You may not see them if you're going in the front of the Visitors Center. They're on the side.
You guys are very visible. They're big, big, big -- I mean, those things are eye-catching, which isn't a bad thing, but you're not parking a Volkswagen on 6th Street, that's for sure.
Right. If there was a way of selling tickets in the front of the Visitors Center, that would be agreeable, I think, to everybody, to all the operators.
My concern about that is, and I don't know if that was the concern at the time the folks were talking about this, we don't want to set up -- and I don't mean this to be disrespectful -- any kind of like a carnival appearance to this where people are hawking in the middle of the street their product. That's the purpose of 86 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. trying to set some regulations that it makes it more -- not formal but a much more attractive way of doing business.
It is. If you go to New York, they have a separate area. If you want to go to a ball game or a play, they have a separate area that you go and you buy tickets.
Right on Times Square where you go at a certain time of the day and you get tickets at half price for shows. I hear lines and lines of people are -- and everybody knows to go there.
Well, they're standing outside. Look, it's New York, but my point is, people know that that is a place to go to, which is far away from the theatre that they may be purchasing a ticket for, and they take the opportunity and the time to walk down 87 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. there and buy their ticket.
The suggestion is that people aren't going to buy tickets anymore if they have to go to the Visitors Center, or less people will buy because they don't want to walk the extra block.
Even if they walk a half block, if it was a separate building to buy the ticket at, to me that would work, but to have to go into the Visitors Center, walk all the way through the back, to me that will never work.
Well, if the industry wants to build a new building, you guys want to front the cost of a new building. My Legislative Assistant has reminded me about Boston. Similar situation, isn't it, in Boston? The guys from Ride the Ducks can probably -- he's shaking his head. When you get up, are you going to be testifying? No one? 88 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. Someone from Ride the Ducks will answer that question. Tell me about the Boston experience when you get up, if I forget to ask you, please. Yes, Mr. Waterman.
Just to make the point, in New York they also -- the open top operation in New York is fairly exclusively sold off street. I think they have about 80 street vendors, and it's a very, very easy product to buy from the street.
Thank you. And it is New York and it is unique, there's no question about it, and I'm not suggesting we need to mirror New York. I don't think we want to do that in most cases. Councilman, do you have any questions?
Thank you, gentlemen. There will be more witnesses and we'll continue with the dialogue. 89 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. Thank you.
Mr. Slocum, Mr. Kates, Mr. Grimes from Philadelphia Trolley Works.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee. My name is Michael Kates. I'm the Director of Operations with the Philadelphia Trolley Works. With me is Michael Slocum, President and owner of the Philadelphia Trolley Works, and Joshua Grimes, our attorney. Philadelphia Trolley Works is the City's largest private transportation provider. We are currently investing several million dollars in our community in the Grays Ferry section in the process of developing a multi-million-dollar facility in the Grays Ferry section of the City on the Schuylkill River. The Trolley Works employs over 150 people, most of them City residents. 90 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. Aside from our trolley vehicles and horse-drawn carriages, we operate London-style double-decker buses and the Land Shark amphibious vehicle in the Independence Mall area. We also operate the Phlash Downtown Loop, several fixed route shuttles and a full-service charter bus business. The Trolley Works has served Philadelphia's residents and visitors from its staging areas on Independence Mall for 30 years. In both good times and bad, we operated when tourism was down in the late '70s and early '80s. We operated in the immediate aftermath of 9/11. And when other tour operators such as Old Town Trolley shut down and left the City, we continued to provide a quality product. In short, we have been a part of Independence Mall's evolution from its beginning to its present position as a major tourism draw for the Philadelphia region. The current staging system on 91 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. the Mall is a product of the City's success in the visitor industry. As more people are drawn to the region, more transportation providers follow. We understand that some officials feel that greater regulation is needed to create a more orderly Mall. While we disagree, we have concluded that some additional rules are inevitable. However, we have two requests. For any additional legislation, that the rules provide all companies an opportunity to compete on an equal footing and that they allow everyone a reasonable opportunity to succeed. The key to our success is visibility and accessibility. Our major issue is with the staging locations mandated by the legislation and a related requirement that vehicles load passengers only from the left side. Our entire trolley fleet loads from the right side, and this is also true of all American-made vehicles, 92 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. including SEPTA buses, Paratransit vehicles and all other trolleys made in the United States. What this legislation would do is require us to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on adapting our fleet for left side access. The process would take several years and reduce the capacity of our vehicles. The process also compromises the structural integrity of the vehicles. It's a very difficult process and something that we are, quite frankly, not prepared to do. Alternatively, we will be relegated to a staging area across 5th Street that would put the Trolley Works at an extreme competitive disadvantage from a marketing standpoint. This legislation initially created six locations that would not provide for proper vehicle loading. As a result of our opposition, the legislation added a location that would require the touring 93 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. public to walk past every other tour provider to choose our product. We have made several suggestions that would not result in such a disadvantage, but those suggestions have been ignored. What is the City's rationale for the left side loading requirement? We're told that it's necessary for public safety, but the facts just don't back that up. Philadelphia Trolley Works vehicles have safely loaded passengers from the right side of its vehicles around Independence Hall and elsewhere for many years. In that respect, we are no different from any passenger car in the United States, which, of course, opens on all sides.
