Committee Hearing, April 1, 2008

COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - BUDGET - - - Room 400, City Hall Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Tuesday, April 1, 2008 10:15 a.m. - - - PRESENT: COUNCIL PRESIDENT ANNA C. VERNA COUNCILWOMAN JANNIE BLACKWELL COUNCILMAN FRANK DiCICCO COUNCILMAN W. WILSON GOODE, JR. COUNCILMAN BILL GREEN COUNCILMAN WILLIAM GREENLEE COUNCILMAN CURTIS JONES, JR. COUNCILMAN JAMES F. KENNEY COUNCILWOMAN JOAN L. KRAJEWSKI COUNCILMAN BRIAN J. O'NEILL COUNCILWOMAN MARIA QUINONES-SANCHEZ COUNCILWOMAN BLONDELL REYNOLDS BROWN COUNCILMAN FRANK RIZZO COUNCILWOMAN MARIAN B. TASCO BILLS 080022, 080157, 080160, 080164 and 080165 - - - V A R A L L O Incorporated Litigation Support Services Eleven Penn Center 1835 Market Street, Suite 600 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103 215.561.2220 215.567.2670 2

Good morning, everyone. This is the continued public hearing of the Committee of the Whole regarding Bill Nos. 080022, 080157, 080160 and 080164 and 080165. The first department to testify will be Fairmount Park. (Witnesses approached witness table.)

Good morning.

Good morning.

Please identify yourself for the record and proceed with your testimony.

I'm Mark Focht, Executive Director of Fairmount Park. Good morning, Council President Verna and members of Council. I am very pleased to appear before you today to present Fairmount Park's proposed Fiscal Year '09 $15,640,540 Operating Budget for Fiscal Year 2009. Joining me to my immediate right is Chief of Staff Barry Bessler and 3 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. joining us in the audience, along with several members of the senior staff, are two Fairmount Park Commissioners, Commission Treasurer Phil Price and the Mayor's appointee, Commissioner Debra Wolf Goldstein.

Welcome. Please stand so that we can see you. (Witnesses stand.)

Thank you for being here. Thank you.

The Park's Fiscal Year '09 budget includes a two and a half million dollar increase over our Fiscal Year 2008 target level and represents a percent increase in operating dollars. 19 The Class 100 request of $10,106,560 is 936,000 above the Fiscal Year '08 estimated obligations and includes funding for 21 new staff positions, raising Fairmount Park's authorized position level from 169 to 189. Additional increases in Classes 200, 300 4 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. and 400 total 1,564,000, including one million dedicated to tree planting throughout the City. The mission of Fairmount Park is to preserve, protect and maintain the open space, trees, natural and cultural resources of Philadelphia's parks for the recreation and enjoyment of citizens and visitors. The 63 parks that comprise the Fairmount Park system, totally 9,200 acres or 11 percent of the City, provide Philadelphia citizens and visitors with opportunities for passive and active recreation and comprise one of the largest municipally operated landscaped park systems in the nation. Fairmount Park also serves as an economic driver for the City by designing, building and maintaining the highest quality public open spaces. Operation of the park system directly supports three of Mayor Nutter's core service areas in the City's Strategic Plan. And they are, first, 5 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. healthy and sustainable communities. Since our establishment in 1867, the Park has served a pivotal role in the City's environmental health. We are pleased to be one of the City agencies guiding the development of GreenPlan Philadelphia, which is our blueprint for a sustainable future. Specifically, the Mayor's proposed budget increase of $1 million will allow us to increase the City's tree canopy by planting between 2,500 and 3,000 new trees in Fiscal Year '09 along streets and in parks. Planting of trees in our larger watershed parks will allow us to increase acreage of our restored natural areas. The second area is public safety. The Fairmount Park Rangers Corps' role is to provide a safe environment for park users. The proposed FY09 Operating Budget includes funding for three additional rangers, increasing the total number of full-time park rangers to 21. 6 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. The third area is jobs and economic development. The Park strives to provide the highest quality public open spaces, such as the Benjamin Franklin Parkway, the Wissahickon Valley Park, Schuylkill Banks and Rittenhouse Square, amongst many, to support economic development of the surrounding areas. A majority of the additional positions 11 in Class 100 will provide a higher level 12 of landscape and facility maintenance. 13 The new positions and higher standards 14 will be supported by increases in Class 15 200, 300 and 400 for materials, supplies, 16 contracts and equipment. 17 The Fiscal Year '09 budget will 18 improve customer service and response to 19 citizen service requests. Quality 20 customer service and accountability in 21 the delivery of public services is a guiding principle of Fairmount Park's management. Customer service standards have been developed to address issues that we have found to be most important 7 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. to citizens. These support one of our priority outcomes, which is to increase the number of satisfied park users and partners. Measuring our progress will be achieved by internal and supervisory monitoring procedures and tracking the frequency of redress. Our customer service standards include the following. Under tree requests, site inspections resulting from citizen-generated requests for either tree planting, prunings or removals will be responded to within ten business days. Supervisors will monitor the requests and will make sure the inspections occur. If an inspection does not occur, citizens will receive a verbal explanation and apology, and the inspection will occur within a subsequent three business days.

The second area is turf mowing. All of our turf will be mowed every two weeks between April 15th and October 1st. Park staff monitors all of our mowing contracts and will respond to any 8 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. complaints, again, with a verbal explanation and apology. Subsequently the turf will be mowed within one business day following the complaint. And the third area of customer service is wedding and picnic permits. Wedding and picnic permits will be issued within ten business days of submission of a complete application. The applications and permits will be date stamped to track this process. If this standard is not met, the customers will receive a 50 percent discount on a future permit application. In conclusion, we at Fairmount Park are very excited by the opportunities presented in the Fiscal Year '09 proposed Operating Budget to further the mission to protect our resources, green our City and serve our customers. Thank you for your time, and I would be very pleased to answer any questions from members of Council. 9 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc.

Thank you very much. Your proposed General Fund budget is being increased by $2.5 million. How much of this increase is tied into the proposed parking tax increase?

Council President, as I understand it from the Budget Director, the entire increase of two and a half million dollars is tied into passing the proposed parking tax increase.

Thank you. Can you tell us how the 2.5 will be used?

Certainly. Of the 2.5, $1 million is specifically for tree plantings, and, again, that would be tree plantings both on streets and on public property, in parks, around rec centers, libraries, any public facility. That will gain us about between 2,500 and 10 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. 3,000 trees. That's one million. Another 936,000 is to fund staff positions, about staff 5 positions, the majority of those being 6 front-line men and women that work in our 7 operating departments, both landscape 8 operations and facility maintenance. 9 Also part of that 936,000 is funding for 10 three additional park rangers. And then 11 the balance of the increase, about 12 500-some thousand dollars, is for 13 materials and supplies, equipment and 14 contracts to support the additional 15 staff. 16

Do we 17 have any money allocated for various 18 parks such as the FDR Park and others 19 that are in districts? 20

Our budget is not 21 allocated by specific parks. It's allocated by operating district. We have 63 parks in the system, but the system is divided into four operating districts, and, in fact, the operating district for 11 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. South Philadelphia and Center City is based in FDR Park. So in each of our operating districts, we have a district manager, a district supervisor. We have a whole hierarchy of staff in those districts that are responsible for maintaining those districts and the parks within those districts. So our budget on the operating budget is allocated over our four operating districts.

I know that's a beautiful park and I know that I guess it was last week they had an election for a new Board, and people are really very, very unhappy with the condition of FDR Park. They say it's really been neglected something terrible, and I would like to see something positive happen there.

Absolutely. We had a meeting. Some of my senior staff met with the new leadership of the Friends of FDR Park shortly after the election, and we're working closely with them on both 12 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. operating projects and capital projects. So we're thrilled that there's new leadership at that Friends group and it will reengage the community.

And I'm very happy to hear that you're aware of it.

I am very aware of it.

If the proposed parking tax increase is not approved, what impact will it have on your budget and service levels?

I guess I would ask the Budget Director if he could join me at the table. (Witness approached witness table.)

Good morning.

Good morning, Madam President, members.

I'm seeing more of you than I see members of 13 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. my family these days.

I hope that's a good thing.

Very good.

