?
Councilman, I've prepared some booklets that kind of summarize what that rate filing was all about, and it will indicate how it breaks down.
...at the hearing. Have you been involved in the discussions about utilization of this debt reserve account for the proposed purpose?
Okay. And I understand you're new in the position. Do you expect to?
I would presume that, you know, I will be brought in at some future time. I mean, I've heard the testimony of the Finance Director. And so long as these funds, this $125 million is used for -- is limited to water and sewer infrastructure, then it is within, I believe, the scope of all the bond ordinances and what have you.
Has the City ever done something like this before? Have we ever used those reserve funds for anything like this?
No, not to -- Well, I think in -- I think I just read where the 354 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 Airport has done something like this in the recent past, a small size, the issue.
Okay. And what would those funds normally be used for?
Normally it sits there and earns interest. It sits there and it's there, again, as a security to the bond holder. It's a promise that we've made to the bond holder, through our ordinances, that we will have on hand at least one year's worth of principal and interest payment, so that they can rest assured they will get their coupons paid.
Now, as a result of the removal which will then be secured by the surety bond, but as a result of the removal we will then not get the benefit of 355 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 the interest, at least on the $125 million; is that right?
Well, I don't know how to answer that yet because $125 million would presumably be placed in some other account before it's spent, thereby hopefully earning interest.
Well, I understand that. But based on the proposed use, it's probably not going to sit in that account very long. It's being moved to be used. It's not being moved to be invested. Right?
Okay. Do you see any way that the -- that a different use, other than that proposed for economic development purposes, but a different use of those funds could then help to reduce the amount necessary or the amount that's been proposed for the water rate increase?
I guess if you're looking at it year by year, there would be a reduction, for instance, in year one of 356 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 our rate increase, I suppose, but --
It's more of a deferral, because we continue to go out and require additional debt. I think --
I understand that. But I mean, what's the first part of your -- under what scenario could we use the -- If we were going to use the 125 -- If a decision was made that we were absolutely going to use the $125 million, not let it sit in the debt service account and just accumulate interest, but we were going to use it for some purpose to directly benefit the rate payers, what would it be?
It would be to use it for capital purposes; and, again -- and deferred debt service on new bonds.
And what would the savings -- What would the savings be and how would that -- and what would then be the reduction to the proposed 43 percent rate increase? 357 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04
Well, if you're talking about $125 million, my guess is you would have about $8 million, eight and a half million dollars less of debt service expense.
Is that a one-time expense or is that an annual expense?
Oh, that would be -- I guess... Yeah, it's a one-time savings.
It's a one-time savings of eight and a half million dollars?
That's right. Instead of 17 -- Instead of $17.2 million in debt service which we are associating with our upcoming $250 million bond issue, half of that, $125 million would presumably drop the $17.2 million debt service approximately in half, to eight... you know, 8.6.
But if you push off the borrowing and make the savings, 358 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 isn't there more than just a one-time savings? If you're going to use the 125 for capital, aren't you going to in effect borrow $125 million less?
Yeah. You won't be paying the 8.5 on an annual basis, that's right, for that chunk of money.
Okay. Now, 14 it's... I don't know. Maybe it's... What 15 do they call that? Sheer -- Sheer luck 16 or... There is a word; can't think of it 17 right now. 18 Where's representative Dewice 19 (phonetic) when you need him? $8 million 20 is, coincidentally, the exact amount that 21 would restore full funding to the 22 Recreation Department and the arts and 23 culture that are presently proposed to be 24 cut. 25 So, you're suggesting that if we use 359 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 the $125 million to directly benefit the rate payers, we've already paid for the bonds that were floated earlier, which created the reserve fund in the first place, improved the infrastructure that presently exists, did not do that borrowing at that particular point in time, would save $8 million on an annual basis, and be able to restore funding to some pretty significant entities in the City.
If the money was permitted to be used for other entities, yes.
No, no, no. Oh, he's been jumping up from the back. I've seen him out of the corner of my eye. I've just been stretching it out to give him time to get up to the table because I know he desperately wants to get back up there, so...