However, neither the federal government nor any state seeks to prevent loading and unloading in the right-of-way, similar to the point that you made with the Super Ducks. There are many occasions when you'll pull up to a hotel downtown where you have to load from the improper side 94 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. of the vehicle. We do that. We do it safely. We man somebody on the pavement. We are not here to recommend loading from the improper side of the vehicle, but if it's one of the only options we have, we would like to use it. We believe we can safely load from everywhere, although not a preference, something we'd like to have the opportunity to do. Are there differences between trolleys and passenger cars? Sure there are. One big one is that our drivers monitor traffic conditions and take proactive steps to avoid dangers to our riders posed by other vehicles. We would, of course, continue to do this under the proposed legislation. However, the City's preference is to ban our vehicles or relegate them to substandard staging locations across 5th Street from our competitors. Other tour companies use foreign-made vehicles or amphibious 95 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. vehicles, which are loaded from the rear or the left side. However, our attempts to achieve a reasonable resolution on this issue have not resulted in favorable changes. Another issue relates to the unprecedented amount of authority this bill would delegate to the Independence Visitors Center. Under this legislation, all tour ticket selling would be prohibited in the Mall area except through booths set up at the IVC. The IVC is seeking a commission on every ticket sold for services rendered. The fee was initially 12 percent of gross sales. This past Monday it was revised to five percent of sales and a $50,000 per year fee. Few industries other than gaming are so heavily taxed. For example, under the IVC's current requirement, our annual cost to operate trolleys on the Mall would rise to at least $56,000. That includes a $50,000 payment to the IVC and around 96 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. $5,500 to the City. That's before we sell a single ticket. On top of that, the IVC will require each company to spend over $20,000 building a ticket booth and the plans to mark up the cost of utilities by percent. The total additional cost to 9 operate per provider would be in excess 10 of $150,000 per year. 11 The result is that a company 12 like Trolley Works would have to sell 13 about 10,000 tickets just for the right 14 to operate in the first year. This is 15 equal to about 310 trolley tours at full 16 capacity. And that figure does not 17 allocate one time to pay our employees or 18 any operating costs. 19 If a company operates both 20 trolley tours and amphibious vehicles like we do, these costs would double. In addition to the increased cost to operate, the IVC will continue to sell tour products for competing entities such as walking tours and segues from their 97 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. information desk. So not only are we required to pay exorbitant fees to operate from the IVC, but they will continue to compete against us. Also, under an agreement submitted by the IVC for tour operators to sign as a condition of selling tickets in that building, the IVC is also seeking unprecedented enforcement powers against tour operators. The IVC wants the absolute discretion to eject from the building and, therefore, terminate the right to sell tickets to Mall visitors any operator that the IVC no longer wishes to have in its building, for any reason or for no reason. There would be no limits on this power. This delegation of power is unprecedented. The IVC is a private corporation, not a governmental agency, but this legislation allows the IVC to be the tax collector, judge, jury and executioner of the tour industry. We all know that the IVC and 98 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC.
its leaders are upstanding members of the hospitality community. We respect their abilities and are often in line with their views, but this is too much power to go unchecked. We can think of no similar situation where so much authority that rightfully belongs to the City is transferred to a private party to exercise as it wishes. If a City agency takes action against tour operators, there are clear avenues for appeal. No such appeal rights exist with this IVC legislation. There are no Councilmembers or other City officials to hold accountable, yet there has been no clear reason stated why this transfer of power from the City to the IVC is necessary. About 15 years ago, Council faced a similar situation when issues arose with sidewalk food vendors. The solution was to specify permissible vending locations and limit the number of 99 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. licenses. There was no dramatic increase in vendors' costs, and enforcement powers remain with the City. We think a similar solution is possible here. There are other issues that concern the Trolley Works, many, but we will defer them to a later time. We prefer instead to ask members of this Committee to work with us to resolve these issues. If our goals are really to organize the transportation companies at the Mall and maintain our harmonious environment, we ought to be able to find a solution that won't increase the fees on each company by nearly $150,000 in one year and, additionally, to force the Trolley Works to accept a bad staging location or spend hundreds of thousands more on modifying its American-made vehicles. You are going to hear that the tour operators have had sufficient time to work towards a solution, but it failed to do so. That is completely untrue. 100 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. When we were presented with the City's plan to restructure staging on the Mall, which was November of last year, we provided detailed objections and various solutions. Some objections were addressed; the solutions were ignored. As the media has reported, all the affected transportation companies are united in their opposition to this legislation. We urge Council and City agencies to work with us to craft workable solutions that will make Independence Mall better, without unduly hurting local businesses. There are certainly many ways to do this. With the winter season rapidly approaching, there is no reason to rush this bill into law. Gentlemen, I implore you to take our concerns seriously. This legislation will result in the death of motorized tour business. Councilman, you had initially opened the discussion with the carriage industry and the threats of the carriage 101 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. industry going away. I won't elaborate, but I'll tell you, this is the last year that Philadelphia Trolley Works will operate carriages. It is not profitable. We will operate carriages in 2006 and then we will cease the operation of carriages. It's an unfortunate circumstance. Where being able to have a substantial barn management program to care for the animals and to run the business profitably, we're no longer able to do that. This year there were losses in the horse industry. Next year there will be further losses in our horse industry. So we have decided as a business, and not necessarily public information, but since you mentioned it, I figured I will let you know that 2006 will be the last year for 76 Carriage Company, and that's very unfortunate. It will be the last year for 76 Carriage Company, but not the last year for the horse and carriage industry. What will 102 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. remain, none of us will be proud of. Philadelphia Trolley Works respectfully requests to postpone this process based on the obvious significant unresolved issues in this bill. There are numerous issues with regard to the IVC that are both irresponsible to implement and would really result in harming our tour industry.
One positive note, the tour industry as it has existed in the last couple of years in the City has been quite confrontational. Those days are over. As a result of this process and Brian forcing us to work together, I think there is one positive outcome and, that is, that we will continue to work together. The days of harassing folks on the street are over and have been probably for the better part of four to six weeks or so. We have realized the consequences to those actions, and, quite frankly, it's over. And I would challenge any one of you to go to the 103 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. street and check that out. So I guess in closing, I do respect the time that you've given us, but just for now, the timing is not right. If we could have a week or two, the landscape of the tour industry is changing significantly, and if this legislation is enacted, the trolleys will go the way of the horses.
I'm glad to see you resolved your differences a month before the hearing. That's very helpful. Talk about timing.
I'm sure it is. I'm sure it is. You had great testimony, and I tried to follow it as best I could. You don't have, other than your copy -- there were some comments about the percentage going from 12 percent to five percent and the annual fee, and your last comment about Philadelphia Carriage will not be 104 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. in business after '06. Did you not say in the beginning you're relocating your facility to Grays Ferry?
I was wondering why you would be building a new facility when you won't have horses. What makes -- and I don't want to turn this into the horse-carriage industry, but I'm the person who brought some of that up, obviously. What makes it more difficult for you to continue operating but the so-called undesirable or companies that we won't be proud of, why will they continue to operate? I thought we said, Michael -- and I think you know this -- that you guys are the state-of-the-art as far as Philadelphia is concerned in the way you 105 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. operate the carriage industry.
And that is a true statement, and we appreciate that recognition. However, I think that I have indicated to you on several occasions that the overregulation of the carriage industry has essentially crippled us financially. We cannot operate a facility, a carriage operation, to the level that we feel is necessary and be profitable. I did meet with you several times after the legislation was enacted and asked for your consideration in relaxing certain issues, and all of those were denied. The net result is, it is not a profitable end of our operation anymore. It's not conducive for us to stay in that industry and continue to just swap dollars or essentially lose dollars.