Steve Agostini, Budget Director. Madam President, what we have proposed is funding from the parking tax for some specific initiatives. Fairmount Park is one of the sort of centerpieces of that. The other you will hear in the next day or two when the Streets Department comes forward where we have proposed $10 million in additional funding for pay-as-you-go, something that hasn't been done recently. If, for whatever reason, the parking tax does not move forward, we would then ask that those expenditures be taken out of the budget, so both Fairmount Park and Streets, because we wouldn't have the funding sources available for that and it would create a 14 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. significant hole in our Five-Year Plan and in the '09 budget.

Thank you very much.

Point of information.

Yes. The Chair recognizes Councilman Green for a point of information.

Thank you, Madam President. The money from the parking tax, does that go into the General Fund?

Madam President, Councilmember Green, yes. What we have proposed is that it would come into the General Fund and we would allocate it. We have not created a special tax kind of nexus or a dedication.

Right. So really the parking tax proceeds are really part of the entire revenue of the City of Philadelphia in the General Fund, and this Council could choose to increase 15 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. funding both on the capital and the operating side in the Park regardless of whether or not there's a parking tax? In other words, we don't earmark money in the City's budget. It's just increased revenue, and it will either be -- we can choose to have the parking tax or not and we can choose to fund the parks or not. They're not really connected in the way you're saying.

Madam President, Councilmember, that's quite clear. The Council could decide to allocate to not move forward with that. What we propose, though, is, we felt it was very important to link the two, that a parking tax increase should not be taken into the General Fund for sort of ongoing purposes, but rather we believe a strong argument existed for increasing the parking tax from the 15 to 20 percent generating $16 million in additional funding annually and then allocating that for specific new projects, not ongoing 16 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. operations. We felt that that was not only the appropriate thing to do, but the best argument.

But you could have tied it to the pay raises that you're giving to City employees. You could have tied it to anything you want. It's just more of a political move than any other move to say parking tax equals trees, parking tax equals $10 million pay-as-you-go funding for Streets. It's the same pool of money, the same pot of money. It's a link that doesn't have to exist.

Well --

It's more of -- it's not really a budget statement. It's trying to tie the two to pass the parking tax; isn't that correct?

Not quite. We made a conscious decision to make an economic link where we said that there were impacts associated with cars that had to do with additional pollution, 17 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. additional congestion, additional wear and tear on our City streets, and that, as economists would refer to that, the externalities associated, where people who are driving their cars, whether they are from within Philadelphia or outside of Philadelphia, were not paying the costs associated with that wear and tear on streets, with the additional pollution, and so what we did was make a conscious attempt to say those externalities, those impacts needed to be addressed, and the best way to address them is to levy a tax that would then fund initiatives that would address those things, which is why you see the investment in trees, why you see the investment on pay-as-you-go Streets, why you see the investment in the parks. We tried to make a direct linkage that taxes associated with parking needed to address, and cars, needed to address the impacts and the externalities, as economists refer to them. 18 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc.

Well, to be fair, the $58 million a year we already get in parking tax can be applied to trees and pay-as-you-go funding. It's just you have to find the money elsewhere for some of the other priorities that the Administration set the budget. I mean, you can take five percent of the 10 percent that exists and apply it to this. 11 So there is a payment that's 12 being made to the City for people who 13 drive, and it's $60 million a year, plus 14 the $25 million a year you receive from 15 the Parking Authority. I'm just making the point that --

I understand --

-- I think the connection is somewhat unnecessary.

Well, I understand your point. I think we would agree to disagree on the sort of necessity of it. We do believe strongly that in order to fund these initiatives, 19 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. it was important to impose that tax, particularly since we are making rather significant changes in other tax streams. This is one that where the nexus between what you're taxing and what you're funding seemed to be very clear cut to us.

Thank you.

Thank you very much. I just have one last question. On of your testimony, you state that, quote, "Wedding and picnic permits will be issued within ten business days of submission of a completed application. If this standard is not met, customers will receive a 50 percent discount on a future permit application." While I see the merit of this for the picnic application, I think you should refund 50 percent of a wedding application so that they do not have to get married again simply to receive the discount. Wouldn't you agree? 20 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc.

Very well put, Council President Verna. Thank you. Duly noted.

You're welcome. The Chair recognizes Councilman Green.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Good morning, Mr. Focht.

Good morning.

And I apologize, but your testimony doesn't say who is sitting there with you. So you may have said it, but I --

I introduced him. This is Chief of Staff Barry Bessler.

Good morning, sir.

Good to have you with us. Thank you. I have several questions. Number one, tree requests. To what extent are those requests going to come 21 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. in through the City's new 3-1-1 system?

We anticipate that many of the requests once the 3-1-1 system is established will come in through that system, yes.

Well, okay. And so that it will be tracked through the 3-1-1 system and we can get information on it through the 3-1-1 system. If people call the department when the 3-1-1 system is in effect, are you going to refer them to the 3-1-1 system?

I don't think we're that far along in understanding the impact of the 3-1-1 system to know if we will accept calls still at our Street Tree Division, which is what we do now, or route everything to 3-1-1. I don't know if we're that far along in planning of the 3-1-1 system.

I think 3-1-1 is not effective unless everything goes through it, because then we don't 22 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. have all the data put into the system for us to be able to track every single request with this 3-1-1 system's tracking number.

There has been some conversation, Councilman, that since folks, particularly community-based organizations, such as Tree Tenders, are very familiar with calling our office directly, that they could still call our office, but everything would go into the 3-1-1 system through our office. If someone calls us as opposed to someone calling us and routing them, telling them they need to call another number.

Or just automatically using that number to go to 3-1-1 is what I'd suggest. It takes efficiencies out of the system that otherwise be there. You don't need operators for tree requests with a 3-1-1 system in place.

Understood.

It allows 23 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. you to use those resources in your department to provide customer service and to meet the other goals of the Administration with respect to the service delivery that you have.

Understood.

Turf mowing, many of our turf mowing contracts are with people who are businesses not located within the City of Philadelphia. There's some in Bucks County and Montgomery County, people that provide that service, and I'm wondering whether or not different people from the City applied. Why is that the case and are your department and the potential vendors aware of the LBE preference for contracts like that?

The turf mowing contracts are let by the Procurement Department on behalf of Fairmount Park and I am not intimately familiar with their process, so we'll have to get more information on that. 24 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc.

Okay. There is a five percent preference for businesses located within the City of Philadelphia for contracts like that that are let through Procurement, and I'll follow up with them as well.

Okay.

I want to talk to you briefly about the infrastructure repair needs in the Park. We all know it's 9,200 acres and 11 percent of the City. It has 435 structures, including 200-plus historic structures. Do you know the dollar value of the Park's physical structures?

No. We don't know the dollar value of the physical structures, no. 20

Has the Park in the recent past conducted a survey similar to the PICA survey that would state the value of the structures in the Park, the repair needs of those structures, done a whole assessment of 25 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. what's needed in terms of repair?

Portions of that have been done over time. We're currently doing a facility assessment right now on eight structures in the Park, which is funded through our capital budget. This is structural and utility assessment. I will say we probably have not gone through as comprehensive kind of system-wide analysis as PICA did several years ago, simply because we've never had the resources to do that. We do have a back-of-an-envelope -- perhaps a little bit more detailed than that -- calculation of about $85 million in deferred maintenance on our facilities and proposed projects in our various master plans. We have trails master plans. We have natural lands restorations master plans that were completed in the late '90s, early 2000's. If you put into it the cost of all the recommendations in those plans, plus what 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. our estimate of deferred backlog -- so it's a combination of deferred backlog and capital -- it would be about 85 million.

What is the deferred backlog portion of that?

Probably about 55 to 60. The master plans recommended about million, 20 to 25 million, in 11 projects. So taking that out of the 85 12 million. 13

Okay. So 14 what is the capital budget for the 15 backlog for FY09? 16

Our capital budget 17 annually is about $4 million. I mean, it 18 fluctuates around that year to year, but 19 on average it's about $4 million. 20

And we had the opportunity to drive around one day together in the park system, which I really appreciated, and during that discussion, we talked about what it means when you continue to defer maintenance 27 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. and the expense associated with continued deterioration of historic properties and how much more expensive it gets over time if you don't tackle it up front. Could you talk a little bit about that to us?

Well, certainly with deferred maintenance, not maintaining our buildings and our properties on a daily or periodic basis, eventually those properties deteriorate from when they can't be managed on an operating budget into kind of slip over to the capital budget side for a major repair. I would say that our proposed FY09 Operating Budget with the increase proposed by Mayor Nutter, it does include in those positions funding for 20 additional facilities maintenance 21 individuals and additional carpenter, plumber, so that we can start to rebuild that staff so we can address in some small way the backlog of differed maintenance so those properties don't end 28 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. up sliding over to the capital side.