It's late in the day. I mean, it's a bonus. 360 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04
That's right. It's savings in the Water Fund, so it couldn't be used for General Fund purposes. So what it could be used for is what you were saying earlier. It could have some impact on the size of the rate increase. It couldn't be used to restore General Fund dollars.
Okay. So let's talk about a rate increase. If you have that amount of savings, what does that take off of the proposed 43 percent increase, to the rate payers?
Well, it would be... I think we are -- our four-year rate increase would accumulate $307 million worth of revenue. $8 million times four, it would take 32 million off of that. So, it would drop the overall revenue requirement by a little more than ten percent, I guess. So...
So instead of a 43 percent rate hike, what would it be?
Well, it -- it -- 361 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 it -- it wouldn't be -- it wouldn't be exactly measure for measure because the way we show the rate increase going out is for the typical residential customer. The actual rate increase, overall rate increase, is 7.4 percent each of the four years. The residential customer, because of the pipeline warrantee or pipeline program that's been proposed, that --
Laterals. The lateral program cost of maybe $3.50, for instance, a month is a higher percentage of a residential customer's bill. So, that's why they're getting a 9.7 percent rate increase because their service charge --
The typical residential customer, the one who uses 800 cubic feet per month.
I thought in 362 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 some other testimony or discussion, there's been an ongoing dialogue about this, with regard to whether or not the sewer lateral program should be covered by the capital budget.
There is a dialogue. There are some outstanding issues that would have to be resolved before that would happen.
Well, let's say it was -- Let's say those issues were resolved.
Yes. Wouldn't that, then, reduce what we're talking about?
It would... It would in the early years, and eventually it would cost more, as you continue to accumulate $20 million of debt on an annual basis.
Well, why don't we do this: Can you... The discussion 363 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 that we've had and the numbers and the scenarios and the like, could you lay out for us and forward to the Chair a... I don't want to call it a plan, but your best thoughts on utilizing the $125 million in a way that directly benefits rate payers for the present infrastructure that we have, and the resulting scenarios of doing that, and what that means in the context of the rate increase, built into your assumption a resolution to the sewer lateral issue.
Oh, I know you will. And Commissioner, I know you had that look of how in the world could I get up at this table. But you know, look: I mean, you've been on the job three days. I mean, what do you expect? I mean, you know, get with the program. (Laughter.)
I'm sure you'll do fine. I have the greatest confidence in 364 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 you, and I look forward to working with you.
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Brown.
Thank you. Thank you, Madam President. Again you are at a disadvantage. You may not be aware of this case. If you are, you can comment. If not, then I want to make sure you get a copy of the letter. July 14, 2003, I sent your predecessor a letter expressing concerns about McWayne, Inc., and the contract they had or have with the Philadelphia Water Department. They have been reported to be uncivilized with regards to their workers, in terms of they have a lot of bad practices, a lot of injuries on the job. So I was curious to know is McWayne 365 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 a company that the City of Philadelphia is still doing business with? And if you're not aware of it, could you look into it? I'll give you a copy of this letter. And could you look into it and get back to us. There's just a sentiment in a number of different quarters that this is not the kind of company the City of Philadelphia should be doing business with, with regards to the way they treat their employees.
Okay, then. We'll make sure you get a copy of the letter. And then if you could be so kind as to forward a response to Madam President.
We will address 366 Whole - Operating Budget 4/28/04 that.
Thank you very much. Thank you, Madam President. I'm done.
Wonderful. Are there any other questions from members of the Committee? Any comments? (No response.0
Thank you so much. Again, I wish you both the best, and this committee will stand in recess until Monday, May 3, at 9:30. Thank you very much. (Hearing concluded at 5:50 p.m.) 367 CERTIFICATE I HEREBY CERTIFY that the proceedings and evidence are contained fully and accurately in the stenographic notes taken by me upon the public hearing of The Philadelphia City Council, taken on April 28, 2004, and that this is a true and correct transcript of same. _____________________________ DAVID A. DEIK, RPR and Commissioner of Deeds ____________________________ Michele L. Murphy (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.)