Is there any reason to think that maybe the addition of -- the increase in other 106 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. types of vehicular attractions may have caused a decrease in the carriage industry as well, more buses, more amphibious? I mean, there's a lot more stuff out there, which gives people more choices. When carriages was the only game in town, if you will -- and I recognize your concern, and you have expressed those in the past -- there really was no other place for people to go, but now you have at least two other types of tourist transportation opportunities.
That may be true to some degree. However, the net result is less revenue, and I think that's coupled not only with that, but the fact that we can't operate during peak hours and we lose a lot of days on the street. We have the weather conditions, the lowering the temperature. I mean, it just cuts into our peak season and our operating. 107 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. And if you couple that with the increases in expenses to operate this type of business -- I mean, unbeknowing this was going to happen today, I was just in an argument yesterday with our saw dust supplier. To deliver a load of saw dust for us right now is approaching $500 a load. A few years ago it was $200.
I don't mean this again to be disrespectful. That's the price of doing business, which we don't control. You don't want it to be there, but it's there. It's like police cars, taxi cabs are paying a lot more for fuel today than they did six months ago. So obviously it's cutting into their profit margin as well. Notwithstanding your concerns about peak hours and the like, but when you talk about weather, again, when it was really just carriages, people didn't have the option on a day that was a little bit chilly to do any other thing 108 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. but the carriage. I don't like cold weather. If I have my choice between -- and there were some carriages out, I think it was, Friday or Saturday. It was a very cold day, going down 6th Street, and there were some people in carriages. You'd never get me in a carriage on a 35-degree-weather day. If I had my choice, I'd be in one of the buses or the amphibious vehicles with the plastic down and the heater on. Again, I'm not trying to get off the hook in saying that we don't take some responsibility. Maybe overregulating. I'm not agreeing to that or admitting to that, but maybe there is some truth to that. There are other factors, I think, that are driving your profit margins down, and I don't think it's just peak hours. Mr. Grimes, the attorney, just can't wait to jump in, I know, and I'll give you a minute. 109 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. Again, I don't want to create this environment where there is just carriages, but it's part of this whole discussion about regulations regarding the tourism and vehicular industry, tour bus ridership clientele and what they prefer versus the opportunities that they have. Mr. Grimes.
And we agree. Our ridership hasn't necessarily suffered. We can only do so many 20-minute rides in a five-hour or four-hour period in the course of a day. So obviously we don't have the potential to generate the type of revenue that we need to survive. But, again, our intent was not to disclose that information here today. It was a result of you bringing up the carriage industry. I think the correlation that we can draw here is that if you expect our operations -- and I think this is 110 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. collectively among all the operators -- to try to absorb a $200,000 a year expense --
I can appreciate and respect that. I just get concerned when you tell me you're going out of business and it's basically overregulation, is the issue.
And I can also assure you that if we can work to relax those regs and you can give us some consideration, we may be able to divert that, but our intent right now is that we will disband that operation in '06, because it is not profitable.
Two questions. Assuming you guys are still in business in '06 and -- you're going to be in business in '06 but not after '06; is that correct? 111 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC.
What makes it profitable for your competitors in the carriage industry to continue to operate and not --
They don't use saw dust. I mean, we've been through this before with the humane issues. I mean, they can cut their operating expenses. They don't have a layered staff like we do. They don't have supervisory staff. They don't have a management staff. They don't have people on site hours a day. 15 They don't have the size of the facility 16 we have. They don't have all of the 17 equipment behind our facility. They 18 don't have the costs. They do it at a 19 much lower level, so they can essentially 20 survive on much less revenue and cut 21 their operating costs, something that we 22 can't do. 23
Without 24 trying to get you into trouble with your competitors -- I'm sure you're already in 112 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. trouble with them at certain times anyway -- are you suggesting that some of the things that they're doing are not complying with the regulations?
I will be the first one to tell you, as I have behind closed doors and publicly, that these guys do not do this business properly.
Based on what the Code requires them to do. So we're back where we were a couple years ago with the condition of the care of the horses?
That's right. In other words, we're back to square one where I was. We need to address --
We're going to get on that first thing tomorrow, I assure you that.
But, Frank, one thing is, it's not the current regs. What I had said from day one is, we had a comprehensive stable management program that addresses the welfare and well-being 113 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. of the animal 24/7, not what happens on the street as a result of that. So if you fail to provide the animal with adequate shelter and care --
Cold weather is approaching. We're going to address that. That, I assure you. And I don't know if that changes your business plan going forward or not --
-- but that's what brought us to that whole debate in the first place.
And it didn't work. I mean, this is the point that we're trying to make. It overregulated the operators who want to do it right, who have that high level of cost factor to operate at that level. It did not achieve that for the lower levels.
You have made your point, and I respect that and I appreciate that, and I've said and I'll 114 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. repeat again, that you did run the best operation that far exceeded everybody else, but if they're not at least reaching the criteria of the Code, then that's something that is out of your hands and it's in our hands and the City's hands to address, and we will certainly address that. Mr. Grimes.
Councilman, I defer. I could talk to Mr. Abernathy or yourself later on, if you don't mind. I don't want to take the Committee's time --
I appreciate that, and let me say this to you: There was some suggestion about giving you guys a couple weeks. What I might request of the Committee is that we vote this out of Committee, but maybe give us some time to go over some of those other issues, and hopefully we can come to some sort of resolution between now and the 15th of December, which gives 115 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. you two weeks.
I hope that's all we need, but I'm going to ask that we vote it out of Committee, because I don't want to delay it any further than it's been delayed, go through the recess period, come back sometime in January and then before you know it, we're into February and then it's going to grind. Because we have put it on hold on a number of occasions already. We've delayed it, delayed it, delayed it. And, again, at the end of the day, what we do here may not be satisfactory to everyone. We don't do everything and call all the shots correctly all the time, but we do have a responsibility to get something done, and we're going to try to keep working towards that, and it will give everyone another two weeks to try to figure this all out and get hopefully some concessions on everybody's part to make 116 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. it work.
We appreciate that, and we do believe that the concessions are there and by working together, we can get them there.