So 85 million is not at this point capital; it's deferred maintenance?

Well, yes. I mean, we would call it deferred maintenance, but it really almost ends up being capital needs, because most of the deferred maintenance, they've deteriorated to the point where they would now be a capital item, not an operating item.

So really where we are is 55 to 60 million almost in emergency type repairs to our structure so that they don't continue to deteriorate and then with -- is that correct?

I wouldn't classify them as emergency, because that has a certain connotation to it. Some of them are emergency, some of them are we need to do these so that they don't become emergencies. 29 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc.

Okay. Well, which is an emergency in my lexicon. So that's $55 to $60 million. Are the new financed positions enough to prevent that backlog from growing, other than the increase in cost of construction for the 55 to 60 over time? In other words --

We haven't done an assessment, but intuitively, I would say it's probably not enough increase in the facilities maintenance staff to -- it will curtail the --

It will slow down the rate of growth of the necessary deferred maintenance, but will not --

Eliminate it.

Eliminate it.

Right.

Could you please provide the Chair how many positions would be required to stop the growth of deferred maintenance in the 30 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. Fairmount Park Commission?

Certainly.

And could you also please provide the Chair information about the $55 to $60 million necessary in capital improvements that would be necessary to get the Park to where its operating budget kind of can pay for the upkeep and maintenance of the systems without having to go over to the capital side?

Certainly.

Does Fairmount Park have any kind of business plan that would talk about its ability to keep or increase the revenue it gets in the Park and any thought about how it can become more self-sustaining that you can talk to us about?

Certainly. Our Strategic Plan that was completed in 2004 talked about the need for the Park to capture -- generate revenue and retain revenue. It's something that we have 31 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. began a conversation with the prior Administration and are now continuing that conversation with the new Administration. We are beginning to build the infrastructure in the Park to do that. We have a Director of Properties and Concessions Management, and also the proposed increase in our operating budget includes the potential for two positions, one to be a specific property manager and one to be a concession manager, so we can start to look at our assets and figure out how to optimize them to generate revenue.

I hope you utilize the advice and counsel of one of your new park commissioners, Farah Jimenez, who is very good at asset management, has done great things for Mt. Airy and other places, and I think she'll be a good resource to you as you look to expand that office.

Absolutely. I 32 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. would add Commissioner Jimenez serves on our Finance Committee for the Commission, chaired by Commissioner Price, and she's been very helpful to us on a number of fronts, yes.

How many structures in the Park are not currently put to productive use; do you know?

When we use the word "structures," as you cited, over 4-- structures in the Park, that includes everything that has a roof. So that can be an open-sided picnic pavilion. So a structure to us does not necessarily mean a building. Of the 400-some, I would not know an exact number, but I would say intuitively probably over 90 percent of our structures are used for their intended purposes, either they're occupied or the picnic pavilion is in good shape and people use it for a picnic. We have very few structures in the Park anymore that do not have an 33 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. active or appropriate use in them.

Okay. So about ten percent are not in use?

Approximately.

And are most of those not in use because they need repair?

I'd say there's probably two or three categories. One is that, yes, they need repair. Two is that they would be in a location in a park that there's no potential use, there's no 14 interest in using that structure. Or, three -- and this is probably the majority of them -- they're in the process of restoration. We have a number of structures where, for example, we've done extensive capital work to restore the exterior envelope, put a new roof on the walls to secure the structure, and are pursuing through grants additional dollars to restore the interior of the structures so we can tenant them. So there's probably three 34 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. reasons that any particular structure in the park system would not have a use in it right now.

Okay. With respect to the structures that have tenants, I'm aware that in most of those kinds of deals that exist, that tenants are required to do the maintenance on the property in exchange -- or in many of them, to do the maintenance on the property in exchange for very low rent. How has that been working out?

I'd say it's been a mixed bag of results across the boards going back to we actually have leases that date to the late 1800's all the way up through obviously our more recent leases. Historically, our leases have been year to year based upon the tenants at some point making substantial capital investment in the building, and then it's ongoing maintenance. We've had tenants that have absolutely been stellar in their performance in maintaining our 35 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. assets and others that have been less so. And our Strategic Plan again spoke to the need to manage our properties at a higher level, which is why this position of Director of Properties and Concessions Management was created, is now filled with a real estate attorney who is helping us work on lease issues on a case-by-case basis. It's just there's a large volume of them. We have over 110 leases in the Park, so --

Councilman Green, would you mind making this your last question for this go-around?

I have a lot of questions for the Park, but --

I know you do, and everybody else does.

Yes, ma'am.

So I would like to give everyone an opportunity to be recognized.

Yes, ma'am. 36 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. The Strategic Plan recommended that the Park develop and implement written maintenance standards for all infrastructure elements. This recommendation was designated high priority, with a four-month timeline for completion. As of March 2007 status report, this task had been started. So that's over a year ago. In the years since, what steps has the Park taken to implement this recommendation?

We are continuing to evolve our maintenance standards in a written form. At the end of the day, it comes down to having enough staff to actually implement those maintenance standards. And, again, with the proposed budget increase of adding 12 positions in the operations staff, we hope to provide that level of maintenance. But you can develop the standards, but then you need the staff to implement the standards.

Would you please provide the Chair with what you'd 37 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. need in terms of providing the staff and doing the maintenance?

Understood. Yes.

Thank you.

Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman Rizzo.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I think I start my comments every year by letting you know I've been around for a while now and have watched Fairmount Park the best part of my adult life and as a child, and I want to compliment all of you that work there, because I remember the days when there were probably triple the number of people that worked in the Park, and some days it amazes me how you even do what you do.

Thank you very much, Councilman.

But still there's times when we have some tough 38 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. questions that need addressed.

Of course.

And one that I spoke to you briefly about, but I want it to be on the record, and Councilman Green talked about some of our assets, and it troubles me. And I don't know whether you saw it coming or didn't see it coming, but recently L&I condemned the East Park Canoe House on Kelly Drive, and because of that, four of our great schools in the City had to be -- State Representative Perzel wrote a letter to me about it and says evicted, but I don't think you actually evicted them.

No, we did not.

But what concerns me in the Representative's letter is the fact that Father Judge, LaSalle, Northeast Catholic High and Temple University use that facility, and what's troubling me is, he says here in the letter that you haven't committed to repairing that facility. I'd like to 39 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. hear for the record our position on that and what you're doing to try to accommodate these young people in the interim.

Certainly. I'd be pleased to. First of all, let me correct one thing that may have been in the letter. The facility was not condemned. It was cited by L&I, and that's a very significant difference legally. So, yes, that happened in late January. We worked with the four schools to move them out of the building. They were not evicted. I met with all four schools and representatives of the Schuylkill Navy on January 31st. When I gave them our absolute commitment that we will -- we have no intention of demolishing the building and we have every intention of repairing and restoring the building for a rowing function. I've told them that repeatedly in meetings we've had with them. We are doing a facilities 40 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. assessment of the building. Fortunately, we were able to get a consultant in there immediately and begin the structural and systems assessment. That report is due to us, with cost estimates, in early May. We've had ongoing communications with all four schools. Temple and North Catholic have relocated immediately adjacent to the building in temporary tent structures. You will see they're off of Kelly Drive. We've worked closely with them to establish that. Father Judge has moved into one of the boathouses on Boat House Row. They graciously made space available to them. And LaSalle College High School moved up to a rowing facility on the upper Schuylkill temporarily. So all four schools have been accommodated, two indoors, two outdoors. We've worked very closely with them. All four schools have been very good to work with. I had a meeting with three of the schools -- Temple did not attend -- that 41 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. was called and chaired by Councilwoman Maria Quinones-Sanchez and was attended by Councilman Greenlee, Councilman Jones and Councilwoman Krajewski about ten days ago or so when I gave them a status report on the facility, status report on their temporary housing and said that we would convene a meeting again in early May after the report is done so we can all assess the report and understand the magnitude of the repairs that need to be made.

You pointed out that the L&I department didn't condemn the building; it cited the building.

Correct.

At the end of the day, they had to move out.

Correct.

So condemn it, cite it. Condemning it I'm sure is more significant than citing it, but when you cited it, it was deemed dangerous? 42 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc.