Mr. Dutcher, Herschend and Mr. Gaier. He's going to do them all? There you go. Councilman Ramos will be leaving the Chambers. He will be in his office. He will have his speaker on listening to this. He does have some other business. He will come down in time for a vote, but thank you. Mr. Dutcher.
Herschend. I'm sorry. I should know. We've met a number of times. I apologize.
It's good to 117 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. see you again.
You're going to be speaking on behalf of Mr. Dutcher, Ride the Ducks. Fire away.
Good afternoon. I appreciate Councilman DiCicco and all the members of the Committee allowing us to testify today. My name is Chris Herschend. I'm the President of Ride the Ducks International. With me, as you mentioned, is Steve Dutcher, who is our General Manager here in Philadelphia. We're here today to express our support for Bill No. 050862. We want to thank Councilman DiCicco and his staff for their efforts to find common ground among all of the interests involved. We also want to thank the Managing Director's office and the entire working group that's been addressing the various Independence Park issues over the last couple of years. Briefly, allow me to introduce my company to you. Ride the Ducks came 118 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. to Philadelphia in early 2003 with the wonderful idea of helping visitors discover this great City, both on land and water, in a fun and professional way. If you look around the room and count the imitators, you can see that we've been fairly successful. Since 2003, we have doubled the number of vehicles we operate here from six to 12. We're now open from March 1st through December 15th, seven days a week. We employ 150 Philadelphians each season, and in our three years, we've hosted nearly 400,000 passengers, more than half from outside the region. Our professional guides function as ambassadors for this great City and point out the sites and destinations within the Historic District, Old City, Society Hill, South Street and Penn's Landing, which directly increases the visits to these attractions, as well as increasing shopping and dining for those from out of 119 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. town. Ride the Ducks Philadelphia is owned by Herschend Family Entertainment. Herschend Family Entertainment owns, operates or partners in properties in 7 eight states, hosting over 8 million 8 guests per year. Our properties include 9 the Dollywood Theme Park in Tennessee; 10 Stone Mountain Park in Atlanta, Georgia; 11 Hawaiian Falls Water Park in Dallas, 12 Texas; and the flagship Silver Dollar 13 City Theme Park in Branson, Missouri. We 14 also, of course, operate Ride the Ducks, 15 which has wholly owned operations here, 16 as well as Baltimore; Memphis, Tennessee; 17 and Branson, Missouri. We also supply 18 equipment and license to partners in 19 Boston, Massachusetts and Seattle, 20 Washington. Since we arrived here in Philadelphia three years ago, we've actively supported many local non-profit organizations and worthy causes. We have provided tours or transportation to the 120 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. following local groups: The Police Athletic League, Ronald McDonald House, Pennsylvania School for the Deaf, Philadelphia Charter School for the Performing Arts, City Year, Philadelphia READS, Philadelphia Zoo, Pennsylvania Ballet, Philabundance, Franklin Institute, Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation, St. Christopher's Hospital for Children and, most recently, Hurricane Katrina victims who relocated to Philadelphia, as well as contributing our equipment and men to the actual recovery and rescue effort in New Orleans itself immediately after the storms. We want to continue to be a great corporate citizen here in Philadelphia, so we agreed to collaborate with this working group to address the various issues that have been raised. However, we do want the Councilmembers to be aware that this legislation singles out Ride the Ducks unfairly and puts us at a tremendous competitive disadvantage. 121 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. These changes come at a significant cost to our company and we believe will also hurt the City by decreasing the amount of visitors referred by us to attractions, shops and restaurants in the City. Let me explain that a bit. Currently we sell tickets to Ride the Ducks from a kiosk we purchased and have licensed in front of our immediate loading area.
This legislation will not allow us to continue to sell tickets where we load our vehicles. Thus, our customers will go elsewhere to buy tickets, while customers of the land tours can board a bus or a trolley and pay later, as they stop at other points in the City to load passengers and sell tickets. Not being able to buy the ticket and board the vehicle immediately will certainly decrease our ticket sales and, importantly, I believe will artificially restrict the growth of this industry. The net result is a phrase 122 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. we've heard often in this process, which is a true leveling of the playing field. Significantly, it also lowers the playing field to the lowest common denominator. We believe it's in the City's best interest to have operators that can sell tickets on site and board passengers quickly, thus moving more people through the process faster. This legislation in fact does the opposite. With that being said, we do support Bill No. 050862. This has been a long and sometimes painful process, but we recognize that the Councilman and the working group believe this legislation is necessary. Ride the Ducks looks forward to continuing this partnership and working with Councilman DiCicco and the City government for many years to come. We thank you for your consideration, and we invite you to come Ride the Ducks. Thank you.
I've been invited and dismissed the opportunity 123 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. until all legislation is complete, because I don't want to think that I've been influenced by a free ride on Ride the Ducks. Actually, I want to pay, so that will eliminate that. That will be a front page story or blog tomorrow. Let me ask you a question. Second page of your testimony, third paragraph, "Currently we sell tickets to Ride the Ducks from a kiosk," which my office was instrumental in setting up for you fellows a while back. Would it help, would it benefit if you were able to sell tickets similar to the way the trolley and/or bus do at other points along the way?
There are no 19 other points along the way on our product.
Well, if there were. If there were. If we created other venues for that.
Let me make sure I understand the question. Our 124 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. product now loads and unloads from a single location.
If we modified the product to load and unload at multiple locations; is that the premise of your question?
Let me see if I understand you correctly. "This legislation does not allow us to continue to serve tickets where we load our vehicles," meaning you would be relocating your sales to the Visitors Center?
Presumably. "Thus, our customers must go elsewhere to buy tickets, while customers of land tours can board a bus or trolley and pay later, as they stop at other points in the City to load passengers and sell tickets. Not being able to buy the ticket and board the vehicle immediately will definitely decrease our ticket 125 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. sales." Let me ask you it this way: What would be your solution to that? What would be a recommendation?
Well, I think the ideal solution is what we have done unique to all the other tour operators in this City, which, as you point out, you helped us in late 2002 to set up for spring 2003, which is continue to have a distinct point of sale, which eliminates our participation in any of the sidewalk fracas -- what's the word -- that's been referred to several times. That works extremely well for our product, and it provides us a point of differentiation, as well as safety for our employees on the sidewalk. That would be my preference in an ideal world.
But if you were allowed to buy a ticket or tickets 126 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. and board the vehicle immediately, would that satisfy some of your concerns? I'm using your --
I'm reading from your testimony and I'm giving you the other side and opportunity to respond to that.