Correct. It was deemed dangerous. An inspector from L&I had gone in there with some Fairmount Park staff. In early January a leak had been reported in the building. When my maintenance staff, plumbers, went to repair the leak, which they did, they saw some cracks in some of the interior walls that caused them concern. So we reached out to L&I, who has building inspectors, and asked them to walk through the building with us. When they did walk through the building, within very short time of walking through the building on it was a Friday, they said this building needs to be cited, and for the security and safety of the mainly young people, high school students, that are in the building, their access needs to be restricted and we need to come up with a plan to relocate their boats out of the building.

Just to sum it up one more time, this is on the fast 43 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. track?

It's on the very fast track, yes.

What would you see by May?

By May we'll have the report from -- the assessment report done by the architects and engineers that are currently combing over the building. That will give us short, medium and long-term repairs that need to be done, with associated costs.

That's fair. May. April 1. Okay. That's good. And I'd appreciate -- I'll get you a copy of Representative Perzel's letter and you could respond to him.

Absolutely.

Thank you. Thanks, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Councilman.

The Chair recognizes Councilman Greenlee. 44 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc.

Thank you, Madam President. Just a follow-up to Councilman Rizzo's question on the East Canoe. As you said, numbers have been working on that, and we all appreciate the cooperation you've given on that. Thank you.

Thank you.

A couple questions on street trees. First on the pruning issue, is there kind of a regular schedule you try to work with on pruning? Is there a certain amount of years? What would that be?

Yes. Ideally, arboriculture standards for urban street trees, every tree should be pruned on about a seven- to eight-year cycle, ideally. We have 135,000 street trees in the City. Ideally, we should be on a seven- to eight-year cycle. Currently, we're probably on about a nine- to ten-year cycle, which is down from 45 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. several years ago when there wasn't any cycle because we weren't systematically pruning trees. So we've made substantial improvement in systematically going through the City. We're not quite on the cycle that we should by national standards, but we endeavor to get there.

You're getting better, right?

We're getting better.

That's the right direction to go. As far as removals, what would constitute actual removal of a tree? I used to hear the term generally said "dead and dangerous." Is that kind of still where we're at?

Yes. The standard is dead and dangerous, which means if we have a report of a tree from a homeowner or property owner that asked us to remove a tree, we will send an arborist out to inspect the tree. If in the arborist's 46 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. opinion the tree is -- if the whole tree or any portion of the tree is dead or dangerous, we'll authorize its removal, and then that's done by contractors. So we have contractors on call that will remove the trees.

I know often times the homeowner, obviously their feeling of what's dangerous and what Fairmount Park or what the inspectors would be is different. Do you find that often times there's that conflict, that people think a tree -- I guess just a tree just being dead, would that be the homeowner's responsibility?

No. If the tree is dead, we would remove it. Sometimes the homeowner or property owner will look at a tree and say the tree is dead and maybe there's a limb or a branch that's diseased or rotted or dead, and we can remove that limb or branch and take care of the risk, but keep the tree alive and keep the tree there, providing shade and 47 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. all the environmental benefits. I think, in our staff experience, the majority of times when our staff goes out and engages the property owner in a conversation about the tree, generally they're educated about it, they understand the value of the trees, and as long as we take care of the immediacy of the problem, again, if it's a dead limb or a lifted sidewalk, if that's taken care of, they're satisfied.

And you mention the lifted sidewalk. How do you remedy that? As far as Fairmount Park, do you just remove the tree and is that sidewalk then the property owner's responsibility?

Correct. The sidewalk is the property owner's responsibility. So if the tree is dead or dangerous or dying, we'll remove the tree, but then it's the property owner's responsibility -- including grounding out the stump, we'll do that. 48 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc.

Fairmount Park does the stump?

Yeah. We cut down the tree, we grind out the stump. It's then the property owner's responsibility to replace the sidewalk.

Got you. Okay. All right. Thank you very much.

Point of information. I have a point of information.

I'm finished, Councilwoman.

I'm going to ask this question again. Did you say that you all will ground out the stump?

Absolutely. For every tree we remove, it's done by two separate contractors. So one contractor will come through and cut down the tree and then a separate contractor will follow along, because it's specialized equipment, and ground out the stump, yes.

What if 49 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. the tree is not dead or dangerous, but is causing the sidewalk to rise, damaging the plumbing of the homeowner? What is the policy on that?

It's two different situations, Councilwoman. If it's damaging the plumbing and the homeowner can provide us with evidence, which is generally a plumber's report, that there's a root system, sometimes they videotape the line and you can see the root in there, if that's the case, we'll take down the tree. If it's just lifting the sidewalk and there's space to pour the sidewalk with a larger opening and keep the tree if the tree is healthy, that's what we recommend to the homeowner. And, again, the sidewalk is the homeowner's responsibility. The tree is Fairmount Park's responsibility.

Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you 50 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. very much. Don't take me off, though.

Councilman, are you finished?

Yes, I am.

Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Brown.

Thank you, Madam President. Good morning, gentlemen.

Good morning.

Let me echo the remarks of Councilman Rizzo for the good work that you do, knowing that the mountain is still much bigger than the staff members to get over it.

Thank you.

Looking first to your testimony, you speak and state that there are 21 new staff positions. Are those -- tell me about those positions instead of me trying to 51 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. answer the question.

Okay.

Are they management level? What types of positions are they?

One moment, please. Let me get to my notes. Of the positions, the 21 10 proposed new positions, 12 of them are in 11 our Operations and Landscape Management 12 group, which are the men and women that 13 are responsible for the maintenance of 14 the Park on a daily basis. 15

On the 16 front line. 17

On the front line. 18 And that also includes additional 19 arborists and additional tree crew to 20 help with the street tree work, 21 considering the million dollars in additional street tree money or tree money. Another four positions are in our Facilities Maintenance Division, 52 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. which in response to Councilman Green's questions earlier, these are the men and women such as masons, cement finishers, carpenters that help maintain our properties. So there's four positions in that. So that's so far. 8 There's the one position then 9 each in the following departments: 10 There's one position in our Planning and 11 Historic Resources Group, which would be 12 a park preservation planner. We 13 currently don't have a full-time person 14 to really care for our historic assets. 15 Then another position is in our 16 Environment Group, which would be a GIS specialist to help map and track all of the Park restoration work that we're doing. And then one position each -- I've mentioned these earlier -- in an Assistant Director of Concessions to help manage our concession and help build revenue, a Property Inspector to help again with the monitoring of our leases and the maintenance of our properties. 53 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. And then the 21st position, as I'm totally these up, is an additional administrative member in our Special Events Office, which is the office that permits all activity in the Park. So that's a direct customer service person, interaction with the public in providing permits and helping support special events.

And many of those appear to be highly specialized positions. You state later in your testimony that there's a commitment to continue to grow a healthy and sustainable community. So when you look at these positions, are there any 19 requirements for any of those positions 20 to have a green profile? 21

Well, all of the 12 positions that are in our Operations Group, all of those men and women, I mean, those are all green positions. Those are arborists, horticulturists, 54 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. maintenance folks that are front-line folks. And then also the GIS position is a person that really will help map and plan all of our ecological restoration projects.

Very well. So all of these individuals will be recruited through the normal Human Resources Department --

Yes.

-- in government?

Through Personnel, yes.

All right. Then if that be the case, my concern and interest always is that government looks like Philadelphia across departments, across position levels. So if ultimately the recruitment and identification is done by Human Resources, does your department ultimately participate in the interview process?

Oh, absolutely, 55 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. yes.

All right, then. I looked through your paperwork, and I ask first, are you aware of a letter that I sent to Mayor Nutter on February 7th wherein I stated that I would be interested in hearing about opportunities for businesses owned by women, the disabled and people of color in the City of Philadelphia across government? Are you aware of that letter that was sent to the Mayor and then it was, as I am told, shared with all department heads that there would be the expectation that each department head would share with us exactly and precisely what you're doing in those areas across your department?

I was aware in our preparation for today that there was a request for us to provide information on what was called non-government -- excuse me. Let me make sure I have the terminology correct. 56 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc.

Right; non-governmental entities.

Non-governmental entities. And specifically for Fiscal Year '08, the fiscal year we're in. We as an operating department have let no 8 non-government contracts. So I have nothing to report on. All of that work is let specifically through the Procurement Department.

Okay. So let me make sure I understand this. So Fairmount Park does not get involved in any contracting of any kind?