Having the point of sale immediately adjacent to the loading point, as many other operators have pointed out, is very desirable, yes.
Oh, Boston. Somebody was supposed to remind me about Boston. We talked about the inefficient way or the more undesirable manner in which we are suggesting that ticket sales be at the Independence Visitors Center.
Every city is 127 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. different. The legislation in Boston is different.
What happens in Boston? Isn't there one designated place to buy?
No, sir. Boston Duck Tours, with whom we are affiliated, although I should stress it is an independent company owned by a separate set of investors and managed independently, my familiarity with that is as anybody else's here having seen it several times. They're blessed with a high traffic desirable tourist location that is private land, the mall.
Private. It's on the mall, Prudential Center. It's owned by a private developer.
Desirable by tourists, high traffic, similar to Independence Mall here. Within that 128 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. mall, they have leased space in a straight-forward land lease. So they're not required by the city to sell or not sell from any location, I believe. Frankly, I haven't...
I'm not a hundred percent sure. There are numerous trolley businesses, land tour traditional trolley businesses in Boston. I believe four companies operate in there, and I'm sure the working group looked into that at some point.
That's what I'm trying to understand. If there is a desirable attractive location -- I have to assume our Visitors Center is a desirable and attractive location. A lot of people go through there. Why wouldn't it be as successful here as it is in Boston?
As I understand it, the Independence Visitors Center 129 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. issue is outside the scope of the legislation. It's not directly included in any of the reads I've made of it. So speaking theoretically, I guess, the IVC is certainly a desirable piece of real estate, and we look forward to being there, and we are there today, as others have pointed out, and we've had great conversations with that team. So our issue with the IVC is really one of timing and whether or not we're forced to be there versus choosing to be there.
Thank you. Angela Dowd-Burton from Rohm and Haas. Cynthia Philo is not here. Is anyone from Old City other than the written testimony -- do we have that written testimony? We have written testimony from Rich Horrow, from the Old City Civic Association, which will be given to the stenographer and put on the record. 130 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. Ann Meredith. You might want to come up, Ann, as well. Are you testifying, Ann? You can come up. Good afternoon, ladies, and thank you for your patience. Ms. Dowd-Burton, Angela Dowd-Burton. Ms. Burton, would you proceed with your testimony. Please identify yourself for the record.
Yes. Good afternoon, Chairman DiCicco and members of the Committee on Streets and Services. I am Angela Dowd-Burton, Government Relations Manager for Rohm and Haas Company. On behalf of Rohm and Haas Company, I am here to testify in support of Bill No. 050862, which amends provisions that regulate the operation of tour buses and amphibious tour vehicles. Our headquarter office is located at 100 Independence Mall West, better known as the west side of 6th and Market Streets. We recognize the 131 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. importance of tourism to Philadelphia and the critical role tour passenger carriers play in helping tourists enjoy their stay in Philadelphia. We believe Bill No. 6 050862 is a step forward for tourism as well as the employees who work in this vicinity of the Independence Mall area. Forty years ago, F. Otto Haas, son of the founder of Rohm and Haas Company, committed to locate its world headquarters in one of the most vibrant parts of the City, across from the Liberty Bell and Independence Hall. This initiative was a partnership with the City at the time when City leaders were embarking on the revitalization of the historic Mall area and anxious to have high-quality commercial establishments along the perimeter of the Historic District. Relocating to 6th Street was an easy decision for us to make at the time. As a Philadelphia company founded in 1908, we recognized the unique history of 132 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. the City and the special relationships that it provides to the citizens and businesses that call this City home. The decision to locate our headquarters on Independence Mall West was the right one 40 years ago and today. While the company has expanded into a global enterprise, we are still proud to call Independence Mall West our home office. On a daily basis, we welcome employees from other parts of the world, as well as business leaders, dignitaries and other special guests to this wonderful location. During the past 40 years, we have enjoyed a true partnership with the City, the National Park Service and other businesses along the Mall. We work together to co-exist in this vibrant commercial and tourist section of Philadelphia. Over the last 18 months or so, however, we have noticed the proliferation of vehicles, buses, ducks, 133 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. super ducks and trolleys, as well as their enthusiastic patrons. We now have a high concentration of vehicles, tourists and employees in a relatively small area along 6th Street between Market Street and Ranstead Street. The excess of tourist vehicles causes undue foot and automobile traffic congestion. Sometimes five or more vehicles are standing outside of our building. The space for taxis and the drop-off and pick-up of our business associates in front of our building is often inaccessible, many times requiring double parking. We recognize the growth in attractions is a reflection of the vibrant tourism economy that has developed in this City. We value the opportunity for visitors to share in this unique experience when they come to Philadelphia. Nevertheless, we find the density of tourist attractions that have recently sprung up to be a new phenomenon 134 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. that may jeopardize the balance of historic preservation, echo tourism and the commercial establishments along Independence Mall. Specifically, our interest is in helping to reduce the concentration of tourist attractions on 6th Street in front of the headquarters of Rohm and Haas Company. We believe Bill No. 050862 provides a balanced opportunity to remedy the present situation. In closing, Rohm and Haas prides itself on its quiet but substantial corporate citizenship. We are one of the oldest, world-scale companies that has maintained its presence in the City.
Today we have more than 1,000 employees located at 6th and Market and still maintain a major manufacturing facility in the Bridesburg section of Philadelphia. We are just three years shy of celebrating 100 years of continued operations in Philadelphia, a milestone we intend to celebrate with 135 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. the very community that has been so supportive of us during the past century. Throughout our history, Rohm and Haas has worked with City leaders and other community and civic organizations to help build the vibrant, world-class City that Philadelphia has become. We appreciate your consideration and support of Bill No. 11 050862. This important legislation will enable the tourist carriers to find a more reasonable passenger zone within the Independence Mall area, while maintaining a balance between historic preservation, tourism and commerce. We appreciate the opportunity to once again participate in helping to maintain a reverence for the Independence Mall area. Thank you.
Thank you, Ms. Burton. As you know, I had the opportunity and pleasure of speaking to a 136 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. number of your employees at Rohm and Haas, I don't know, a couple months ago. I lose track of time.
And I believe -- his name escapes me at the moment, your CEO.
Raj Gupta is the CEO and Robert Lonergan is the Chief Counsel.