Not directly from Fairmount Park, no. Everything is done through the Procurement Department.

That's important to know. Okay. So if I want '07 numbers and information, I need to go to Procurement to get those numbers for Fairmount Park; is that what I'm hearing? (Bell rung.)

Correct. 57 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc.

Okay. Well, the bell has rung, and we will honor it. I'll get you on the next round. Thank you.

Thank you.

The Chair recognizes Councilman Jones.

Good morning.

Oh, I'm sorry. Councilwoman Tasco.

I had a point of information and I lost my time.

So you did. I'm sorry. Councilman Jones?

I defer to seniority.

Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Tasco.

You answered the one question. In the 58 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. Managing Director's budget, there is a line item for tree removal. Do you know, how does that coordinate with you?

That is the money that we use for tree removal. It's not directly in our operating budget. It's in the Managing Director's budget. We administer it on behalf of the Managing Director's Office.

Okay. Thank you. And I think you answered the question about the status of the tree trimming schedule. Is that pretty much up to date?

Yes. We are -- again, we're trying to get to a seven- to eight-year window of pruning every tree. We're currently at probably a nine- to ten-year window. One moment, please. In Fiscal Year '09, we'll be pruning -- we're scheduled to prune about 6,600 trees. That's the budget 59 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. allocation we have through the Managing Director's Office. So far, we've pruned about 4,400 of those. So we have about 2,200 left to go this spring, with about three months left in the fiscal year.

So do you notify the neighbors if there's going to be a tree pruning or you just go in the neighborhood?

No. The way the notification occurs is that every tree -- a sign is roped off on the tree asking folks not to park in front of that tree or under that tree. That occurs about 72 hours before the tree crew comes through to do the pruning. They won't prune, obviously, if there's a vehicle parked there, so that cars have to move. So that's how the notification occurs. It doesn't occur on property owners because we want to make sure that the person that's parking the car at the tree knows that we're going to be coming through to prune that tree. So it 60 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. happens by actually posting the trees that are going to be pruned about 72 hours in advance, and then they come through and if there's no vehicles there, they prune the trees.

Okay. Just for the record, when you are going to cut dead and/or dangerous trees on a block or if there's a request for removal, do you have to have a certain percentage of the neighbors sign to do that or what is the policy?

No. We have --

We're never clear on what the policy is.

For the removal of a tree, there's no requirement to get property owners' permission. Because the trees are technically property of the City of Philadelphia, it's the City's professional arborists' determination whether or not that tree is at risk of harming someone. So in the end, it's the City's responsibility to make that 61 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. determination and remove the tree. So, no, we do not need property owners' permission to remove a tree.

And that's for the dead and dangerous tree?

Correct, for the dead and dangerous trees.

Okay. And just to, again, for the record, if the tree is dead or dangerous, you will remove the tree and including the stump?

Correct.

See, the reason we ask these questions, I've been here a long time and I've gotten different answers depending on who the Administration is. So that's the policy for right now?

That's the policy.

For the next eight years?

That's the policy.

It might change after that? 62 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc.

Right.

I just want to be clear. My staff is watching. I want them to understand what the policy is, because they have to deal with the public.

Understood.

And every day it's -- so we know what the next eight-year policy will be relative to dead and dangerous trees. I hope you heard that, Pat. Thank you.

Thank you.

I'm done, Madam President.

Thank you. Again, the Chair recognizes Councilman Jones.

Thank you, Madam President. Commissioner.

Good morning. 63 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc.

First of all, thank you again, for the record, of orientating me, Councilman Green and Councilwoman Quinones through the Park. We took an extensive tour of the facilities and gained an appreciation, a greater appreciation, for what you do.

Thank you.

And what the task before you is. So thanks for that.

Certainly.

My question revolves around the whole effort to do greening within Philadelphia, and narrowly tailored, my question is, to what degree does the parks work with the School District to create or reinforce the experience of environmentalism and greening jobs per se that we have? And one project in specific which you have been helpful on is Concourse Lake and Centennial Lake. We're attempting to do an outdoor environmental classroom out of a restoration of an underappreciated lake 64 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. in my district. So generally, what does your department do to reinforce these jobs of the future and work with the School District and other great groups like the Overbrook Environmental Center? American Cities has a developing environmental curriculum. Are you working with them?

Certainly. Let me answer your question on three fronts, if I may. Specifically, first around schools and physical properties, we have worked closely with the School District to try and get trees planted around schools. We did a project two years ago through TreeVitalize, a program of DCNR and the Philadelphia Eagles. We planted about elementary schools across the 20 City. And with the change in leadership 21 of the School District, we're looking 22 forward to reactivating that conversation 23 and moving that forward. So that's about 24 greening the environment around the 25 school, so the students see that. 65 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. Second, in our Environmental Education Division at the Park, our environmental educators regularly interact with school teachers by either providing programs to the schools, will go out to the schools and provide programs or, at our two environmental centers, having schools come to the environmental centers for programming, And, third, when you get to more senior high school level and the youth are beginning to think about jobs and careers, our staff often goes out and interacts with schools, particularly Saul High School in Roxborough and Abraham Lincoln in the Northeast, that have programs specifically focused on green initiatives, horticulture, arboriculture, grounds maintenance, career paths like that. Several of our senior staff members are graduates of those schools and continue to be engaged with those schools to provide --

I just would 66 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. encourage you guys to -- Saul is in my district, and I appreciate that, but there are a number of other high schools. And I think we're on the cutting edge of a new kind of job description called green, and I think you guys in particular have a vital component. Yes, green jobs mean buildings and skyscrapers and waterless urinals and gray water reusage. All of that is fine, but the largest asset we control is the Fairmount Park, which I think is also a part of it. Let me give you some specifics. We entered into negotiations with Chairwoman Blondell Reynolds Brown involving the golf course. You've been very helpful in that, but what I would like to see is, for example, the golf courses engaging with local high schools near them to talk about careers in outdoor maintenance of facilities like golf courses, also irrigation of golf courses, so that those green jobs become a reality. Not to mention the fact that 67 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. the next Tiger Woods may be discovered in one of those high schools. So what I'd like to continue to courage you to do is have our concessions, which are the golf courses, maintain relationships with local high schools, such as Overbrook, Roxborough High School and others around the City of Philadelphia, to develop that relationship. So I'd like to see that in two ways. One, recreational, of course, but also in the jobs of the future, which are green. So the Concourse Lake and Centennial Lake, I appreciate your support of, but I want to encourage that connection with public schools so that our young people, Philadelphians, can actually move towards curriculums that create real jobs in the future.

Absolutely.

So I rely on you to do that.

Point of 68 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. information.

The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Brown.

Gentlemen, if my memory serves me correctly, in the agreement with Mr. Billy Castor -- help me if I'm wrong.

Billy Casper Golf.

Yes. In the legislation it stipulated that the owners of that outfit will -- not optional, but they are required to engage in the type of relationships just articulated by Councilman Jones with the area high schools, correct?

Correct. They have to produce the plan for our joint review, Fairmount Park and City Council's review, of the engagement of the high school students in both recreation and employment, yes.

Very well put. Thank you.

You're welcome. 69 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc.

Thank you, Madam President.

You're welcome. The Chair recognizes Councilman Jones.

Thank you. Real quick, make sure that they know that that's a requirement. The Parkway, I had an opportunity to go in a different tour with the Art Museum, and they're going to testify later, so I'm going to ask the question while you're here to reinforce that. It's my understanding that 30 weekends a year we shut the Parkway down for one activity or another. What I would like to encourage is a study that might shift some of those activities, not all of them, from the Parkway, but to an area within my district along Parkside Avenue, near the Please Touch Museum and other areas, because what has been brought to my attention is because of the 70 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. use of the Parkway, there is some vehicular traffic that is obstructed and the attendance is impacted by some of those particular functions. And I know you guys work closely with the events coordinators to do that, but can there be a study that is done to look at that strip between Please Touch Museum and the Mann Museum as an alternate park parade route or festival route?

Yes. There was actually what's called the Centennial District Master Plan, which we discussed when we did the tour of the Centennial area, proposed how special events could be staged in that area, and, in fact, we are staging many special events in West Park now in the area near Parkside. To be very honest, there are some challenges with that, too, because of traffic flow in and around that neighborhood impact on the Parkside community and, frankly, with Please Touch moving to Memorial Hall, they've been very gracious in saying they 71 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. would accommodate some special events, but we don't want to overburden that facility, which is making obviously a very significant investment in that City asset. (Bell rung.)

So it's a very delicate balance. We're very aware of it. We can certainly give you more information on it.

That signifies the end of my questioning, but real quick, I can get this one and you can respond to it. There's some thought of losing Camp William Penn and we're looking at some of the alternate suggestions for that land. One of the issues was raised that we could supplement the Park experience, the camp experience within Fairmount Park. Currently, we have Outward Bound operating there, but have you given any thought to that and where would that be and how could that happen? 72 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc.

This is the first I've heard of it, so, no, I haven't had the opportunity to give it any thought.

That's a fair answer. Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman Green.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Picking up where we left off, does the Park have a database in which it tracks information about the physical condition of their structures, their maintenance needs, scheduled repairs, et cetera?

No. 21

Is that something that you believe you need?

Yes. I mean, we've been -- a work order management system would be the appropriate vehicle to do 73 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. that. We've never had the resources to implement one. I understand that through the 3-1-1 process and other initiatives coming out of the Managing Director's Office, the goal would be to provide work order management systems for most of the City's operating departments. That would be on a unified platform. Some information could be exchanged. But right now we have no work order management system.

And that would be for current requests, though, and not include sort of all the deferred maintenance that wouldn't come through a 3-1-1 system and --

Well, I don't know enough about how the system might be functioned to know if backlogged or requests that are on pieces of paper or that are floating around in our facility staff could be input into the system to track them as they move forward.

I guess 74 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. where I'm going is that the Park probably needs to do a thorough review of its assets to determine what needs to be done, get it all in a database and then keep track of it, and if you would provide the Chair with what that would take, working with MOIS, I would appreciate that.

Mm-hmm.

Just a related question. You addressed this a little bit, but we have heard very good things about your Deputy Director for Property Management, Doug Kubinski. I apologize if I got the name wrong. But that being said, the task of managing all these assets and 9,200 acres is a significant one. Do you think it's appropriate to have more than one person performing the function of managing these assets?

Well, Councilman, we currently have two people doing it. We have Director Kubinski and a support 75 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. staff member. So we have two currently funded civil service positions. As I mentioned earlier, our proposed operating budget increase would add two more positions to that department, one as a concessions manager and one as a property manager.

So the bridge to the future -- well, let me get to a couple of specific questions, then I'll get to the general questions, I guess, on my next questioning. You and I have discussed the situation at Northwestern Stables. And there seems to be some disagreement within the Park Commission about a proposal you received from an entity called Desfor Farms, or perhaps disagreement in the way we may view it.

Okay.

And my question is, the last time you and I spoke, there are $750,000 in the capital budget to improve Northwestern Stables; 76 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. is that correct?

Correct.

And what Desfor Farms has proposed to do is, as a private entity, spend that $750,000 and allow you to spend that 750 on some other capital project. It's my understanding that Desfor Farms in return for that wanted a long-term lease on the facility, guaranteed to allow all of the existing boarders to stay at that facility, said that they would provide one or two days a week during the summer of low-income sort of outreach and allowing people to come, be on horses and other things. And I guess I don't understand, with all of the financial and capital needs of the Park, why we wouldn't take up that offer.

Okay. Some of those statements are not correct, from my understanding and my meetings with the Desfors. First of all, they did not commit to providing $750,000 in capital investment. What they committed to was 77 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. if they got a long-term lease, over the life of the lease they may make, may make, some investment in the facility. However, even their indication that they would do that was proposed to be in the out years of their agreement, not immediately up front. And this building has severe structural and code issues that needed to be addressed in the short term.

That is not my understanding based on conversations I've had, but okay.

I've had several meetings face to face with the Desfors in 2006 and 2007 and that was fairly clearly conveyed to me at that time. Second, their own very draft financial pro forma indicated that if they were to make capital investments in the facility, it would result in potentially significantly higher boarding rates over time, again, when they would make those improvements. 78 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. (Bell rung.)

And the response from the community was almost unanimous in their concern that if the boarding rates would be increased, it would drive out most of the community use of that facility. So, again, in January of '07, I convened a meeting of the Desfors directly with the Board of Northwestern Stables to try and broker an agreement where the two could work together as a for-profit operator and a non-profit kind of community liaison. That was fairly clear from that meeting and other communications that the two parties could not work together or would not work together, and subsequently I received many communications, e-mails, phone calls, letters, from current boarders and neighbors that valued the non-profit model there, the Northwestern Stables non-profit model, as opposed to a for-profit commercial operator. 79 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. So at that point, a decision was made not to do a long-term lease with the existing non-profit, but to stick with them through the points that 6 we've spoken about that they were 7 required to meet, and, again, they're 8 currently on a year-to-year basis. 9

That's my 10 time. I'll get back to this. Thank you. 11

Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Brown.

One might think it's a good thing that we don't hear about this whole notion of violence and whatever in the parks. Of the 63 parks citywide -- I don't want to ask that question. We don't want to single out any particular park. Has the Commission taken a comprehensive look-see at the issue of violence in the parks or ways to be proactive and prevent it where we can 80 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. when it comes to issues of violence in the parks?

Councilwoman, I won't say that we've done a specific study of violence in the parks, but I will say that we're in regular communication with the 92nd Police, which is the police for the majority of the park, and then the adjacent police districts. I can say confidently that crime is very, very low in Fairmount Park. There are very few crimes that actually occur in the park. The situations you often hear about are the very sad situations where occasionally a body is left in the park, but the crime has been committed somewhere outside the park and then -- but the body is found in the park. We work very closely with, again, with the 92nd. There are two areas that periodically seasonally have increased quality of life crimes, break-in to cars and stuff like that. We 81 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. respond with increased ranger patrol and increased 92nd patrol. We've also looked at increased lighting and other issues in those areas. So, again, I won't say we've done a comprehensive study, but I will say we respond very quickly on a case-by-case basis.

On the issue of lighting, is the Fairmount Park a beneficiary of the new lights that are being put up at intersections around the City or in high-crime areas around the City?

I'm not familiar with that initiative, so I don't know if we are or not.

Let me suggest that you have a conversation with Councilman Darrell Clarke and/or -- would you say the Police Department, Councilman Rizzo, for the new effort regarding cameras?

I think you 82 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. might have misspoke. I thought I heard you say street lights.

I did say street lights and I meant cameras.

You meant cameras?

Yes, yes, yes.

Jack Gaittens, Deputy Gaittens.

Okay.

Have a conversation with them. And in areas which you might deem as high violence, for whatever that definition is, look to see if there are opportunities to further lighten or put cameras in those particular areas.

Certainly.

Okay. Your park rangers.

Yes.

Help me in the testimony. You're going to add to 83 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. them. Did I not hear you say that?

Yes. The proposed budget increase would add three full-time rangers to our current complement of 18, bringing us to full-time rangers, and 7 that is supplemented by anywhere from 8 eight to ten seasonal rangers, which are 9 already in the budget. 10

And the 11 recruitment and identification of them 12 happens where? 13

It happens through 14 our Ranger Corps and it's done by 15 outreaches to colleges and -- we have a 16 number of vehicles because we're always, 17 as with any staff, you're always having 18 turnover, so we're always reaching out to 19 hire rangers and bring them into the 20 program. 21

Tell me this: Does Fairmount Park have an intern ranger program for high school students to sort of trigger or spark their interest in that world as a career? 84 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc.

It would be our seasonal ranger program, where, again, we hire anywhere from eight to ten rangers. They would not be high school students because the requirement of the ranger program is at your minimum of years of 8 age. So often times our seasonal 9 programs bring in recent high school 10 grads that work as a seasonal ranger, and 11 then many of them, if a position is open 12 and they enjoy the job, will apply for a 13 full-time position. So the seasonal 14 program has kind of become a feeder 15 program for the full-time ranger program, 16 yes. 17

We talked 18 about the Billy Casper, which is a part of my questioning. The tree planting, can or does a constituent have any say in where the tree planting happens or is that left purely to the decisions rendered by the leadership at the Park?

No. What happens is, a property owner will make a request 85 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. for a tree. We send out an arborist to look at the site. The arborist looks above for overhead wire, looks at certain safe distance from corners, knows where underground utilities are, and makes recommendations for where the tree should be planted and what the species of the tree should be. That information is then given to the property owner, and the property owner has to sign the form and send it back to us --

I see.