Mr. Lonergan. Chief Counsel, you're right. We had some discussion about the future of Rohm and Haas in the City of Philadelphia, and I won't divulge all of the discussion, but decisions are being undertaken as to whether or not it makes business sense to continue to keep its corporate headquarters in Philadelphia. The building needs some significant repairs and reinvestment.
So it's a business decision, and we certainly don't 137 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. want to see you leave, but one of the issues that came up was what you testified to today. Do you happen to know what the value of the wage taxes that Rohm and Haas -- if you don't, that's okay. I should have asked you this before you testified. Any numbers on what Rohm and Haas's contribution to the Philadelphia tax base is?
But it is significant, I know. I know it's significant. I thought I heard that number that day, and I don't recall it. And it is a state-of-the-art building. It's one of the most attractive buildings that I can recall. And I think I mentioned that day, as a young man coming down 6th Street, I always admired the chandelier, for lack of a better description. It's just a magnificent 138 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. building and it's an icon to my eyes, and we certainly want to do what we can to accommodate your existence in the City of Philadelphia. And I'm not suggesting that if we don't relocate the staging areas, that that will be the primary reason for why you may not stay, "you" meaning Rohm and Haas, but it certainly will, as I got it, I understand it from that discussion that day, it's certainly one of the factors that is being looked at rather carefully. And I do appreciate the fact that you understand that tourism is important and it's something that you welcome, and you're not being nimbies, Not in my backyard. We understand that as well.
But thank you again for your testimony. Ann. Ms. Meredith. Excuse me.
Good afternoon, Councilman DiCicco. 139 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC.
I'm here on behalf of the Independence Mall Business and Residents Coalition, also known as IMBARC. We represent businesses, residents and public institutions in the Greater Independence Mall area. Our mission is to improve the beauty, vitality and accessibility for the benefit of our visitors, residences, businesses and their employees. We're thrilled with our City's success in attracting so many visitors and so many great new operators to give great experiences on the Mall. However, IMBARC has been long concerned about the need for a more effective management plan for tour passenger carriers in the Mall area. On 6th Street in particular we've observed traffic and pedestrian crowding and overuse of public space for operations, including, but not limited 140 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. to, the forming of nearly impassable crowding on sidewalks, the use of trees for locking up strollers and wheelchairs and the use of public sidewalks for storing supplies. Intrusive noise has also been a particular concern of our members, along with the demeanor of some front-line employees who serve as ambassadors to our City for our visitors. Over the past year, IMBARC has convened a public meeting where the need for a long-term solution was addressed at length. We've also had numerous communications on behalf of our members with the City's Managing Director's office, the Park Service and other stakeholders. We're very grateful for the hard work of the City, for you and your office, the Park Service, the tour passenger carriers and other stakeholders in addressing this complex issue, because we think there's a real, real need. In keeping with our mission and 141 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. the aforementioned concerns of our members, IMBARC wholeheartedly endorses the ordinance's designation of the east side of 6th Street between Market and Arch Streets for passenger loading zones, the east side of 5th Street between Market and Arch and the west side of 5th Street between Market and Arch for passenger loading zones. We feel these designations adequately address our current concerns and, with a more effective operational management plan, should reduce vehicular and pedestrian congestion. In addition, IMBARC endorses the ordinance's prohibition of inappropriate and unsafe conduct on the part of the operators' front-line employees. We enthusiastically endorse the requirement that tour passenger carriers are responsible for maintaining the sidewalk within 15 feet of the tour passenger loading zones. We hope that the operators and their employees would 142 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. be proactive in reporting work that needs to be done to the sidewalks, as heavy usage has and will continue to create safety hazards. We suggest that language be added regarding trash disposal, as the trash cans near the current staging areas are often overflowing. We would additionally ask that the sidewalks not be used for storing supplies and that trees not be used for locking up strollers, wheelchairs and the like. Finally, we believe the ordinance should address the noise issue in light of the large volume of complaints relating to blaring music and the encouragement of rowdy guests' behavior on residential streets and in front of sacred historic sites. I know that the ordinance does state that everything needs to be in accordance with The Philadelphia Code, so I'm assuming that that's included in The Philadelphia Code, relates to that. 143 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. That's why that's there, among other reasons. But it seems because it's such a big issue, that it should be stated explicitly. IMBARC understands that this ordinance does not meet the needs of all of the tour passenger carriers.
Since our mission is to improve the vitality of the Mall area and believe the Mall should be run like a first-class visitor destination, we urge continued cooperation between the City, Park Service and the operators in developing a plan that achieves maximum operational efficiency and outstanding guest service, while balancing the needs of the business and residential community. Further, and with all due respect, the ordinance appears incomplete since it addresses where tour passenger carriers are not permitted to sell tickets, but it does not address how and where they are permitted to conduct ticket sales. We're aware that this is a 144 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. controversial issue, but believe this resolution should be part of the ordinance.
Thank you. And since there are no members of the Committee, I have no questions at this moment, but thank you, Ms. Meredith, and thank you, Ms. Burton, as well.
The next panel, Mr. Castellano from the National Constitution Center, Mr. Moore from the Independence Visitors Center, and Mr. Eidmann from the National Park Service. And I'll leave it up to you gentlemen who wants to go first.
Good afternoon, Councilman. My name is William W. Moore and I'm the CEO and President of the Independence Visitors Center. We're located at 6th and Market Streets. I've been asked to share my testimony with you today regarding Bill 25 No. 050862, and I'd like to thank the 145 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. Streets and Service Committee for hearing my testimony. I'd particularly like to thank your staff member, Brian Abernathy, for working so diligently on this process with us and also you, Councilman DiCicco, for affording this opportunity and, more importantly, for bringing attention to the issues concerning the City's tour operations and proposing this legislation. As you're all aware, Independence Mall's physical restorations began in 2001, and since then, we've included more than $300 million of capital improvements, many funded by the City of Philadelphia, that resulted in renewed interest in and increased visibility for the nation's most historic square mile regionally, nationally and internationally. In fact, the enhancements combined with the City and regional marketing efforts have led to a tourism boom not experienced since the Bicentennial celebration in this City. 146 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. The addition of our multi-purpose Visitors Center, which opened in 2001, was a cornerstone for this development on the Mall and has been a focal point for residents and visitors alike. We now attract more than 2 million visitors annually, but, honestly, that's about five seasons worth of Eagles, not counting we don't do any booing in the Visitors Center. These developments and the subsequent surge in tourism have undoubtedly benefitted existing businesses, while also attracting new businesses and new players to the area. The increase in our tour operators is a clear example. Evidence indicates that the increasingly popular tour operators, just like the City as a whole, were primed for even more growth, but in recent months, evidence also indicates this newly thriving industry lacks adequate controls and adequate structure. Increasing 147 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. concerns over service, safety, congestion, building business operations and quality of life are just some of the reasons that we're here today to talk about. In a word, the current situation is problematic. For just over two years now, City stakeholders have been meeting with historic area tour operators to discuss a remedy. Unfortunately, no conclusions have been reached. While some differences obviously exist, all parties, City of Philadelphia's Managing Director's office, the stakeholders and operators themselves, I believe are committed to finding the appropriate means of governing this industry. Based on ample input from all sides, legislation was proposed to accomplish a series of goals, including, but not limited to, the following: Oversight and regulations for this fast-growing multi-million-dollar industry, regulation of tour departure and pick-up points, 148 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. establishment of safety reporting methods and, finally, from the point of view of our visitors who are not here today to testify, this legislation creates an environment conducive to ticket sales outside of the public right-of-way for visitor convenience. While the convenience, safety and the satisfaction of City visitors is certainly at stake, if we don't reach sound decision regarding governance and regulations, we'd be naive to think that the problems end here. We cannot ignore increasingly loud complaints stemming from local businesses whose operations are disrupted and that residents who find themselves inconvenienced, nor can we ignore the impact the tour operations have on the historic area. Foot traffic, street traffic and sidewalk congestion, alterations, jockeying between operators, unannounced route and fare changes, safety issues and haphazard operations all exist.
Each one 149 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. by itself is a sufficient argument for regulatory measures and for this legislation. Bundle these concerns together, however, and you have a far more significant problem. The current environment surrounding tour operators threatens the value and the long-term sustainability of their own industry and has a potential to tarnish the image of this historic area, which is Philadelphia to many outsiders. The reputation we in the historic area have established as invested and interested parties in recent years has helped us move forward. We can't afford to slide backwards. This legislation will ensure that we don't. I appreciate your attention.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman. My name is Phil Castellano. I am the Chief Operating 150 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. Officer at the National Constitution Center. Tourism is booming on Independence Mall, and the financial commitment that has been made by the public and private sectors is raising this region's profile exponentially. Residents and visitors to Philadelphia are now exposed to art, culture and entertainment at the level that has never been seen before, and tourism is vastly growing as an economic stimulus to our City. Tour vehicles and their operations are now a big part of the visitor experience to Philadelphia, and regulating the activity of the vehicles will only enhance the visitor experience and thus lead to even more participation by tourists and residents. The National Constitution Center supports the regulating of tour vehicle operations and looks forward to all of us as tourism partners in generating even more positive 151 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. exposure and economic development for the City of Philadelphia. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Castelanno. Mr. Eidmann, please identify yourself for the record and proceed with your testimony.
Yes. Good afternoon. My name is Frank Eidmann. I am the Special Events Coordinator for Independence National Historical Park here representing Dennis Reidenbach, our Park Superintendent. I would like to thank the Streets Committee and you, Councilman DiCicco, for giving me this opportunity to share with you the National Park Service's position on the proposed legislation. Independence Mall is the single most historically and culturally significant urban landscape in the City of Philadelphia and perhaps, for that matter, the entire country. As its 152 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. caretakers, the National Park Service, along with our partners, the Independence Visitors Center Corporation, the National Constitution Center and the City of Philadelphia, have an obligation to maintain an atmosphere and business climate that is both respectful to the monuments of our country's founding and, at the same time, responsive to the interest and needs of the visitors, residents, property owners, business owners and other stakeholders in and around Independence Mall. As a result of the concerted and successful efforts of the City's tourism agencies in promoting Philadelphia and the improvements to the Mall, including a new Visitors Center, National Constitution Center and Liberty Bell Center, Independence National Historic Park has experienced tremendous growth in visitation. We serve more than 2 million visitors a year, and this year we expect to have more than 2 million 153 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. visitors to the Liberty Bell Center alone, more than any year since the Bicentennial. Business in and around Independence Mall, particularly the local tour operators covered by this proposed legislation, have been beneficiaries to this growth in tourism. Because local tour operators conduct business on public right-of-ways, the impact of their growth on the landscape is significant. And if their expansion of operations is controlled by nothing more than market forces, serious negative impacts to the Mall may result. Negative impacts of this unchecked and unregulated growth, such as conflicts with neighboring residents, visitors, business and property owners, is what prompted the City of Philadelphia to call together stakeholders and tour operators to formulate a remedy for this situation. Over the course of the past couple of years, meetings were conducted 154 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. and all affected parties, including the tour operators themselves, were invited to voice their concerns and offer solutions. The legislation proposed and presented today to the Streets Committee is the culmination of many hours of deliberation, taking into account the business interest of the tour operators and the concerns of the many Mall stakeholders affected by their business operations, including Independence National Historical Park. The National Park Service supports this legislation, as it will contribute to the improving of our visitors' experience. The National Park Service is adding its voice to its partners in support of a managed visitor experience. Our hope is that we can sustain the public's interest by continuing to provide a quality experience at Independence National Historical Park. Thank you. 155 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC.