-- saying that, yes, they definitely want the tree planted, and if they do, then our contractor goes out and plants it. So the property owner gets to approve both the location and the species.

Okay. Before this bell rings -- (Bell rung.)

So close.

Not close enough, right? So I'll have another 86 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. round, because I just have a couple of more remaining. Thank you.

Thank you.

You're welcome. The Chair recognizes Councilman Goode. Before we do recognize the Councilman, as far as the tree planting, what is the waiting period between the time the resident signs the form and the tree is planted?

It all depends on when the resident signs the form. We only plant trees five months of the year. We plant them from about April 15th to June 15th and then again from about October 15th to December 15th. So that's about five months. If an individual comes to us and says they want a tree in January and we inspect it and approve it, it could be four, five months until they get the tree. If they come to us in September 87 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. and say they want a tree, it could be a month or two. So it all depends on when they actually request it. It also depends on how much funding we have and availability out of the nurseries, because we order -- our contractors order the trees in large quantities a month or two in advance.

I know there had been a very huge backlog.

Actually, there has, Council President, but I'm very pleased to report that we are eliminating the backlog. With the plantings we will do this spring coming up starting in a few weeks, through the spring into early summer, we will satisfy all of the requests that we currently have in our system. Now, requests continue to come in, but what has traditionally been termed our backlog in these hearings for tree plantings is substantially almost eliminated.

88 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. Wonderful. I'm glad to hear that. Councilman Goode.

Thank you, Madam President. Good morning, Mr. Focht.

Good morning.

I found your earlier conversation with Councilwoman Brown kind of interesting with regard to participation with disadvantaged businesses, and you stated that you were informed that you should include that within your testimony, but because you didn't do any direct contracting with non-governmental entity, you did not include it in your testimony. I have a series of questions with regard to that. The first is, why did you not think it important to include in your testimony that you did no 22 contracts with non-governmental entities to at least fulfill the request?

Actually, not in the written testimony, but in the 89 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. PowerPoint presentation, which I believe you have, there is a box on that slide that states exactly that, that said that we had no -- that we directly contracted with no non-governmental entities in Fiscal Year '08.

What about Fiscal Year '07?

None in Fiscal Year '07. We don't contract directly with any agencies. Everything is done through Procurement.

I've been down this road with some departments already. You did not do any contracting whatsoever in terms of Class 200 in terms of non-governmental entities?

Not directly as Fairmount Park, no. 22

So you didn't spend $15,388 with a non-governmental entity and you didn't spend 87,000 in total? 90 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc.

Those were done through contracts released by Procurement Department.

Well, how much in contracting was done in terms of Class 200?

We'll have to get you the answer to that. I don't know the total number of contracts, total number or total value released by Procurement on our behalf.

Are you familiar with the fact that the Finance Department now has to release an annual report stating what dollars were spent that does go through each department, that I introduced a bill which was now signed into law last week that mandates a ranking of those departments, and that in fact from the information contained within that report for Fiscal Year 2007, there is information on Fairmount Park that does say that there was an amount of money that was spent, it does say a 91 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. portion of that was spent with disadvantaged businesses, and at the end of the day, Fairmount Park is listed as having spent about $15,388, with participation of about 17.5 percent? But my series of questions now is several fold. Are you involved at all in the contracting process?

I'm not sure I understand your question. We're involved and identified --

You clearly understand my question.

Well, no, Councilman --

Are you involved in the contracting process?

We're involved in determining what services need to be contracted, such as turf mowing or tree maintenance, but then they're done -- and we develop the specs, but the specs are released by Procurement.

So you 92 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. determine what services should be contracted. You develop the specs for that. And then is there any other involvement in the process whatsoever?

Reviewing the bids.

You also review the bids within the process. Is there any other involvement after that?

No. 11

Okay. You are familiar with who the Procurement Department selects on an annual basis?

Excuse me. Say again.

Are you familiar with who the Procurement Department selects as contractors on an annual basis?

We're aware of who they select, yes, because we manage them.

Okay. Do they generally select the same firms on a year-to-year basis?

No. It all depends 93 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. on what service you're speaking of.

For specific services, are there basically contractors that receive the business over and over and over again?

No. 8

I will actually take it upon myself to investigate whether that's true or not, because I believe it probably is not true, but I'll get to my next point. So you are not aware that there's a report out stating that Fairmount Park has 17.51 percent disadvantaged business participation?

I was not aware of that report.

And even though the Procurement Department handled the actual bid process, at any point were you aware of the level of participation of disadvantaged businesses and the work that was being done?

I was not, no. 94 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc.

Why not?

I don't know.

Are you aware of what the City's disadvantaged participation goals are on an annual basis?

No. 9

Is it possible for you to identify contractors and/or subcontractors that are disadvantaged businesses that could perform services for Fairmount Park, possibly meet the bid specifications and essentially, at the end of the day, you know can perform the work from having reviewed bids over and over again? (Bell rung.)

I would have to get back to you. I'd have to ask my staff, who works with these contractors, if they know of contractors. I understand the question. I personally don't know the contractors.

So if the 95 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. City has an overall goal, don't you think Fairmount Park can help raise that goal or meet that goal through actually doing the type of due diligence?

I would agree that we should be part of a system to meet that goal, yes.

And so there is a greater responsibility on your part than you led on to. You can't just pass it off on Procurement Department.

I'm not passing it off on Procurement Department. I'm --

That's exactly what you said.

I'm merely stating --

That's exactly what you did.

-- what the obvious is.

Thank you.

You're very welcome. 96 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc.

I will visit this quite often.

The Chair again recognizes Councilman Green.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Briefly, back to Northwestern Stables, it's my understanding that current boarders were provided guaranteed competitive market rates similar to that they were paying and only new boarders would pay a higher fee in return for the capital improvements if they could -- what the market would bear. So perhaps what we need to do is have the people who want to make the capital investment, as I understood it -- and I understand that you may have gotten a different thing -- send you another proposal that clarifies these issues. And I would agree with you, if they're not willing to spend the money, that they shouldn't be there. But to the extent we can get someone else to spend money in 97 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. the Park versus having it come out of your capital budget when the needs are so great, I just think it's something we ought to pursue, and perhaps we can just follow up on that together.

Certainly.

Rather than beating the horse to death, as they say. Just one quick question about that, though. Was there any political influence associated with the non-profit that currently has the contract?

No. None.

Did you ever have discussions with the previous Mayor's Office about that contract?

Yes.

And is there anybody on the non-profit Board that worked in the Mayor's Office?

I believe currently there is. At the time, there was not. At the time that we had these discussions in 2006 and 2007, the Board had about 98 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. four or five members. There was no one on that Board that was political or associated with the former Administration. The Board has currently expanded their membership to nine members, which is one of the requirements, and I do believe on the current expansion Board there's a former member of the Administration.

And who is that?

Joyce Wilkerson, the former Chief of Staff, who is an equestrian.

Okay. Thank you. We talked briefly about this, but one of the goals identified in the Strategic Plan June 2004, as you mentioned, was to increase sustainable revenue sources to support operations and capital improvements within the Fairmount Park system. That was a high-priority recommendation, and strategies for 99 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. accomplishing this goal, to recreate revenue. Division of managed revenue generated by the Fairmount Park system was required to be -- or recommended to be done within an 18-month time frame for completion. Can you tell me where that stands?

Well, as I mentioned earlier, that recommendation resulted in the hiring of Doug Kubinski as our Director of Properties and Concessions Management, also resulted in the ongoing process of negotiating or tightening up both our concession and lease agreements and also the proposal in the expanded staff to add those two positions.

But is there a written business plan to accomplish this currently floating around in the park system?

No. We didn't write another plan to do it. We just went and did it. 100 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc.

Okay. In my experience, in order for a business to be successful, even though you almost throw the plan out the minute it's written because things change, the world is dynamic, in order to successfully implement a plan, the plan and revenue goals and other things need to be in writing so that we can hold the people accountable for increasing revenue responsible for the plan that they submit and are trying to attack. So I would ask that you please provide the Chair -- you may not get to it in this budget process, but please provide the Chair and this Council a written business plan for revenue generation in the Park that we can then hold the people in charge of that accountable for and the Park management accountable for.

Councilman, I'll certainly do that. Again, I don't think that that's in the short term in that -- 101 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc.

I understand that.

I mean, we didn't have any staff to even do this work, so there was no point in creating a plan to hold no one that existed accountable.