Thank you, Mr. Eidmann. Will there be anyone else testifying for or against these bills? Because I want to conclude this public hearing, and I will ask my colleagues who are members -- Councilman Nutter is here -- my colleagues who sit on the Streets and Services Committee to please return to the Chambers for the purpose of voting out the bills in this committee. Before we conclude with the public hearing, I want to thank everyone again for your participation. I'd just ask Brian -- and it's two years this legislation is in the making, and as I said at the onset of this hearing, that no one gets a hundred percent of anything and there are some issues, and I did also pledge that we will not call this bill up for final approval before the 15th of this month. I will ask the committee to vote this out favorably today with a 156 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. suspension of rules, which will allow us to have the first hearing. For those of you not familiar with the process, you have to have two readings of the bill 6 before it's called up for final passage. So in the interest of time, since there's only three session days left, including tomorrow, I will ask that the bill be reported out in its current form with a suspension of rules. I will further ask -- and Brian will contact a number of folks, Big Bus operators, Mr. Waterman, Mr. Slocum, either you or Mr. Kates, Mr. Kravitz from Super Ducks, and Ride the Ducks and Mr. Dutcher, and Mr. Moore, and I think that's it, maybe four or five people in the course of the next week prior to the 8th of December to convene a meeting and to talk about some of the issues and recommendations that came out of this testimony today. I think there may be a need to do some adjustments to the current 157 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. legislation, which is not unusual, and all the hard work that's been in it. When you get to the public hearing, things kind of get put on the table that you really need to take a harder look at. There may be some concessions we may ask, but I think we can come up with some piece of legislation in addition to what's here, amend this to accommodate most of the issues that have been raised as a result of this public hearing. And, again, as I said at the onset, it's a beginning. Whatever that final bill looks like, we will know in a six-month period of time. If there's adjustments that need to be made and should be made, we can always come back and do that, but we have to start somewhere, and I appreciate all the hard work that has gone into this. Mr. Engelke I see is here from Senator Fumo's office. I want to thank you, Carl, and the Senator for your participation as well. 158 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. We need one more individual member of this Committee to get into the public meeting. We have two points of information. Bill 051072 and Bill No. 7 051073 are being held at the request of the sponsor. And there will be an amendment to this bill and there may be subsequent amendments as a result of the meeting that will take place hopefully within the next several days as well. This concludes the public hearing. We will wait a few minutes to get the fourth member to establish a quorum, and we will then go into the public meeting. So you can all take a breather. Thank you. (Pause.)
Thank you. We're now back in session. This begins the public meeting on the Committee of Streets and Services. Councilwoman Donna Reed Miller is also in attendance. We do have a quorum for the purpose of voting 159 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. these bills out. The Chair recognizes Councilman Ramos for the purpose of voting bills out of Committee.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I move that the amendment as previously described regarding Bill 9 No. 050861 be adopted. (Duly seconded.)
It has been properly moved and seconded that the amendment to Bill No. 050861 be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation. All those in favor signify by saying aye. (Aye.)
I'm sorry; that the amendment be adopted. Thank you, Councilman Nutter. That the amendment be adopted. All those in favor? 160 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. (Aye.)
I move that the amendment as previously described regarding Bill No. 050859 be adopted. (Duly seconded.)
I move that Bill No. 050861 as amended be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended to permit first reading of this bill at our next Council meeting. (Duly seconded.)
It's been properly moved and seconded that Bill No. 24 050861 as amended be reported out of this Committee with a favorable recommendation 161 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. and a further recommendation that the rules of Council be suspended. All those in favor signify by saying aye. (Aye.)
I move that the amendment as previously described regarding Bill No. 050859 be adopted. (Duly seconded.)
It has been properly moved and seconded that the amendment to Bill No. 050859 be approved. All those in favor signify by saying aye. (Aye.)
The amendment is approved. Councilman Ramos. 162 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC.
I move that Bill No. 050859 as amended be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended to permit first reading of this bill at our next Council meeting. (Duly seconded.)
It has been properly moved and seconded that Bill No. 050859 as amended be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation and a further recommendation that the rules of Council be suspended. All those in favor signify by saying aye. (Aye.)
The bill 24 is approved. Councilman Ramos. 163 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC.
I move that the amendment as previously described regarding Bill No. 050857 be adopted. (Duly seconded.)
It has been properly moved and seconded that Bill No. 050857 be approved and a further recommendation that the rules of Council be suspended. All those in favor signify by saying aye. (Aye.)
I move that Bill 050857 be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended to permit first reading of this bill at our next Council meeting. 164 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. (Duly seconded.)
It has been properly moved and seconded that Bill No. 050949 be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation and that the rules of Council be suspended. All those in favor signify by saying aye. (Aye.)
I move that the amendment as previously described regarding Bill No. 050949 be reported out of Committee with a favorable --
Oh, I made 165 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. the mistake. I made the mistake. I apologize. I jumped to 949.
Do 949, then we'll have to go back and do the other one. I apologize. Is there an amendment to 949?
That's what confused me. I didn't see that. All right. So we'll report it out on 949.
I move that Bill No. 050949 be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended to permit first reading of this bill at our next Council meeting. (Duly seconded.) 166 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC.
It's been properly moved and seconded that Bill No. 4 050949 be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation and that the rules of Council be suspended. All those in favor signify by saying aye. (Aye.)
I move that the amendment as previously described regarding Bill No. 050952 be adopted. (Duly seconded.)
It's been recommended and seconded that the amendment to Bill No. 050952 be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation.
No, no, no. 167 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC.
I did it again. I've been doing this pretty good up until this year. It's like the tenth year I'm losing it. I move that the amendment to Bill No. 050952 be reported out of Committee favorably. All those in favor?
I move that Bill No. 050952 as amended be reported out of Committee with a favorable 168 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended to permit first reading of this bill at our next Council meeting. (Duly seconded.)
It's been properly moved and seconded that Bill No. 9 050952 as amended be reported out of this Committee with a favorable recommendation and that the rules of Council be suspended. All those in favor signify by saying aye. (Aye.)
I move that Bill No. 050860 be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of 169 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. Council be suspended to permit first reading of this bill at our next Council meeting. (Duly seconded.)
It has been properly moved and seconded that Bill 050860 be reported out of this Committee with a favorable recommendation and that the rules of Council be suspended. All those in favor signify by saying aye. (Aye.)
I move that Bill NO. 051098 be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended to permit first 170 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. reading of this bill at our next Council meeting. (Duly seconded.)
It has been properly moved and seconded that Bill No. 051098 be reported out of this Committee with a favorable recommendation and that the rules of Council be suspended. All those in favor signify by saying aye. (Aye.)
I move that the amendment as previously described regarding Bill No. 050863 be adopted. (Duly seconded.)
It's been reported and seconded that Bill No. 171 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. 050863 be reported out of this Committee with a favorable recommendation and that the rules of Council be suspended. All those in favor signify by saying aye. (Aye.)
I move that Bill No. 050863 as amended be reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended to permit first reading of this bill at our next Council meeting. (Duly seconded.)
Did you do the amendment? Did you offer the amendment?
Yes. I just 172 11/30/05 - STREETS - BILLS 050859, ETC. did the amendment.
He did it. You put on the "reported out of Committee" piece at the end. Do you want to do it again?
Yes. Let me just go over that again. Bill No. 050863 as amended is being reported out of Committee with a favorable recommendation. All those in favor signify by saying aye. (Aye.)