But if you provide us a plan that shows revenue and that the Park can generate revenue and how it can generate revenue and the expected revenue generated, then I'll invest in that plan with more dollars for your operating budget to execute it.

I understand.

But I can't do it without a plan.

I understand.

As Councilman Jones liked to say, if it isn't measured, it isn't managed. We have to have written plans. Okay. Another process was to -- you've sort of answered that question. 102 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. As of the March 2007 status report -- okay. I think you have answered my questions. Thank you very much. And I once again want to say that we're all very pleased with your management of the Park. We were very impressed the day we went out, and we thank you for your continued efforts on behalf of our Park and your service to the City. Thank you very much for coming in to testify.

Thank you, Councilman.

You're welcome. The Chair recognizes Councilman Rizzo.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Director, I'm sure you read like I read that Commissioner Ramsey is exploring bringing the mounted police back. One of the bigger disappointments in my political life, that that unit ever 103 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. left. How could you accommodate them based on the contractual arrangements that you have? If we brought even a limited mounted unit back to the City, how would you house them?

I only am aware of Chief Ramsey's plan by what I've read in the press, which I agree with you, I think it would be a wonderful plan for the City. We've had very preliminary conversations with folks in Police about where they could be housed. I have no 15 indication yet of how many horses or what they're thinking about. We need some more information to determine the amount of space. As you know or recall, when the mounted was disbanded, they were occupying a facility on Krewstown Road in Pennypack Park. That was their facility. We have subsequently used that facility for some of our operations. We could certainly consider the mounted going back 104 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. into that facility, depending upon how much space they need or --

Before they were dismounted, they also occupied Northwestern. They occupied --

They didn't at the very end. For the last five or six --

Right. I'm saying early on --

Oh, early on, yes.

-- when there were 180 horses, when they patrolled Fairmount Park aggressively, they were at Northwestern. Could you put a limited number of mounted units at Northwestern?

That's a complicated question. I think we could if the restoration of the facility was complete. Right now with the structural deterioration of the facility, there's about, if I remember correctly, between 20 or 30 stalls that are not habitable because of the structural integrity of 105 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. the building. If the restoration of the building is complete, that will make more stalls available, and, in theory, the mounted could be accommodated in those. Right now, currently, I don't believe -- there's only a very small number of vacant stalls in the building because their capacity is limited.

I understand there's an old barn over off of Dupont and Henry. There's a few facilities. They're deteriorated, but they could be rehabilitated, from what I understand, to house the horses if we ever went in that direction.

Okay.

So I was just wondering what we could do or what we couldn't do. So I think if Chief Ramsey moves forward, then obviously we need to be prepared for that move.

Absolutely.

The last question that I have, you addressed 106 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. earlier public trees, about the Fairmount Park's responsibility. My office constantly gets calls from my constituents that they want to talk about private property trees. They want to talk about the tree that's a hundred years old in their next-door neighbor's front or backyard that they're afraid is going to fall on their home. How do you respond to an issue like that? Not a curb tree, but a tree that's on a person's lawn. How do you deal with that if you deem it rotted or dangerous? Do you go in and remove it and charge them? What exactly do you do?

No. There's no -- we won't even inspect trees on private property. If a property owner contacts us about a private property tree, we explain that as per the City Charter, that tree is the responsibility of the property owner, and we will give them -- if they're interested, we will give them lists of certified arborists. If they 107 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. don't know who to work with, we can point them in the direction, but we don't invest staff resources in investigating that tree and we certainly don't remove trees on private property.

Let's have this scenario, and it happens frequently, where a very senior citizen lives in a property and the tree falls, knocks the fence down, falls into the house next door. The roof is damaged. There's an opening in the home due to the tree falling. The Fairmount Park Commission will not engage at all? They'll just stand back and let that condition exist?

We will not engage in that. We don't have the financial or legal authority to engage a tree on private property.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

You're welcome. When we first started our 108 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. hearings this morning for Fairmount Park, it seemed to be moving very rapidly and I took the liberty of calling the Recreation Department to come in, and they have been sitting here for quite a while, and I thought that rather than go through the very extensive day as we had yesterday, if we worked through, we could probably get completed much earlier today than we did yesterday. So at this time, the Chair recognizes Councilwoman Brown.

Two more questions, Madam President. I hear your appeal, and I have no problems honoring it. Let me get to my question and then the quick follow-up to Councilman Goode's line of questioning. Presently before members of Philadelphia City Council is a tour guide bill that I'm hopeful to garner adequate support, and I'm curious to know, are there any stipulations, requirements, 109 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. parameters for the tours that happen in Philadelphia Fairmount Park?

Currently, we have no tours of the park. We had a tour operator that offered a for-profit private tour of the park through Philadelphia Trolley Works, but that ceased about two years ago.

Okay.

So currently we have no systematic tours of Fairmount Park.

All right, then. In my line of questioning regarding the contracting opportunity, I referenced the letter that was sent to the Mayor on February 7th, and it's my -- well, let me not be presumptuous. Could we ask the Budget Director to come to the witness table, Madam President? Is he still here? Great. (Witness approached witness table.)

The 110 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. unfairness about this question is that it was copied to Clay Armbrister, Rob Dubow, Julia Chapman and Stephen -- well, that would be you.

That would be me.

So what I need to know is how the specifics of this letter was handled with budget department heads, City department heads.

Madam President, Councilmember, when we received your letter, we were about two days into the preparation of testimony. We went back to every department and we told them that in the slide presentations that they were producing, we were going to add a slide that referenced your question with respect to MBE/DBE and that we had a template. Everybody was to follow that template and they were to provide us with the information. To my knowledge, everyone has provided that, and I believe that what 111 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. we're seeing here and I think part of the confusion is that there is some confusion on our end with respect to who is the keeper of that information, is it Procurement, is it MBEC, is it the department, and I think what we need to do is go back and perhaps do this in a more comprehensive manner rather that on a department-by-department basis to bring you a report probably from the Budget or Finance Department, give you those participation rates that you and Councilmember Goode were asking for and do that in one sort of comprehensive document as opposed to doing it department by department so that you have that before you.

Okay. And my comment to that is, it's important for leadership to take the lead and represent this issue that has been raised for the last eight years since I've been here. It's equally important that department heads recognize a quote by Peter Drucker, 112 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. which is, "Management is doing things right. Leadership is doing the right things." So it's important that that philosophy be shared across government and not just rest on the second floor in his cabinet. And I believe that that's where -- I can't speak for Councilman Goode, but his line of questioning signifies that, yes, it starts with leadership on the second floor, but philosophically it needs to be driven by every single department head and not always feel comfortable in punting it to the Procurement Department or to the Mayor's Department or to the head of diversity for government. What the expectation here now is going forward, that everybody who is in government, who is in position of leadership and responsibility, take the responsibility to make sure that, A, their department looks like Philadelphia, and, B, women, people of color and people with 113 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. disabilities are getting a fair shake at the economic pie. Thank you, Madam President.

You're welcome. The Chair recognizes Councilman Green.

Point of information.

Yes. The Chair recognizes Councilman Goode for a point of information.

Thank you, Madam President. Just very quickly to add on to that. The purpose of the Councilwoman's request and the purpose of the ordinance 19 which was signed into law is to put the pressure on each department, because clearly if the City has a goal of 37 percent and we're here today at a Council hearing where Fairmount Park, according to the executive branch's own document, for Fiscal Year '07 is at 17 percent and 114 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. I believe that Recreation is at 13 percent and I could go through the list, clearly the City is not going to get to an overall goal of 37 percent unless everyone is raising their goals. And the only way you're going to raise those goals, even through a procurement process that has a Charter mandate of the lowest responsible bidder, is to identify subcontractors. And clearly, each department is more familiar with the services that they want to undertake, probably, as Mr. Focht said, create the bid specifications, are involved in the bid process to some extent. So clearly, we could raise these goals if each department head are actually identifying qualified disadvantaged businesses that can participate on a subcontract level. And either we're going to do it or we're not going to do it, but clearly, it's not useful to us in the end if the Administration just comes back and goes 115 4/1/08 - WHOLE - BILL 080022, etc. through their full list, but it's a healthful dialogue for us to have with each department, which is why Councilwoman Brown made the request she made before the budget process and clearly why I introduced the bill, which is now law. And it is what it is now, and each department should be held accountable. Thank you, Madam President.

You're welcome. The Chair recognizes Councilman Green.